The IT Spot: New Trailer!

Wednesday we were granted this trailer teaser:

Again, Pennywise does look creepy. But not enticing, which is missing a huge point of the character. That's how he got Georgie, which is pretty important as it's what kickstarts the whole 'Bill seeking revenge' aspect to the Loser's club.

So, we got the "real" trailer 7/27/17:

...I'm not sure how I feel. Much like the last time, I'm sure my opinion will change as I go over the individual images. What a fun journey for us all!

First, there's not as much new content as I expected. A lot of this footage/audio was displayed in the last trailer. Like, at least a third.

There were new things in the VO that revealed a bit: Mike talking about his Grandfather believing the town was cursed. That could mean the Black Spot incident doesn't have to be shifted timeline-wise (the original incident happening to his father, who in this timeline would be too young to have served in WWII). The change from father to grandfather isn't a huge deal, at least for me.

Yet another trailer, and no trace of Bill stuttering. I think it may have been trimmed (the audio seems to jump a little). I'm sure it sounds annoying, but not even a hint of it? The character is literally called 'Stuttering Bill.' It's the reason he's a even in the Loser's club. He needs to stutter.

Georgie's strangled, perhaps watery repetition of 'You'll float too' is also different. Probably just a gimmick for the trailer itself

 There are some images however, that bear further scrutiny. And by some, I mean A LOT. Here there be spoilers and speculation, so if you want my overall opinion jump to where it's safe below.

Eddie breaks his arm in the novel, so we can assume this is his cast. This is evocative of the scene at the end of the book, where the kids cut their palms and hold hands, making a blood pact to return if IT's not really dead. But their clothes look pretty clean if that's the case. It could be before they've gone in (I think it happened prior as well, minus the cutting), or it could have been 'cleaned' digitally.

The other main thing is the change on the case from Loser to LoVer. I'm assuming this is a nod to the infamous sex scene that will not (I hope) be included. There's no way, the film would be rated X if it was.

 I just like seeing the balloon float past the logos. Small touch, but nice. Wonder if that will be in the film proper?

 Here is a mashup of several things: Ben getting Henry Bower's H carved in his stomach, and Bev watching adults see their plight, and go by unseeing. I guess it makes sense to condense. However...

The balloon is a bit much. GET IT? IT IS THERE, AND EVIL! GET IT?!!

See those yellow Penny-Eyes up there (no damnit, I'm not sorry)?

See how they're now blue? That's a direct callback to the novel where Georgie almost takes off after seeing yellow, animal eyes in the sewer. He then 'realizes' the eyes are blue (like his father's), and is enticed to stay. A nice, subtle touch, and good attention to details.

I'm not sure if this is a callback to the book (I'm only 3/4 of the way through my reread), but it seems familiar. 

Not sure what this is, specifically. I think it may be from the scene where Bev's father (possessed by IT to an unusually high degree) tries to see if she's still 'intact' after running around with boys.

 Ah Eddie. You little shithead. This is another callback, as Pennywise gifted him a knife at one point.

Bill, giving a speech on the steps of the House on Neibolt street. Bill gave a LOT of speeches in the book.

A nice shot, but if Pennywise looked more 'normal' this would be much creepier.

I have no idea if this is a particular scene or not.

 It's good to see so much of the house on Neibolt street, looking so classically creepy.

Here Bill is saying "We will win." with Ritchie at his side. If you've been reading my IT spot rereading blogs, you'll know how important Ritchie is to defeating it, and how this is a great call-forward.

I'm not sure why Mike is leading the charge into IT's chamber, aside from him possibly being the fastest Loser (which is made clear in his entry to the Apocolyptic Rockfight).

Next  we see a montage of individual attacks on the losers. I believe they are as follows:

Mike, with the burned hands from the victims of The Black Spot. No longer Rodan, but with licensing issues, I can understand the condensation. Also, not as many kids in the 80s would know who that was, unlike in the 50s.

Stan, with the drowned, dead boys of the Standpipe (watertower). At least, I think that's Stan. It's hard to tell.

No idea, but it looks creepy.

I think this MAY be Patrick Hockstetter and his refrigerator of death. Those COULD be skins/the flying leeches that kill him. More on that in an upcoming IT spot.

Ben getting attacked by what seems to be mummy linens. The MummyIT never actually touched him, but okay, it's a movie, we've got to get visually appealing.

