Remake of IT--should this be done?

[Sweet One]

Should they really try to make a remake of IT? The first one had Tim Curry as Pennywise. Could that really be improved?

Curry has a varied cast career as a villain, he has played Darkness in Legend, Dr. Frank N. Furter in Rocky Horror, Bill Sikes in Oliver Twist among others. I haven't seen him in a longn while though...

His last roles weren't that that good. He was in Home Alone II. I think I might have seen him in the second Scary Movie, which I couldn't stand.

Anyway the big screen might mean bigger budget production values, but the best SK movies (meaning most respectful of the source materials, with attention paid to character) have been on the small sreen, so it seems.

[JohnDalglish]

Hi,

See him as Twoflower in the made-for-TV adaptation of Terry Pratchett's The Colour of Magic - he's brilliant in the part IMO. And the production values are just fine, and four hours means that nothing is cut from what is (relative to Sai King anyway) a fairly slim volume.

I'm almost apoplectic about Follywood shoehorning IT into cinema length, and also about the updating of the time line. IT with mobile phones and the internet in 120 minutes?

I don't effing think so!

Long days and pleasant nights

[Balrog21]

IF and only IF Frank Darabont would do it and it was done as a 5 night miniseries on HBO or Showtime or TNT. Then followed up with a truly kick butt DVD on par with the deluxe(extended) DVD's like the LOTR's DVD's

Any other way I think would be a waste. This ridiculous idea of changing the time line is absurd and downright makes me want to hurl.

Hopefully and yes, I have said a few prayers that Mr. King does have some input on the matter and squashes the idea of a 2 hour film. Time will tell though. I am hoping for the best.

Best,
Bal

[coolambindang]

I did enjoy Curry in that role but as for the rest of it I really have never felt it could have been all that the book is, if that makes any sense. I just always feel cheated when SK's books are reduced to tacky, horrible made for tv BS. I just hate the made-for TV format, to much bending over backwards for TV censors.

[Neil W]

Hi,

See him as Twoflower in the made-for-TV adaptation of Terry Pratchett's The Colour of Magic - he's brilliant in the part IMO.

Tim Curry was Trymon. Sean Astin was Twoflower.

[Spooky]

Yeah, I'm not big with the updated timeline. I thought the settings were perfect in the book. So instead of the children scenes taking place in the 50's, it'll be the 80's? I just don't see that working.

[Annarkie]

WAITAMINUTE! They're going to make the remake shorter than the TV version- which wasn't long enough? NOOOOO make them stop! It would be an abomination at cinema length! Like Queen of the Damned was! I mean Queen of the Damned literally had nothing to do with the book!

[NickG641]

The original was a "PG", relatively light-hearted, cheapened version of King's story made on a television budget with effects that consisted of puppets and claymation. It was enjoyable, certainly, with a great performance by Tim Curry. But besides that it was a rubber spider and a lot of blood-filled balloons.

I think now there's an opportunity to create a dark, appropriately adult, and perhaps genuinely scary adaptation "It", with special effects that are finally advanced enough to accurately depict some of the truly terrifying imagery found in the novel. It'll be fit into a running time that's reasonable for the silver screen, for sure. But look at previous adaptations of novels. Each of the Lord of the Rings films clocked in at around three hours, Watchmen was two hours and forty minutes. Even a blockbuster like The Dark Knight was two and a half hours long.

Personally, I'm not worrying about it becoming some 90 minute PG-13 teenage affair. I'm just grateful for this: it's Warner Bros (who took the gamble with Watchmen)...and not the Sci-Fi Channel. Who gave us such memorable contributions as: "Abominable", "Boa vs. Python", and "Flash Gordon: The TV Series".

[~Ally~]

I'm really not looking forward to this (remakes just ain't my thing).
The original version was passable and Tim Curry was amazing as Pennywise, he scared the life out of me when i was 10 and the music Fur Elise gives me shivers whenever i hear it to this day.
There is just far too much detail in the novel for it to ever be made into a movie which could contain all it's content so i am more than satisfied with the original movie attempt.

An updated timeline sounds ridiculous, IMO Hollywood can't do decent horror adaptations, they always go for the shock factor whilst missing the importance of character and plot development.

[Jack Torrance]

I would not mind it really. If nothing else we always have the TV series to fall back upon. Is this going to be made for TV again or an actual movie this time? I am hoping for a movie. Although it would be super condensed and leave out a ton of good stuff I assume?