Poll of the Day > People already complaining that the "IT" movie isn't scary...

(+) Yeah! (+)

It's not supposed to be horror as much as it's supposed to be an actual drama with deep characters...

Very few of Stephen King's books are actually in the horror genre.
---

There were definite horror scenes in the movie. Whether they worked out or not is whatever, but denying they were in there (or that the film wasn't marketed as a horror movie) is a little silly.

I haven't watched or read it but in general most horror films are not scary. That's probably why I prefer physiological films. Saw(the first one) was a good example of this for me.
---

I saw images of IT that look like Kishin from Soul Eater so I'm actually anticipating a decent film now.
---

I had to stop reading the book as it was way to graphic and descriptive for me. I have the first IT and was okay watching it.

People on the internet complaining about a thing?
---

Mead posted...

People on the internet complaining about a thing?

Remember just last week when that never used to happen at all?
---

Itt: people who don't know what horror as a genre is

green dragon posted...

Itt: people who don't know what horror as a genre is

Is it supposed to be funny?
---

wwinterj25 posted...

green dragon posted...

Itt: people who don't know what horror as a genre is

Is it supposed to be funny?

Nah, I think you have an understanding of the horror genre. Horror isn't always scary, nor is it always supposed to be scary

green dragon posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

green dragon posted...

Itt: people who don't know what horror as a genre is

Is it supposed to be funny?

Nah, I think you have an understanding of the horror genre. Horror isn't always scary, nor is it always supposed to be scary

Then what makes it different than a comedy if they don't try for horror?

It wasn't really scary, but it struck a fantastic balance between creepy and humorous.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

green dragon posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

green dragon posted...

Itt: people who don't know what horror as a genre is

Is it supposed to be funny?

Nah, I think you have an understanding of the horror genre. Horror isn't always scary, nor is it always supposed to be scary

Then what makes it different than a comedy if they don't try for horror?

Macabre or supernatural themes.

From wikipedia:

Horror is a genre of fiction which is intended to, or has the capacity to frighten, scare, disgust, or startle its readers or viewers by inducing feelings of horror and terror.

green dragon posted...

Macabre or supernatural themes.

From wikipedia:

Horror is a genre of fiction which is intended to, or has the capacity to frighten, scare, disgust, or startle its readers or viewers by inducing feelings of horror and terror.

That definition seems to indicate that a horror movie needs to be scary, not your premise.

Something about the movie doesn't let me find it amazing. I think it might be that it doesn't like the creepiness marinate long enough before the next scene is a happy one or one making you laugh. The movie was more of a thriller than a horror film. More of a coming of age movie than either of those genres, though.

I didn't love the novel as much as other people seemed to love it as well.

Also thought Tim Curry's portrayal in the 90's was meh, done by someone who never really read the book, and just did the popular clown thing of that era. Like if Bozo the Clown ate children.

Maybe I'm just turning into a contrarion.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

green dragon posted...

Macabre or supernatural themes.

From wikipedia:

Horror is a genre of fiction which is intended to, or has the capacity to frighten, scare, disgust, or startle its readers or viewers by inducing feelings of horror and terror.

That definition seems to indicate that a horror movie needs to be scary, not your premise.

Meh, to me at least, something can be horror but not scary. Like, it induces certain feelings that aren't scary but make you feel uneasy

green dragon posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

green dragon posted...

Macabre or supernatural themes.

From wikipedia:

Horror is a genre of fiction which is intended to, or has the capacity to frighten, scare, disgust, or startle its readers or viewers by inducing feelings of horror and terror.

That definition seems to indicate that a horror movie needs to be scary, not your premise.

Meh, to me at least, something can be horror but not scary. Like, it induces certain feelings that aren't scary but make you feel uneasy

I liked It, full disclosure. But I can see why the strengths of the movie rely more on its characters and witty dialogue than on its truly scary or creepy moments. Sort of like Devil's Rejects in that way (which I loved).

supergamer19 posted...

Like if Bozo the Clown ate children.

Currently rereading the book. It makes the comparison to Bozo (among other famous clowns) multiple times, so the Curry version of Pennywise is on point in that regard (IMO).
---

The horror aspect of it is more centered on making you feel uneasy or disturbed as opposed to right out scared. There were scenes that were straight out frightening but what I loved about it was how genuinely creepy Skarsgard's representation was. I loved the book and the original IT gave me nightmares as a child. The idea of some extradimensional being knowing your deepest fear, bringing out the worst in some disturbed town, and feeding on children, all while being somewhat unacknowledged or ignored by the adults in the town is just a horrifying concept.

GunslingerGunsl posted...

There were scenes that were straight out frightening but what I loved about it was how genuinely creepy Skarsgard's representation was.

