Current Events > wtf @ all the BS about the new IT being closer to the book than the old movies

(+) Yeah! (+)

Mind you I'm only about halfway through the book, but the old miniseries has been much much closer to the source material so far.
---

100%

I keep seeing this too and it makes no sense. I can't imagine anyone who actually read the book stating that aside from Pennywise being a little closer to the mark.
---

It's closer in the sense of atmosphere and soul of the book. The miniseries yes followed the events closer but was missing the point of the atmosphere and especially Pennywise by a large margin.
---

I havnt seen the new movie but probably the house part and the ending
---

People think an adaption means exact page to screen. But it's more important to get the feel and essence. You can change things as long as you have that, and the new IT had all that.
---

Gunpo posted...

I havnt seen the new movie but probably the house part and the ending

The ending was actually the biggest difference all around.

The house was also nothing like it was in the book but I agree at least it was included this time.
---

FF_Redux posted...

It's closer in the sense of atmosphere and soul of the book. The miniseries yes followed the events closer but was missing the point of the atmosphere and especially Pennywise by a large margin.

Not really. The movie missed a gigantic part of the childhood nostalgia atmosphere that is so central to the book. In the old movies, you got much closer regarding that, primarily because they left time open for character development that the new movie just didn't do.
---

My guess is they focus on the Pennywise character which in the old one was more comedic and ignore the rest

COVxy posted...

FF_Redux posted...

It's closer in the sense of atmosphere and soul of the book. The miniseries yes followed the events closer but was missing the point of the atmosphere and especially Pennywise by a large margin.

Not really. The movie missed a gigantic part of the childhood nostalgia atmosphere that is so central to the book. In the old movies, you got much closer regarding that, primarily because they left time open for character development that the new movie just didn't do.

So wrong
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

The house was also nothing like it was in the book but I agree at least it was included this time.

The house was in the original movie, they just substituted the werewolf with the mummy, iirc. The scene was also vastly different, but still had Bill and Richie escaping on Silver.
---

COVxy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The house was also nothing like it was in the book but I agree at least it was included this time.

The house was in the original movie, they just substituted the werewolf with the mummy, iirc. The scene was also vastly different, but still had Bill and Richie escaping on Silver.

It was Bill and Stan

If you gonna fanboy about the shitty mini series at least fanboy right
---

FF_Redux posted...

It was Bill and Stan

If you gonna fanboy about the shitty mini series at least fanboy right

In the book it's Richie.
---

COVxy posted...

FF_Redux posted...

It was Bill and Stan

If you gonna fanboy about the shitty mini series at least fanboy right

In the book it's Richie.

Yes but it happened WAAAAY differently in the miniseries. You just mentioned that in the miniseries it was Richie but it was Stan
---

COVxy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The house was also nothing like it was in the book but I agree at least it was included this time.

The house was in the original movie, they just substituted the werewolf with the mummy, iirc. The scene was also vastly different, but still had Bill and Richie escaping on Silver.

Oh damn, you're right. I totally forgot about that and I just watched it last month.

Yeah, there's no question the miniseries was more faithful to the book even though I liked the remake for what it was.

Some of the changes were just stupid though and omitting the childhood bonding was a good move for horror but not for the essence of IT like people keep saying.
---

FF_Redux posted...

Yes but it happened WAAAAY differently in the miniseries. You just mentioned that in the miniseries it was Richie but it was Stan

It happened way differently in both, but still the escaping on Silver is a big moment in the book, and they got closer on that accord at least.

Reading through the book provides me with waay more recognition from the miniseries than the movie, including Pennywise's dialog. A lot of the shit in the miniseries was a line for line rip of his lines.

The only thing that I thought was cool was the the movie made mention of the black spot and the ironworks explosion. I hope they actually expound on these things, but I doubt it.
---

literally IT nerds arguing

lmao
---

You don't get it. Yes the miniseries were closer with the events, but everything else were so badly done, it didn't feel like the book. The new movie felt like the book and felt like a more accurate adaption considering the essence and atmosphere. Which is the more important part of an adaption.
---

Why did they take the town history buff role away from Mike in the new movie?
---

FF_Redux posted...

You don't get it. Yes the miniseries were closer with the events, but everything else were so badly done, it didn't feel like the book. The new movie felt like the book and felt like a more accurate adaption considering the essence and atmosphere. Which is the more important part of an adaption.

The atmosphere entirely depends on the idea of the development of childhood friends and nostalgia around everyday childhood events. This was almost entirely missing in the movie where they pretty much just rushed through encounter to encounter with Pennywise.
---

SazhAndFrocobo posted...

Why did they take the town history buff role away from Mike in the new movie?

