Beav
Hank Scorpio
OMG... I just realized I'm a Brony.
Posts: 5,556
|
Post by Beav on Oct 20, 2010 10:15:48 GMT -5
I've actually always enjoyed IT both the book and the miniseries. I agree King tends to use similar plot points (i.e. Maine and characters who are writers), but all and all he's probably my favorite writer. Here are my comments:
1. You can't really judge King based on the miniseries. They left stuff out and took tons of liberties.
2. In the book, which the Critic barely talks about, they explain pretty much everything he's got a problem with. For example, he mentions no one knows where IT is from or what IT is. King tells you that in the book. Also doesn't it lend a little creepiness that you DON'T know what IT is?
3. Tim Curry was actually scary for the first time you saw this as a kid. At this point he's more creepy than scary.
4. I agree the effects are silly and the spider's ridiculous, but keep in mind the effects of the time weren't anywhere near as advanced as today. Also I feel the spider's better described in the book.
I could come up with a few more points, but I'm exhausted due to lack of sleep. That being said I DID find this review funny and totally agree with several of his points such as how they over did the balloons.
BALLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!
|
|
Paul
Vegeta
Posts: 9,340 
|
Post by Paul on Oct 20, 2010 10:28:37 GMT -5
That ending might be the funniest ending of any NC episode ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by thespaceman on Oct 20, 2010 11:00:20 GMT -5
That was a great review. I am a big Stephen King fan, but I can look past his differing opinion. I nearly plotzed when he opened the book and "Sweet Transvestite" started playing.
|
|
MCMGM
Vegeta
WC's Official Jeff Buckley Stalkeress.
Red Sonic My Ass
Posts: 9,184
|
Post by MCMGM on Oct 20, 2010 11:55:21 GMT -5
Stand by Me? Shawshank Redemption? Misery? Carrie? The Shining? The Green Mile? Creepshow?! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by YAKMAN is ICHIBAN on Oct 20, 2010 12:26:00 GMT -5
LOVED the I Love Lucy Vitameatavegamin reference.
|
|
|
|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on Oct 20, 2010 16:35:26 GMT -5
2. In the book, which the Critic barely talks about, they explain pretty much everything he's got a problem with. For example, he mentions no one knows where IT is from or what IT is. King tells you that in the book. Also doesn't it lend a little creepiness that you DON'T know what IT is? Agreed, but he's reviewing the miniseries, not the book, so I guess he's intentionally leaving out the explanations from the books. Then again, in that case, he shouldn't be bashing King's style in the first place either. Oh well. And yeah, I don't see the problem with not knowing bout It's story. After all, when Michael Myers was given a backstory, people got pissed because it made him less scary. 4. I agree the effects are silly and the spider's ridiculous, but keep in mind the effects of the time weren't anywhere near as advanced as today. That, on the other hand, I can't agree with. Dude, it was 1990, there already were great animatronics and CGI was already almost twenty years old. There's no excuse for a big budget movie of that time to have such awful special effects (what was up with the claymation hole?!), especially if you keep in mind that only one year later, we got Terminator 2 and 2 years after that, Jurassic Park. Oh and 10 years earlier, there was Alien and two years earlier, Star Wars. So really, if they could make badass lightsaber effects for a 1977 movie that only had a modest budget, you can't tell me they couldn't make a decent lightning strike effects in 1990. |
|
|
|
Post by mysterydriver on Oct 20, 2010 16:40:43 GMT -5
NC should probably watch some Foster Brooks before his next use of "Drunk" acting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Oct 20, 2010 17:57:38 GMT -5
Carrie? The Shining? The Green Mile? Funnily, King hates the movie version of The Shining, to the point that he made his own TV mini-series version. Not only is some of the story in the movie made up, but the mother character is the absolute opposite in the movie of what it is in the book. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2010 18:21:15 GMT -5
Eh not one of my favourites tbh
Couple of things really annoyed me his drinking game/drunk acting, funny at first but went on too long
Also his complaining about the flashbacks, well they kinda needed to show why they were going back otherwise the viewer would have no idea why they were going back and you just know he'd have complained about that
Yeah I'm a wee bit biased cause it scared the crap out of me when I was young and I actually have it on DVD but I can admit it has flaws (I knew he'd go for that bike scene in particular lol) but those two points I mentioned really got to me
|
|
|
|
Post by elektro on Oct 20, 2010 18:25:01 GMT -5
That, on the other hand, I can't agree with. Dude, it was 1990, there already were great animatronics and CGI was already almost twenty years old. There's no excuse for a big budget movie of that time to have such awful special effects (what was up with the claymation hole?!), especially if you keep in mind that only one year later, we got Terminator 2 and 2 years after that, Jurassic Park. Oh and 10 years earlier, there was Alien and two years earlier, Star Wars. So really, if they could make badass lightsaber effects for a 1977 movie that only had a modest budget, you can't tell me they couldn't make a decent lightning strike effects in 1990. While I agree that the effects were crap, you have to remember that this was a TV miniseries, and not a full-length feature film. Most miniseries have a budget far beneath what a feature film would have. |
|
|
|
Post by -Lithium- on Oct 20, 2010 19:12:44 GMT -5
Episode was kinda meh, and I could have done without the "drunk" acting, but the ending was great.
