Stephen Kings IT remake

[In58men]

http://moviepilot.com/stories/2014/0...-horror#!wQSg0


Discuss

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by Gonzo

Dude, really? Anything with Rebecca Dehorse-face in it is instant fail.

To each his own, I guess. She looks pretty good to me.

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by Brainiac

Gary Sinise was terrific. Molly Ringwold was fine as Frannie, and Laura San Giacomo was a better Nadine than a real-life Nadine would have been.

In fact, almost all of the casting was dead-on perfect, including Ray Walston as Glen Bateman, Rob Lowe as Nick Andros, Matt Frewer as the Trashcan Man, and Bill pillowbitererbakke (Dauber from Coach) as Tom Cullen. But casting Corin Nemec, who probably weighs about 100 lbs. soaking wet, as Harold Lauder was such horrific casting that it almost ruined the mini-series for me. Every time he came on the screen I said "WTF?" and shook my head.

Overall it was still excellent, but that guy was not Harold Lauder.

Edit: Sometimes the filters on this web site are ridiculous. I can't even type Bill F*gerbakke's name without the damn filter getting in the way.

They've tried for decades to get a full blown in depth A level multipart movie franchise or pay cable channel adaptation. Something that really fleshes out the depth of the book, but getting deep deep pockets financing always falls through due to the the enormity of the project.

Game of Thrones may finally have cracked open that door on the feasibility of high budget projects that are critically acclaimed and high production value with such a Big amount of source material to cover.

[Cheater5]

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth

Ya, if you do some research into The Shining movie, and the symbology, and meticulous level of detail that movie has, it's INCREDIBLE!!

Most have no clue about how crazy and genius Kubrick pulled off with that flick.

The older I get the more amazed and intrigued with Kubrick's ability and the level of genius this man was able to put on display in the achievement of his films.

This is an an extremely long read, but downright brilliant, plus it's broken out into lots of smaller sections, so it's really easy to check it out in part and revisit it whenever you may like.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!

http://t.co/kDmjg3CRCj

Interesting, but honestly it took this guy FAR too long to make his points. It's as though he had to tell us over and over how he's going to blow our minds, just keep reading...because what he says next is very compelling...

I found myself scrolling through trying get to his evidence and conclusions.

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by Cheater5

Interesting, but honestly it took this guy FAR too long to make his points. It's as though he had to tell us over and over how he's going to blow our minds, just keep reading...because what he says next is very compelling...

I found myself scrolling through trying get to his evidence and conclusions.

Can't disagree. A draft edit would do wonders, but I'll suffer through a bit of the rambling because the overall content is fascinating.

It's my theory that some of the redundancy is because it's a cut and paste compilation of a number of posts over a period of time - which is why you see a lot more callback to points already just made, which you typically wouldn't see if the entire piece was 1 contemporaneous writing.

[frankotank]

look....I didn't say Kubricks Shining isn't good. I've read the book a couple times and I've seen Kubricks movie many times. Some of the things Kubrick did....like replacing the hedge animals coming alive with a maze is just downright STUPID. the ending of his movie of atrocious in comparison to the ending in the book. Stephen King hated the ****ing movie. I don't. But....it was nice to see the mini series stay true to what King originally wrote. Weber did a great job and the lady in the tub was ****ing fantastic. when that thing crawled out of the tub....wow....and the ending of the book and mini series is much much MUCH better that the stupidity of Jack simply getting lost in a maze and freezing to death. you've got a ****ing AX in your hand Jack! now granted, it was supposed to be a mallet (thanks Kubrick!), but it's an AX! how the **** do you not simply chop your way out??? because the ending is STUPID.

King feels that Kubrick made very cold movie out of his story. (the ending is a perfect example of this compared to the book ending) he feels that he turned Jack, a deep character in the book, into a horror caricature and devolved Wendy into a stupid sniveling screamer. he actually calls the movie downright misogynistic.

if you haven't read the book, seen the Kubrick, and seen the mini series.....then you just don't know....and you're missing out.

[Cheater5]

Originally Posted by frankotank

if you haven't read the book, seen the Kubrick, and seen the mini series.....then you just don't know....and you're missing out.

I used to be a voracious reader of Stephen King- but for some reason skipped The Shining. And to be honest, Tommyknockers turned me off. I did come back and read Needful Things, because I was pulling an all-night duty and it happened to be laying around.

Suddenly, I have a lot of time on my hands- guess I will go read!