That was a major complaint for me tho, worst part of the movie.
---

as someone who thinks IT is King's greatest book, I think the new movie was closer to the soul of the story than the miniseries was. it gets the atmosphere right. Pennywise is too comedic in the miniseries. it's not as a dark a story. IT is supposed to be a very dark and fucked up story and they censored alot in the miniseries

Tezlok posted...

as someone who thinks IT is King's greatest book, I think the new movie was closer to the soul of the story than the miniseries was. it gets the atmosphere right. Pennywise is too comedic in the miniseries. it's not as a dark a story. IT is supposed to be a very dark and fucked up story and they censored alot in the miniseries

Thank you. TC clearly never read the book.
---

Tezlok posted...

Pennywise is too comedic in the miniseries.

But his comedy is almost directly ripped from the book doe.

Like, I think we can all agree that one of the hokiest scenes is in the library with Ben as an adult. But, like it's actually super accurate to the book, at least in Pennywise's lines and delivery.
---

FF_Redux posted...

Tezlok posted...

as someone who thinks IT is King's greatest book, I think the new movie was closer to the soul of the story than the miniseries was. it gets the atmosphere right. Pennywise is too comedic in the miniseries. it's not as a dark a story. IT is supposed to be a very dark and fucked up story and they censored alot in the miniseries

Thank you. TC clearly never read the book.

Ok two things

1. TC already said he is only half-way through the book
2. This topic was solely about the series being closer to the source material with the old series

You really need to chill when it comes to It. You're a worse fanboy than you accused him of being

Axiom posted...

Ok two things

1. TC already said he is only half-way through the book
2. This topic was solely about the series being closer to the source material with the old series

You really need to chill when it comes to It. You're a worse fanboy than you accused him of being

I prob read the book before you were born
---

Admittedly, I don't know / remember enough to go down a checklist of plot points and dialogue. But it's pretty obvious which adaption matches the tone of the book.
---

Axiom posted...

You really need to chill when it comes to It. You're a worse fanboy than you accused him of being

I can't take anything FF says about this movie seriously. He was sucking its ass before it even came out....hardcore. Multiple topics about how great it was going to be and how much better it was going to be. He went into any and every topic about anything It related and just wouldn't shut up about it.
---

Axiom posted...

FF_Redux posted...

Tezlok posted...

as someone who thinks IT is King's greatest book, I think the new movie was closer to the soul of the story than the miniseries was. it gets the atmosphere right. Pennywise is too comedic in the miniseries. it's not as a dark a story. IT is supposed to be a very dark and fucked up story and they censored alot in the miniseries

Thank you. TC clearly never read the book.

Ok two things

1. TC already said he is only half-way through the book
2. This topic was solely about the series being closer to the source material with the old series

You really need to chill when it comes to It. You're a worse fanboy than you accused him of being

Especially because they're wrong.

Literally the only thing the remake had was more technology to create an "atmosphere".
---

ZCheveyo posted...

Axiom posted...

You really need to chill when it comes to It. You're a worse fanboy than you accused him of being

I can't take anything FF says about this movie seriously. He was sucking its ass before it even came out....hardcore. Multiple topics about how great it was going to be and how much better it was going to be. He went into any and every topic about anything It related and just wouldn't shut up about it.

I hated IT before it was released, Cary dropping out (thought his would be awesome), the design of Pennywise at first, the first trailers etc, but the more I learned about it the better I felt about it, and I got hyped, and not disappointed, yeah it's not a perfect movie, it has flaws. But it's helluva better than the miniseries it hits all points except maybe following the same events as the book if you care about that.
---

Polycosm posted...

Admittedly, I don't know / remember enough to go down a checklist of plot points and dialogue. But it's pretty obvious which adaption matches the tone of the book.

It's missing the essential contrast that makes It actually unique. I'd say, at the 50% mark, about 60-75% of it is non-Pennywise related content.
---

So anyone actually have specific reasons why they think the remake was closer?

Not some ambiguous statement like "the atmosphere" which is saying you prefer the graphics of a movie that came 30 years later.

What's actually closer.

BIlls not.
Eddie isn't really either.
Stan wasn't even a character he was just there.
Ben is different.
Mike was just there.
Bev had the opposite and went too far into being badass, in turn, losing most of what made her a bad ass.

IT's layer was completely different as was the way they defeated them.

IT had no weaknesses like the book.

Henry is fine but everything else concerning him and his group was completely different.

No character development, no childhood bonding, no coming of age story, no childhood anxiety over adulthood changes.

What makes it the closest adaption?
@FF_Redux
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Not some ambiguous statement like "the atmosphere" which is saying you prefer the graphics of a movie that came 30 years later.

lol if you think graphics mean atmosphere.
---

FF_Redux posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Not some ambiguous statement like "the atmosphere" which is saying you prefer the graphics of a movie that came 30 years later.

lol if you think graphics mean atmosphere.

So what's it mean then? Almost every location present in the remake was in the original. What specifically made the atmosphere better.

I'll take it you concede every other point since you ignored them.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

FF_Redux posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Not some ambiguous statement like "the atmosphere" which is saying you prefer the graphics of a movie that came 30 years later.

lol if you think graphics mean atmosphere.

