It Chapter Two Review & Comments

Jim Di Griz

Distinguished Member
Was always going to watch this anyway but thanks for the review. Im going to wait for a set. There is rumour of a longer cut of the first film being released too...
 

Bacus

Distinguished Member
Hi Kumari,

Great review :smashin:
I liked the first one and this now looks promising.
 

MarkNorton1

Active Member
Cheers for the review Kumari, very much agree, went to see it last night, a very long long film but I enjoyed it almost as much as the first one.

my only gripe I guess is unless I missed something but after the brutal homophobic attack at the beginning I was kinda expecting/hoping for some payback on the gang, this didn’t happen so far as I can tell? Pretty sure I didn’t fall asleep through any!
 

psychopomp1

Well-known Member
Watched it last night and loved it!
I was worried that nearly 3 hrs run time may have been too long but no, it was perfect. Liked the bit where Mr Stephen King himself makes a brief appearance in the movie as a shopkeeper. Probably nitpicking here, but would have been nice if the adult Ben had a bit more of a personality (like the kid Ben). Highly recommended :smashin:

Now only if they would do a re-make of 'The Stand'
 
Last edited:

Drax1

Distinguished Member
^ Bit of a spoiler in there matey you might want to invisitext. It worked as a nice surprise for me not knowing beforehand.
 

Drax1

Distinguished Member
I think one of Chapter 2's biggest assets is that the chemistry between the adult Losers is almost as good as that with the kids in Chapter 1. Having said that, the first instalment flew past, but the running time Chapter 2 seemed way more drawn out, despite it being a film that seemed busier generally. Far too much padding, with the addition of a lot of unnecessary scenes that needed better editing.
There's a great film somewhere in Chapter 2 that could have been told in 130 odd minutes...
 

psychopomp1

Well-known Member
^ Bit of a spoiler in there matey you might want to invisitext. It worked as a nice surprise for me not knowing beforehand.
Apologies, edited my post accordingly.
 

Cameron583

Well-known Member
Watched it today, and having enjoyed the first, I'd give this a solid 5. Found it very bland, no depth to the story and horrendously long.

Was quite looking forward to it :)
 

DarkEntity

Well-known Member
Just back from this. I was a tad worried about the length, but once you're in and watching the time flies by, it doesnt feel like 3 hours at all! I enjoyed the first part but this was far better, much more to see, some good scenes with Bill as Pennywise and some other good performances from the cast.

solid 7 or 8/10 for me :)
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
Saw Kermode talking about it earlier.

Seemed to say narrative cohesion was an issue, and mentioned how it felt more like part of a mini-series this time. Referenced the old Tim Curry jobber. And of course the fact it was too long.

If the wait for the Blu wasn't gonna be till after Xmas I'd hang on, but think this is still one I need to get closed off at the cinema.
 

BrynTeg

Distinguished Member
Just got to see It ... and really enjoyed It ...
Thought it could of been trimmed a bit maybe, 15-20 mins?? but i didnt feel as if there was any real filler on screen....
 

Gambit1977

Active Member
Not seen it yet, but I have to know....
is the alien monster thing as rubbish as in the mini series?
 

Grangey.

Well-known Member
Saw this last night.

Honestly, wasn't a huge fan of the first, didn't feel much suspense, nore particularly horrifying/scary/terrifying which I believe was intended... but put this down to having children as main actors. Went into IT2 with higher hopes, now that they both had adults as lead characters (which to me meant immediately the "terrors" would have to be much worse), and knowing they no longer had the confines of a book to hold it back.

Did not disappoint... MUCH better than the first in my opinion. Instantly more recognisable as being darker in it's displays of horror and graphical content (without over egging it), and a really solid performance.

Did it need to be as long as it was? No, but there was no harm in it either. Great cast selection and film overall.
 

epicdream

Active Member
Enjoyed it overall, have to agree with the comments about it being too long (or maybe it was me wanting to go to the loo?)
2 bits I particularly enjoyed; The Thing reference (you'll know it when you see it) which made me laugh out loud and towards the end there is a moment where the LFE cranks into high-gear (which was fab on IMAX). I'd give it a solid 7/10 (maybe 8)
 

SpuddybabyUK

Active Member
Have to say I thought it was very “meh”.