I didn't really care for his take on it. I mean, it was OK. Serviceable to the story. But he was playing it as a big dumb monster. I guess the dude can really only read the script as written, but I liked Tim Curry's more sophisticated, yet alien approach to the character. Thankfully though because the movie has other strengths it doesn't really focus too much on Pennywise so this isn't much of a problem.

Of course it's not scary... it's Stevphven King
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

GunslingerGunsl posted...

There were scenes that were straight out frightening but what I loved about it was how genuinely creepy Skarsgard's representation was.

I didn't really care for his take on it. I mean, it was OK. Serviceable to the story. But he was playing it as a big dumb monster. I guess the dude can really only read the script as written, but I liked Tim Curry's more sophisticated, yet alien approach to the character. Thankfully though because the movie has other strengths it doesn't really focus too much on Pennywise so this isn't much of a problem.

I didn't see him as a "big dumb monster." I saw him as a demented creature that took much pleasure in tormenting his prey. He was essentially playing with his food. Lol.

Never read the book. Don't care too either. I loved the original miniseries from back when I was a kid. I always love Tim Curry's portrayal of the clown. I didn't want to like the new one more than the old one. But I couldn't help myself. It really is just so much better in every aspect. I'm eagerly awaiting the second half.
---

green dragon posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

green dragon posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

green dragon posted...

Itt: people who don't know what horror as a genre is

Is it supposed to be funny?

Nah, I think you have an understanding of the horror genre. Horror isn't always scary, nor is it always supposed to be scary

Then what makes it different than a comedy if they don't try for horror?

Macabre or supernatural themes.

From wikipedia:

Horror is a genre of fiction which is intended to, or has the capacity to frighten, scare, disgust, or startle its readers or viewers by inducing feelings of horror and terror.

does not compute
---

i liked it.
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

does not compute

Not hard to grasp. Horror can be the type that actually gets you physiologically rather than jump scares, gore and the like. It doesn't have to cause fear.
---

wwinterj25 posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

does not compute

Not hard to grasp. Horror can be the type that actually gets you physiologically rather than jump scares, gore and the like. It doesn't have to cause fear.

the definition linked says "intent to induce fellings of horror and terror"
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

the definition linked says "intent to induce fellings of horror and terror"

Still we know that isn't always the case with "horror" films.
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

does not compute

I already addressed that

Not a lot of jumpscares, huh?

jumpscares suck 99% of the time anyway.
---

You know what it had instead of jump scares? A clanging metal sound to identify when to be scared. That's just as bad to be honest.
---

I saw the original IT (vaguely remember it) and feel the remake looks meh. maybe it's because I still like Tim Curry?
---

If it was supposed to be horror they'd leave in the underage gangbang from the book.

=P
---

ForteEXE3850 posted...

If it was supposed to be horror they'd leave in the underage gangbang from the book.

=P

From my understanding that occurs after the climax of this film, so it would have been particularly odd narratively as well as just creepy. It would be like having an extended shot of Luke Skywalker eating Darth Vader's helmet during the Ewok party of RotJ.

NaclynE posted...

I saw the original IT (vaguely remember it) and feel the remake looks meh. maybe it's because I still like Tim Curry?

I loved Tim Curry as the clown too. I really didn't like the new clown from the trailers. I thought the movie looked good but this guy can't beat Tim Curry. But I gave it a shot and actually ended up liking the new guy more. I didn't want to but it happened. Don't let your love of Tim Curry stop you from trying this one.

My absolute favorite Tim Curry role was his Prince of Darkness in Legend.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

There were definite horror scenes in the movie. Whether they worked out or not is whatever, but denying they were in there (or that the film wasn't marketed as a horror movie) is a little silly.

This
---

Also King's characters are generally not deep. The dude literally uses the same bully archetype in almost all of his works.
---

The thing is, if you're older than 12 *most* horror movies won't scare you. You might get startled by a jump scare, but generally nothing will leave you frightened.

FrozenBananas posted...

It's not supposed to be horror as much as it's supposed to be an actual drama with deep characters...

No, it's clearly supposed to be horror. You can have drama in horror. Many of the best horror films do.

Zareth posted...

Very few of Stephen King's books are actually in the horror genre.

Most of them are either horror or horror adjacent (such as dark fantasy). He's done non-horror short stories, though.

green dragon posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

green dragon posted...

Itt: people who don't know what horror as a genre is

Is it supposed to be funny?

Nah, I think you have an understanding of the horror genre. Horror isn't always scary, nor is it always supposed to be scary

Pretty much. It's a broad umbrella of macabre subjects which serves more like a hashtag than a distinct genre.
---

I compare it to Stand by Me (also King) with a monster.

I enjoy coming of age movies like those, Goonies, E.T., Super 8, etc.