So what's it mean then? Almost every location present in the remake was in the original. What specifically made the atmosphere better.

I'll take it you concede every other point since you ignored them.

If you can't grasp what it means, there is no use to discuss it.
---

Lol.
---

FF_Redux posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

FF_Redux posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Not some ambiguous statement like "the atmosphere" which is saying you prefer the graphics of a movie that came 30 years later.

lol if you think graphics mean atmosphere.

So what's it mean then? Almost every location present in the remake was in the original. What specifically made the atmosphere better.

I'll take it you concede every other point since you ignored them.

If you can't grasp what it means, there is no use to discuss it.

Yeah, when discussing a subjective and abitraey statement like "the atmosphere is better" you can't just claim that us not knowing the inside of your head makes us wrong.

You used to be better than this childish bullshit bro. Give us some actual content to discuss.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

FF_Redux posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

FF_Redux posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Not some ambiguous statement like "the atmosphere" which is saying you prefer the graphics of a movie that came 30 years later.

lol if you think graphics mean atmosphere.

So what's it mean then? Almost every location present in the remake was in the original. What specifically made the atmosphere better.

I'll take it you concede every other point since you ignored them.

If you can't grasp what it means, there is no use to discuss it.

Yeah, when discussing a subjective and abitraey statement like "the atmosphere is better" you can't just claim that us not knowing the inside of your head makes us wrong.

You used to be better than this childish bullshit bro. Give us some actual content to discuss.

How do you not understand what atmosphere, soul, essence of a story means?
---

At best we can assume you mean that you liked the remake because it had a more consistently dark/horror vibe, but that's not more consistent with the book, it's less.
---

COVxy posted...

At best we can assume you mean that you liked the remake because it had a more consistently dark/horror vibe, but that's not more consistent with the book, it's less.

Yeah. Other than that it's pretty much him saying he has no actual content to put forth but he really doesn't want to "lose" since winning and losing is all CE is obsessed with these days.
---

COVxy posted...

At best we can assume you mean that you liked the remake because it had a more consistently dark/horror vibe, but that's not more consistent with the book, it's less.

So a comedy movie with a man in a silly clown suit is more consistent? lmao
---

I don't really mind how close an adaptation is to the original as long as it's good.
---

FF_Redux posted...

COVxy posted...

At best we can assume you mean that you liked the remake because it had a more consistently dark/horror vibe, but that's not more consistent with the book, it's less.

So a comedy movie with a man in a silly clown suit is more consistent? lmao

Come on up, Ben, Pennywise called down. I wont hurt you. Ive got a book for you! A book . . . and a balloon! Come on up!

Ben opened his mouth to call back. Youre insane if you think Im going up there, and suddenly realized that if he did that, everyone here would be looking at him, everyone here would be thinking, Who is that crazy man?

Oh, I know you cant answer, Pennywise called down, and giggled. Almost fooled you there for a minute, though, didnt I? Pardon me, sir, do you have Prince Albert in a can? . . . You do? . . . Better let the poor guy out!Pardon me, maam, is your refrigerator running? . . . It is?. . . . Then hadnt you better go catch it?

The clown on the landing threw its head back and shrieked laughter. It roared and echoed in the dome of the rotunda like a flight of black bats, and Ben was only able to keep from clapping his hands over his ears with a tremendous effort of will.
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

I don't really mind how close an adaptation is to the original as long as it's good.

This. The remake was great and that should be good enough lol.

COVxy posted...

FF_Redux posted...

COVxy posted...

At best we can assume you mean that you liked the remake because it had a more consistently dark/horror vibe, but that's not more consistent with the book, it's less.

So a comedy movie with a man in a silly clown suit is more consistent? lmao

Come on up, Ben, Pennywise called down. I wont hurt you. Ive got a book for you! A book . . . and a balloon! Come on up!

Ben opened his mouth to call back. Youre insane if you think Im going up there, and suddenly realized that if he did that, everyone here would be looking at him, everyone here would be thinking, Who is that crazy man?

Oh, I know you cant answer, Pennywise called down, and giggled. Almost fooled you there for a minute, though, didnt I? Pardon me, sir, do you have Prince Albert in a can? . . . You do? . . . Better let the poor guy out!Pardon me, maam, is your refrigerator running? . . . It is?. . . . Then hadnt you better go catch it?

The clown on the landing threw its head back and shrieked laughter. It roared and echoed in the dome of the rotunda like a flight of black bats, and Ben was only able to keep from clapping his hands over his ears with a tremendous effort of will.

There's tons of this too. People jump through serious hoops when they say he was "rarely" funny. Some even say he's never funny..

Crazy, I know.
---

Yeah, to me, both the atmosphere and the events were less true to the book.

I still enjoyed the movie, it's just that the claim of it being closer to the book is baffling to me.
---

Up.
---