However, I watch it with the knowledge of the book, as it’s my favourite book.
As such, I knew I would find it hard to really enjoy it, as I would always know what is coming.

Given that, I felt it deviated so far from the book, it didn’t seem like a true part 2.
I thought Pennywise was very underused in the whole film, and the true version of IT was just a CGi mess.
The Ritual of Chüd was totally different to the book, I get that they couldn’t have done the battle of Wills in Space with the telling of jokes and the biting of tongues, but if they had introduced an element of something in the first film with the kids we could have got some of the mysticism across. Especially as the kids believe it.
As for the way they killed Pennywise, I get that the message is overcoming childish fears, but it was pretty lame, reducing IT to a baby like blubbering mess. I don’t think that was the best they could do.
In both parts I thought that it never really got across the camaraderie between the children. I didn’t think that it needed all the swearing and mum jokes and moving it forward to the 80s also made some things irrelevant. Why would young bill name his bike silver, as in all likelihood he would never have the cultural reference in the 80s. Speaking of Silver, I didn’t see a need for it in this film. In the book it was a huge part of Bills youth, saving him and Stans life in one instance, and then Audras at the end, yet only seemed to exist in here to get a King cameo.
Henry Bowers, no real need for him to be in the sequel. In the book he is released by IT as he can kill the losers no matter what, but this is not explained in the film. Also, in the book, he injures Mike so bad that he is in hospital when they go into the sewers thus reducing their strength even more, this doesn’t happen in the film, as Mike is the only character who knew how to kill him so has to be there, so pointless to have this small Bowers subplot.
I als think they could have shown the effects of the death of pennywise on the town of Derry. It pretty much gets destroyed by floods and storms, and given the relationship the town has with Pennywise it would have made his death a lot grander.
There are many many more things I could say but would take too long to write.
Personally I think the miniseries is actually superior to this, as even though it’s shorter it takes its time with the important stuff.
In chapter 2 it seems to rush into the return to Derry.

I could go in and on, but Ill finish up with saying I think the mini series is a lot better, even though it ignore some of the larger plots, as it gets the kids bang on, the adults too.

I always said as it was being filmed that it lend itself more to a Netflix miniseries, than a two part film given the whole story contained in the book. But there you go.
 
Last edited:

theprestige

Well-known Member
Just got back from seeing it and kinda loved it. I find very little to complain about this film and am a bit surprised at the mixed reviews. This is high entertainment and thrilling stuff with some important messages. Maybe it's because I never read the book, but everything seemed to make sense to me and the set pieces not only show character development but reveal a lot about our characters internal struggles, which I thought was skilfully done.

James Ransone and the rising Bill Hader were the MVP's for this one. The former i've been waiting to see in a big film ever since I watched The Wire over a decade ago and the latter i've only recently just become a fan of since checking out the show Barry. That's not to say that the rest of the cast aren't good, it's a very well acted film overall, but those two were my favourites. And gosh, Jessica Chaistain gets fitter and fitter in each film I see her in. She's fitter now than she was a decade ago!

Yeah, it's nearly 3 hours long but, honestly, the time flew by. My rule with films is that if you find yourself annoyed by the length of the film then it probably wasn't for you.

For me, this is a top film and was as great as I hoped it would be.
 
Last edited:

theprestige

Well-known Member
Forgot to mention the younger Skarsgaard brother. He is GREAT in this too, completely gone and, for me, easily eclipses Curry's version. Seriously, for those who on the fence about seeing this, just go and watch on the biggest screen that you can and with the best sound system.
 

vader100

Well-known Member
Saw this last night.

Honestly, wasn't a huge fan of the first, didn't feel much suspense, nore particularly horrifying/scary/terrifying which I believe was intended... but put this down to having children as main actors. Went into IT2 with higher hopes, now that they both had adults as lead characters (which to me meant immediately the "terrors" would have to be much worse), and knowing they no longer had the confines of a book to hold it back.

Did not disappoint... MUCH better than the first in my opinion. Instantly more recognisable as being darker in it's displays of horror and graphical content (without over egging it), and a really solid performance.