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by frankotank

look....I didn't say Kubricks Shining isn't good. I've read the book a couple times and I've seen Kubricks movie many times. Some of the things Kubrick did....like replacing the hedge animals coming alive with a maze is just downright STUPID. the ending of his movie of atrocious in comparison to the ending in the book. Stephen King hated the ****ing movie. I don't. But....it was nice to see the mini series stay true to what King originally wrote. Weber did a great job and the lady in the tub was ****ing fantastic. when that thing crawled out of the tub....wow....and the ending of the book and mini series is much much MUCH better that the stupidity of Jack simply getting lost in a maze and freezing to death. you've got a ****ing AX in your hand Jack! now granted, it was supposed to be a mallet (thanks Kubrick!), but it's an AX! how the **** do you not simply chop your way out??? because the ending is STUPID.

King feels that Kubrick made very cold movie out of his story. (the ending is a perfect example of this compared to the book ending) he feels that he turned Jack, a deep character in the book, into a horror caricature and devolved Wendy into a stupid sniveling screamer. he actually calls the movie downright misogynistic.

if you haven't read the book, seen the Kubrick, and seen the mini series.....then you just don't know....and you're missing out.

The animals switched in part was simply because there was no way to do it back in '79.

Again, maybe you should check out the link I posted, otherwise you're simply talking outta hand with Respect to Kubrick / King and what you presume to know. You don't have to have 100% buy-in, but the Information proffered isn't out of hat and a lot is simply too relative respectively to chalk up to pure coincidence.

And, yes, I've read The Shining, and have seen the all the various adaptations.

[frankotank]

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth

The animals switched in part was simply because there was no way to do it back in '79.

Again, maybe you should check out the link I posted, otherwise you're simply talking outta hand with Respect to Kubrick / King and what you presume to know. You don't have to have 100% buy-in, but the Information proffered isn't out of hat and a lot is simply too relative respectively to chalk up to pure coincidence.

And, yes, I've read The Shining, and have seen the all the various adaptations.

very good point about the animals. the ending change....ugh.
I will absolutely check that link out. looks like a long read.

" otherwise you're simply talking outta hand with Respect to Kubrick / King and what you presume to know."

I'd think that having read the book and seen both movies and read many King interviews would allow me to speak to this subject to some extent.
not sure why you think I'm presuming anything, which makes me even more curious about the link. I've only stated things I know are true. King has several very recent interviews out there right now and he's still bitching about Kubrick. lol

question - to my knowledge there are TWO adaptations. you used the word various. is there another I don't know about??

[lcarus]

If they absolutely must remake a shitty clown movie, go with Killer Klowns From Outer Space. Even though no remake could ever live up to the original.

[frankotank]

crap.
started reading.
I have things to do here at work today.....and I'm wondering it they'll get done. this is one big sumbitching chunk of reading.

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by frankotank

very good point about the animals. the ending change....ugh.
I will absolutely check that link out. looks like a long read.

" otherwise you're simply talking outta hand with Respect to Kubrick / King and what you presume to know."

I'd think that having read the book and seen both movies and read many King interviews would allow me to speak to this subject to some extent.
not sure why you think I'm presuming anything, which makes me even more curious about the link. I've only stated things I know are true. King has several very recent interviews out there right now and he's still bitching about Kubrick. lol

question - to my knowledge there are TWO adaptations. you used the word various. is there another I don't know about??

I just meant check out the link as it will illuminate a lot about the movie that is crazy. Such as Kubrick purposely made the movie an inverse of the the book's plotpoints. Some of the acrimony between the two and Kings negative public comments stemmed from King during production trying to get heavy-handed , and repeatedly trying to give Stanley notes on how he should make the movie and talk him into firing Shelley Duvall. Kubrick eventually got tired of this pestering and stopped taking his calls.

As far as I know, those are the only 2, and then you the book, obviously, and the abridged and unabridged versions of the audiobook.

[Ceej]

No love for langoliers?

Best/worst TV movie ever.

[frankotank]

Originally Posted by lcarus

If they absolutely must remake a shitty clown movie, go with Killer Klowns From Outer Space. Even though no remake could ever live up to the original.

I dunno....if they cast Steven Weber.....it could happen.

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by frankotank

crap.
started reading.
I have things to do here at work today.....and I'm wondering it they'll get done. this is one big sumbitching chunk of reading.

Ha ha, sorry! You're ****ed from a productivity standpoint.

[frankotank]

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth

I just meant check out the link as it will illuminate a lot about the movie that is crazy. Such as Kubrick purposely made the movie an inverse of the the book's plotpoints. Some of the acrimony between the two and Kings negative public comments stemmed from King during production trying to get heavy-handed , and repeatedly trying to give Stanley notes on how he should make the movie and talk him into firing Shelley Duvall. Kubrick eventually got tired of this pestering and stopped taking his calls.

As far as I know, those are the only 2, and then you the book, obviously, and the abridged and unabridged versions of the audiobook.

I will say Shelley Duvall....for me personally.....I simply can't stand her in that movie. just terrible! somebody made a funny about the mini series mom earlier....give me her over Shelley ANY DAY!

now....back to reading!