 Not sure which kid this is, but somebody is getting a whipping. It's most likely Stan, as IT almost got him several times, since he had the hardest time coping.

 Henry Bowers firing his gun (in vain, his friends all died in the sewers).

As for this scene, I'm not sure. This could be in the Neibolt house, though there's nothing like it in the book. I'm willing to forgive that, because it's really, really creepy.


We get some head-turning action (it's subtle, but it's there):

 And we have a...special appearance, I guess you'd say.

 

 Yep, that is the OG, Tim Curry Pennywise, just hanging out. Nice!

 Also, I can't see perfectly, but I think Ritchie's shirt says Freese, which was the toy store in Derry he got chased through by the Bower's gang, before almost being killed by Paul Bunyan.

And last, another shot of Pennywise being all creepy and shit. Much less creepy than other bits

SAFE

So what do I think overall? Honestly, my opinion is still cautiously optimistic. Pennywise still looks too creepy at the outset, and Bill isn't fucking stuttering. But there are a lot of details that show the people in charge read the book, and care about the details.

It also doesn't hurt that Joe Hill, AKA one of my favorite authors, recently stated the movie is terrifying. Of course, being the son of Stephen King, he may be biased.

We'll just have to wait and see.

---------

 BONUS!

Want to support other scary clowns? Help make the Killer Klowns from Outer Space Orchestra re-recording a reality!

It IT Spot: Rereading, part 7

Here we have the short, not sweet life of the Cochran brothers. Their aside is left out of the miniseries entirely, so this whole post is a SPOILER.

This isn't a formal aside from Mike's notes: just something King gives us. Eddie Cochran's body was never recovered, as IT ate him as The Creature from the Black Lagoon. And just for a bit of added horror, his little brother Dorsey died by being beaten to death with a hammer. From his stepdad.

This section is horrible, but it sets up a lot of important things. Another kid with a connection to the Universal Monsters that plague the rest of the book is one.

It makes sense that other kids in the town would have pop-culture inspired fears. We'll see more of it later (but that's getting ahead of ourselves).

The other important thing is Eddie's reaction to the Gilman coming after him. Even as he's dying, he thinks it can't be real and searches for the zipper on the creature's back. The only other child that expresses such a strong amount of disbelief in the face of death is our good friend, Stan Uris.

Disbelief isn't a saving grace in Derry. It is death, both literal and metaphorical.

The other, more subtle factor is Dorsey's aforementioned beating death. Bev is also subject to beatings, and at one point IT actually inhabits her father, trying to do something worse than a beating. We don't witness the incident (King is not a monster), but in the aftermath we get the sense that the stepdad may have been pushed into his actions by the malevolence in the town. Oh, in another area he still would have been an abusive POS, but he may not have been so much of a terror, or a murderer.

Every little bit of wrongness in Derry is magnified by IT, whether it's an explosive disaster, or a parent making the wrong choices.

There will be a lot more of that before we're done.

The Dark Tower Trailer

Yes, the trailer for The Dark Tower has dropped. Watch it, it's only a few minutes long.

Short answer, I'm conflicted.

I'll keep this spoiler free, as it's been a while since I've read the books, and Bahamute is reading it now. If you want something with spoilers for the books, and more speculation, this Wired article has you covered. I may do an in-depth analysis of the books, ala my IT blogs, when I'm done with them.

I love the casting of Idris Elba as Roland and Matthew McConaughey as The Man in Black. I like the style of the trailer, as it evokes the epic nature of the series, and the lines I can remember seem correct (it's been a while).

My biggest issue is that they're showing footage of events that happen in later books. If this changes the ending of the first book, which is looks like it has too, I hope they're planning ahead for those ramifications. Also, I really like the ending and the events they're likely skipping over.

TLDR: I can understand simplifying the story for the movie, but I don't have to like it.

I also hope The Tower is discussed more fully in the movie, as the line about what it is and what it does is far too brief.

Also, what the fuck is up with this?!

That says Pennywise, and is clearly part of a statue of Pennywise holding his famous lure, balloons. But...WHY?! I'm kinda excited to know.

Also, Roland shouldn't be on earth now. That seriously screws up later books. But again, if they're planning and it's part of the medium shift, it can work. Can. With hard work and planning/

On the plus side, I know what this is, and it looks perfect. Too bad it's two books early...(see my earlier remarks).

