"It" is due to return in 2013

[DaveBond21]

In the novel, the cycle of "IT" is about every 28 years. This means that It is due to revisit Derry in 2013.

Does anyone think Stephen would be tempted to write a sequel to mark the date?

[themadone06]

It would be cool, but I believe It is completely dead and was killed in the first novel.

[Raistlin]

A sequel would be a great idea. It may be dead, but clowns are a funny bunch :eek2:

[Patricia A]

In the novel, the cycle of "IT" is about every 28 years. This means that It is due to revisit Derry in 2013.

Does anyone think Stephen would be tempted to write a sequel to mark the date?
That is a brilliant idea!
But if it's done it'll probably be something like Carrie 2 and that would suck.
I just went from elated to sad it 3.2 seconds.

[Nutty Bavarian]

I don't know if I'd want a sequel, but definately a remake with modern CG. Some of the stuff from the book just wasn't translated to the movie. I've always hated clowns. I mean come on if you have to paint on a smile that just seems creepy.

[Cowboy]

I understand that there will be no Mayans attending the premier.

[the_last_gunslinger]

I don't think a sequel would be a very wise idea. IT was such an epic masterpiece that any follow up novel would pale in comparison.

Plus, what made the book so great was the Loser's club, learning of their childhoods in the fifties, and watching them reunite in the eighties. The nostalgia factor would simply not exist. Plus, the main characters are just too old now to be as interesting. Unless King brought in a whole new cast, or have something hokey like having their children fight It.

However, I would think it to be very interesting if the date were to be commemorated, but not as a novel. As a short story, maybe. I could swallow a sequel if it was in a shorter form.

[thepunisher82]

If the sequel were to have one of Pennywise's spawn as the villain, I would love for King to do it. As much as I love "IT," the book made it very clear that Pennywise won't be coming back to Derry. The book did raise the possibility that Ben may have missed some of the babies, so I see it as the only sensible way to go about a sequel without spoiling the legacy of the first book.

[michal]

Maybe reading this he will now...

[Robert Gray]

I certainly hope not. There is no bigger fan of "It" than I, but some stories have reached a satisfying conclusion. If something was done right the first time, there is no reason to revisit it.

[thymeoperator]

I understand that there will be no Mayans attending the premier.

that is hilarious!

[eaglpaul]

There is already a film remake being made. It is due out in 2011, and unlike the original, will be released in the theaters. I hope this means that there will be more blood and gore, in other words, that it will be truer to the book, while at the same time keeping to the time schedule of a theatrically released movie.

If they're smart they'll do what Peter Jackson did with the LOTR series and split the book up into parts and make those into movies. I know that LOTR was three books, but if you think about it IT as a stand alone novel was longer than all three books combined. I believe that it would be more than possible to split the book up into sections and make 2 movies from it. And release them six months apart, that way you don't overload the viewer, but at the same time you increase the anticipation of the climactic ending of the film.

I don't believe that that will really happen, but it's a good idea. Another good idea is to bring Tim Curry back as Pennywise. He's the voice I hear in my head when I read the book, I just hear him saying "They all float down here." That is so creepy, I love it.

But no matter what happens, I think a modern remake of IT will be awesome, and that I will thouroughly enjoy it.

[Robert Gray]

I disagree. There is nothing good about a movie and plenty of bad about resetting the time. The best thing that could happen to this film is it dies in pre-production.

[tillyn]

I would like to read some more with those characters just to see if anything happens, one of my fav. stories.

[Jake Featherston]

I certainly hope not. There is no bigger fan of "It" than I, but some stories have reached a satisfying conclusion. If something was done right the first time, there is no reason to revisit it.

I'm inclined to agree. "It 2: In Soviet Derry, Clown Kills You!," or whatever it would be called, would be a bad idea. But a short story might be very cool.

[jaxter]

ugh I don't know.. i heard IT remake was being made into ONE movie, if thats so I think that is a poor poor decision. After reading the book I can't go back to watching the movie It. It really just wasn't the same. If theres a movie being made about IT than i think it would only do it justice to make into a few movies or a series sort of just so the show could really plunge into the depth and meaning of the book. and also only if in production they put ALOT of emphasis on really putting effort into finding good actors that can play the part AND look it, and the story itself. to me that just seems like alot of odds that can't be beat. With Hollywoods record of mashing movies together just to make a fast buck I don't think I'd like to see this book ruined. I loved it too much.

[Mephisto]

:laugh:
I understand that there will be no Mayans attending the premier.

[foyst]

It would be cool, but I believe It is completely dead and was killed in the first novel.

Hi all, not sure if i think an It 2 would be a good idea but regarding It's fate, in Dreamcatcher...

from wiki

A brief mention is made to It when Jonesy and Mr. Gray reach the place in Derry that used to be called Standpipe Hill. Instead of the Derry reservoir (known as the Standpipe), there is only a memorial to those who died in the storm of 1985 and "to the children--ALL the children" from the primary member of the Losers Club, the heroes of the novel It. At the bottom of this memorial is a graffito that would unsettle any of the surviving members of the Losers Club--"Pennywise Lives."