Did it need to be as long as it was? No, but there was no harm in it either. Great cast selection and film overall.
Talking rubbish mate, the book covers both the child and the adult stories. Problem was the second part strays far too much from the book. The town itself is almost a character in the books and the ending apocalypse is far more absorbing in the book than the tame ending here.
 

midknight

Well-known Member
Cheers for the review Kumari, very much agree, went to see it last night, a very long long film but I enjoyed it almost as much as the first one.

my only gripe I guess is unless I missed something but after the brutal homophobic attack at the beginning I was kinda expecting/hoping for some payback on the gang, this didn’t happen so far as I can tell? Pretty sure I didn’t fall asleep through any!
I said exactly the same thing. Horrible start and really wanted to see some payback but never happened. Liked the film but it was a good 30 mins too long and kind of got a little repetitive towards the end.
 

SpuddybabyUK

Active Member
Talking rubbish mate, the book covers both the child and the adult stories. Problem was the second part strays far too much from the book. The town itself is almost a character in the books and the ending apocalypse is far more absorbing in the book than the tame ending here.

Yes totally agree with this.
 

dudeonline

Active Member
I watched this at the weekend. I couldn't wait for it to finish. For me, it was not scary, it was silly and laughable in many places (where you shouldn't be laughing). Way too long. I realise many have enjoyed it, but I won't be watching again.
 

Tim_A

Active Member
IT's (see what I did there...) unlikely to feature in my top 10 for the year. Was it scary? Not really. I've been more scared by Dr Who (that Jon Pertwee one with the maggots terrified me as a kid, and the more recent one with the gas masks... shudder), but I'm not a horror fan, so that didn't really bother me. Was it over-long? yeah, but I wasn't looking at my watch. With a big ensemble cast, it's bound to go long if you want to give everyone a fair crack of the whip. Is Jessica Chastain still hot? Absolutely! Did I like the flashbacks? No. It felt like "we just thought of this cool plot twist, so we better put in a flashback to make it look like it was there all along". Did they kill IT in the end? Dunno, I had to pee. But it probably depends more on box office returns than plot. (Chapter 3: "ITS"...?) Did it move me to read the book? No. Will I buy the blu ray? Umm... if the iTunes download is 4k, and the extras are decent, and it gets a good discount, maybe. For completeness, you understand.

"I.T. Chapter 2: Georgieeeee turn it off and on agaaaain..." 6/10
 

vader100

Well-known Member
IT's (see what I did there...) unlikely to feature in my top 10 for the year. Was it scary? Not really. I've been more scared by Dr Who (that Jon Pertwee one with the maggots terrified me as a kid, and the more recent one with the gas masks... shudder), but I'm not a horror fan, so that didn't really bother me. Was it over-long? yeah, but I wasn't looking at my watch. With a big ensemble cast, it's bound to go long if you want to give everyone a fair crack of the whip. Is Jessica Chastain still hot? Absolutely! Did I like the flashbacks? No. It felt like "we just thought of this cool plot twist, so we better put in a flashback to make it look like it was there all along". Did they kill IT in the end? Dunno, I had to pee. But it probably depends more on box office returns than plot. (Chapter 3: "ITS"...?) Did it move me to read the book? No. Will I buy the blu ray? Umm... if the iTunes download is 4k, and the extras are decent, and it gets a good discount, maybe. For completeness, you understand.

"I.T. Chapter 2: Georgieeeee turn it off and on agaaaain..." 6/10
If you want to experience the story as it was supposed to be told, read the book. It's superb.
 

theprestige

Well-known Member
I don't understand this constant criticism with film adaptations of popular books doing things a little differently. What's the point of translating the book from page to page?? A film is a different creative medium, surely you expected them to be a bit more ambitious than just simply adapting page for page a book that's already had a famous television adaptation?
 

vader100

Well-known Member
I don't understand this constant criticism with film adaptations of popular books doing things a little differently. What's the point of translating the book from page to page?? A film is a different creative medium, surely you expected them to be a bit more ambitious than just simply adapting page for page a book that's already had a famous television adaptation?
That’s fine when it achieves something on par or better but when it falls as short as this film did you have to question the filmmakers decisions. Part 1 strayed from the book a fair way too but in a way that was interesting and and clever.
 

Trending threads

Latest news

Bowers & Wilkins unveils new PX wireless ANC headphones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Roku Premiere streaming device with 4K HDR hits UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
CTA launches 8K UHD TV display certification programme
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Huawei launches Google-less Mate 30 and Mate 30 Pro phones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Huawei launches 4K Vision TV
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Latest threads

Top Bottom