I need to see a longer trailer, but for sure they're using a lot of stuff from later books, and I'm not happy about that. I hope they're taking that into consideration, as it could really screw up movies two and three if they're not careful. But if they are, this could be really great.

Now, to wait for more footage...

 OKAY, one SPOILER filled thing that makes it all better. DO NOT READ unless you've finished the books. Seriously.

SERIOUSLY.

Okay, if you're sure.

SERIOUSLY. HUGELY GIGANTIC SPOILERS.

There's speculation that this is just another cycle of Roland's journey: a sequel to the events of the books, which explains any changes. Until I get a better idea, I really, really like that one. If that's the case, this will be awesome, no matter what.

Media blitzkreig

So, some more trailers have dropped; notably, Spider-Man Homecoming and Baywatch.

Both have lots of red spandex.

There's a bunch of others that I haven't mentioned like Pirates of the Caribbean 5, Transformers 5, and The Justice League.

To be frank, at the time of writing, I haven't even seen the trailer for Justice League. There's just so much coming out, it's actually overwhelmed me. I have officially reached the point where I'll just wait to see a trailer in front of whatever youtube media I'm catching up on.

And that's just 2-5 minute trailers overwhelming me. I still haven't seen Kong Skull Island, and it has a bunch of my favorite actors in it. I never ended up seeing Kubo and the Two Strings, Hidden Figures, or La La Land.

I did see this, though. Neat!

Partly I can blame 12 Angry Jurors since many of my nights have been taken up by assistant directing. I have a pretty long vacation coming, and my father in law has Netflix. Maybe it's finally time to catch up on some backlog.

I'm also quickly running out of Law and Order SVU and Devil is a Part Timer episodes. What combo of drama/anime to tackle next...

It *knew* what scared you

Short version: There is a Poltergeist reboot coming out this year. The trailer just came out. I am not very pleased.

I've already talked about how much I dislike the Nightmare on Elm Street reboot, and how I was underwhelmed by The Evil Dead re-sequel-boot. This is another in the long line of horror reboot/cash grabs that may have good intentions but fail at their basic aim: scaring us.

Here's the original trailer and the reboot trailer, for comparison:

Not everything is awful here. So first, the changes I like:

• The family isn't well off, and the house is a fixer upper rather than a brand-new home in an up-and-coming suburb. In the 80s it made sense to have a upwardly-mobile, well off family in a growing area. With the current economy this will be a better match for the every man. Making people emotionally connect is crucial to making any movie work, and the Freelings were very relatable in the original. I'm glad to see they understand this was one of the reasons why. 
• The effects look better in some scenes. I liked the brief shot of the tree and Robbie 2.0 especially.
• The casting of Sam Rockwell as Steven Freeling 2.0. He's a fine actor, and I enjoy his performance every time I see him.

And Nite-Owl can't do all these roles.

The things I take issue with:

• Showing the clown moving. The clown was a pivotal scare of the original. They spent the entire movie setting it up. And even though we knew it would be waiting on top of the bed, it was still terrifying. They've eliminated the suspense. So many trailers show too much, and this one is no exception. The design of the clown is fine, but the original still works better for me.

Plus the doll malfunctioned and almost killed the child actor. THERE'S a convincing performance!

• The re-naming of all the main characters. A minor point, but this isn't like Evil Dead where it was an original(ish) story, with new(ish) characters. These characters are clearly Steven, Robbie, Diane, Dana, and Carol-Anne Freeling. Is it really so much better to hear screams of "MADDIE!" rather than "CAROL-ANNE!"? The only major cast change that would necessitate a name change seems to be...
• Getting rid of Tangina Baron and replacing her with a man. Maybe this was done to avoid similarity to Insidious's Elise. But it's still annoying. Let there be more than two important women in this movie!
• The many, many, many jump scares. This is a problem with modern horror movies in general, but seeing them attached to a property I hold so close to my heart hurts. It's the same thing that ruined A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010 for me. And the marketing. And the writing. And the plot. And the effects. And the acting.

Aside from a trying-his-hardest performance by Jackie Earle Haley.

The international trailer has a better feel, and less jump scares (still too many, but less). I'm willing to give this film a shot, but I'm skeptical it can be a worthy remake. If it's a passable movie, that'll be something.