[Bob Ross]

I disagree. There is nothing good about a movie and plenty of bad about resetting the time. The best thing that could happen to this film is it dies in pre-production.
On one hand I agree with this. On the other hand, I think there were so many things that just weren't included (or completely screwed up) in the original miniseries that I would love to see some kind of remake. I would not want the setting changed in any way though. To me, IT takes place in 1958 and 1985 and that's where it needs to stay (a mistake made by the original miniseries as well). There's really no other way I would want to see it. Also, I cannot see this as a simple two-hour movie, and if that it the route they want to take I agree completely with you that it needs to die in pre-production. But if they were make it a multi-part miniseries (preferably on HBO, which would make sense when you consider A: doing so would allow the gorier parts of the book to come to glorious life and B: Warner Bros. - who are making the remake, own HBO so I don't see why this couldn't be an option) I could really get excited.

As far as King himself writing a direct sequel to the book? No way it's going to happen. And there's no way I want it to happen. I've seen too many writers cheapen former masterpieces with needless followups (Ira Levin's SON OF ROSEMARY comes to mind).

[LauraJo]

I did wonder about that bit in Dreamcatcher...

They could never make a film as good as the book, and I think it would be impossible to make the film true to the book, particularly Beverley's method of 're-bonding' the group...there would be uproar about that, certainly!

As for a sequel...prehaps not. A short story might work...or prehaps a story featuring some of the charactars, such as Bev and Ben who went off together?? Not a whole story about them specifically, but maybe a cameo so we can 'check in' on them?
You probably couldnt bring back the losers club, as at the end of the book they are all starting to forget everything again.

[Jake Featherston]

I've seen too many writers cheapen former masterpieces with needless followups (Ira Levin's SON OF ROSEMARY comes to mind).

Yeah, what a piece of crap that was!

[faithraine96]

I don't think there SHOULD be one. I agree with an earlier post, IT is such a masterpiece, and almost everyone remembers "that clown movie", even if they aren't a die-hard fan of King. Messing with it (no pun intended) would not be a very wise choice. I do hear they are remaking the movie (something I think is going to ruin it all, but we may be pleasantly surprised; most remakes or sequels suck), which may bring It to a new generation, but...

Another thing I have heard suggested (but not verified at ALL), is the possibility of an uncut IT (like the uncut Stand), which I think would be great to release at the time when Pennywise would make an appearance in Derry, but there is nothing to say that there IS an uncut. I don't see any reason why there SHOULD be an uncut. The book is already over 1000 pages long. It's already a very interwoven and complex novel to begin with...

[pseudosomething]

I wondered about a sequel as well. A novella or short taking place in Derry that coincides with the Pennywise return date would absolutely be readable, and might be great. I couldn't see it involving the original characters, though. At least not all of them. Their story was told. An incidental connection makes more sense.

[Sony02]

I love it, but it would not be a good continuation. We only have five left.

[Robert Gray]

It isn't due back because that story ended. Retelling the same story over and over again would not be satisfying and can only diminish the original by tainting it.

[Jake Featherston]

I do hear they are remaking the movie (something I think is going to ruin it all, but we may be pleasantly surprised; most remakes or sequels suck), which may bring It to a new generation, but...

I don't think the original movie was very good, so I look forward to the remake.

[nicklove09]

If "IT" is remade, I think it should be made into a 1 season series, like how LOST is, with the flashbacks and stuff. GOSH that would be my favorite SHOW ever "IT" haha.

[Balltastics2000]

It is by far my favourite novel and the only story that has genuinely scared me. I've read it 3 or 4 times in my life, the first time when I was 12, the most recent a couple of years ago when I was 27 and I would gladly welcome any further tales of Derry and the creature that dwells beneath it.
With regards to the new film, I am quite annoyed that it is to be a modernised version. In my dream world I would direct the story as two feature length films back to back, Kill Bill style, the first chapter of course being the 50's and then following it up with the 80's component of the tale. Jumping back and forth between childhood and adulthood works great in the novel but not so much on film.

[JackTheRipper]

In the novel, the cycle of "IT" is about every 28 years. This means that It is due to revisit Derry in 2013.


This has occurred to me as well, but I believe you added wrong. 1985 + 27 = 2012

[DancingCorpse]

I don't think i would like a sequel to IT. In my opinion, i just think that that particular story is done and dusted - and beautifully at that :)

[sissy]

"IT" was the first S.K. book I ever read, I was 13 years old and could not leave my bed at night to use the bathroom at night for 6 months without a light on. It was the scarriest thing ever to me. Needles to say I was hooked from that first sleepless night.:love: however the movie only made me laugh. I am completly for the idea of a short that features the spawn of It "calling" offspring of the losers club for revenge of the murder of its mother.

[KingIsKing]

No, I watched his book-signing tour and he was asked this question and he said that there would be nore of it. (pun intended)

[thymeoperator]

This has occurred to me as well, but I believe you added wrong. 1985 + 27 = 2012

... which means at the end of the new film the whole planet will blow up, the end ?? :)

[Bluey Lunger]

This has occurred to me as well, but I believe you added wrong. 1985 + 27 = 2012


makes sense. isn't utd 2012? p989 It=p734 UtD

[Flipsk8emerica]

In the novel, the cycle of "IT" is about every 28 years. This means that It is due to revisit Derry in 2013.

Does anyone think Stephen would be tempted to write a sequel to mark the date?

No, I saw a recent video of SK at a book signing promoting his new book Under the Dome and someone brought up the same question. SK stated "I'm done with clowns"

As far as movies go that's a different story.
On 12 March 2009, Warner Bros. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros.) announced that the production of a new adaptation of Stephen King's novel had started, and will be releasing a theatrical remake in 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_in_film). Dan Lin, Roy Lee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Lee) and Doug Davison are set to produce. [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_kings_it#cite_note-0)Not much is known about the remake except it will be R-rated and it will take place in the mid 1980s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s) and the present equally