Also, do him and his brother live in the same house?
|
|
bob
Backup Wench
The "other" Bob. FOC COURSE!
started the Madness Wars, Proudly the #1 Nana Hater on FAN
Posts: 80,564
|
Post by bob on Oct 20, 2010 19:29:45 GMT -5
be thankful that they didn't adapt everything from the novel into the miniseries
in the novel Mary Beth has sex with all of them in an attempt to bring them closer together before they confront Pennywise
as for the episode It was a bit of a let down
|
|
|
|
Post by nickcave on Oct 20, 2010 19:48:13 GMT -5
I am a huge fan of Stephen King but watching this did kind of make me realize he does recycle the same "band of losers" characters in his books. Stand By Me, It and Dreamcatcher all utilize this.
|
|
|
|
Post by BorneAgain on Oct 20, 2010 19:51:18 GMT -5
I don't care about Stephen King one way or the other, but Critic should never be fake drunk in any video again. After about five minutes it just gets grating.
Real drunk on the other hand...
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottensinpwf on Oct 20, 2010 19:57:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex Shelley on Oct 20, 2010 19:59:30 GMT -5
OH GOD NOT THE INTIMIDATING BALLOON |
|
|
|
Post by Spankymac is sick of the swiss on Oct 20, 2010 20:39:17 GMT -5
Eh not one of my favourites tbh Couple of things really annoyed me his drinking game/drunk acting, funny at first but went on too long Also his complaining about the flashbacks, well they kinda needed to show why they were going back otherwise the viewer would have no idea why they were going back and you just know he'd have complained about that Yeah I'm a wee bit biased cause it scared the crap out of me when I was young and I actually have it on DVD but I can admit it has flaws (I knew he'd go for that bike scene in particular lol) but those two points I mentioned really got to me Yeah, I agree on the drunk acting bit. You can tell he thought it was WAY funnier than it actually was. It was a good premise, but he stretched it farther than it had any business going. I'd have preferred for him to just do a straight review. |
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Oct 20, 2010 23:04:53 GMT -5
My favorite book always was Stephen King's It, but I will admit even in the book...........the spider was always a letdown.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2010 13:45:38 GMT -5
I thought the review was funny as hell. Definitely something to watch more than once.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Oct 21, 2010 14:30:05 GMT -5
2. In the book, which the Critic barely talks about, they explain pretty much everything he's got a problem with. For example, he mentions no one knows where IT is from or what IT is. King tells you that in the book. Also doesn't it lend a little creepiness that you DON'T know what IT is? We know the origins of a lot of monsters out there (Jason Vorhees, Freddy Kreuger, f. ex), as well as of most classic monsters (Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster), and they're not less creepy because of it. Not knowing doesn't make it inherently more creepy. This is a monster who is attacking kids as a clown, so it's not really the same thing as, say, Michael Meyers, who we were better off not knowing the origins of. |
|
helped $lim jinx NXT. Woops
