Skip to main content

The End of It


Andy Muschietti’s 2017 adaptation of Stephen King’s It ended with the Losers’ Club promising to come back in twenty-seven years if the titular monster they defeated ever returned. It was a smart idea to divide the book, which is spread across two timelines, into two movies. The updated setting of the late 1980s for the first film to correspond with a modern era for the sequel really worked to that movies’ advantage -not just in connecting to the nostalgia of the target demographic, but in how the culture and aesthetic of that era complimented the plot (it fit right in with the epidemic of child disappearances around that time for example). However in spite of the ending, the movie didn’t feel like one half of a whole, which was the intent. It was good enough to stand alone as a coming-of-age horror movie with a beginning, middle, and end. It Chapter Two, for being based in the same novel, has to prove its own necessity.
What puts it at a disadvantage from the get-go is that even before the 2017 movie, most of what people remember about It, be it the book or the 1990 miniseries, is from the childrens’ portion of the story: the now iconic death of Georgie Denbrough, the torrent of blood from Beverly’s sink, that one incredibly uncomfortable scene in the sewer near the end, the kids overcoming their fears and beating Pennywise. Because what makes It resonate so well as a story is concentrated in the protagonists being kids; vulnerable, powerless, and afraid when confronted and endangered by their worst fears, only to ultimately come together to overpower them. It Chapter Two can’t replicate that with an adult cast, not easily at least, and it’s what keeps this sequel from living up to its predecessor.
Most of the scares the adult Losers’ Club are faced with are merely extensions or reprisals of their childhood terrors, the film not taking into account much that adults develop very different fears from when they were children. Sure the lifelong trauma stemming from Beverly’s (Jessica Chastain) history with abuse and the death of his brother still haunting Bill (James McAvoy) have a believable permanence, but the movie doesn’t do anything interesting with them. The basis for everyone’s fears has remained rooted in their childhood and the town of Derry, and their lives haven’t yielded fresh meat for Pennywise (Bill SkarsgÃ¥rd) since. It seems especially pointless for Bill from a narrative sense given the completion of his emotional journey and closure for Georgie in the climax of the previous film. Some of this can be excused by the movies’ strong theme of reconciling the past, and the plot requiring each character to produce a personal token from that summer in order to defeat It, but centring so much in the past nonetheless prevents the movie from making any sort of independent, meaningful comment. And from a cinematic standpoint, it mostly just reminds us of that first film.
Consequently, It Chapter Two incorporates quite a few flashbacks with the cast of the preceding film reprising their roles, each of which are strong scenes that elevate the movie and make me wish they had been in the last (or at least filmed then) so as to avoid the distracting digital de-aging effects on what are now rapidly growing teenagers (poor Finn Wolfhard and Jeremy Ray Taylor are hit worst by this –looking almost plastic in their appearances). They’re certainly a welcome offset to a couple incredibly irrelevant plot diversions in the present, such as a scene with a little girl at a baseball game that adds up to nothing and a whole subplot involving the adult bully Henry Bowers (Teach Grant) that simply pads the runtime. Equally superfluous is a brutal homophobic attack up front ending in a gay man being killed by Pennywise that eliminates the books’ sole consolation of the attackers being indicted for it. The gay subject matter elsewhere in the film is generally handled better.
Losing his status as a bizarre queer icon aside, Pennywise is still only about half as scary as Muschietti and SkarsgÃ¥rd believe, embodying far more the demon clown cliché than the palpable, predatory killer the John Wayne Gacy inspired character was meant to. Its SkarsgÃ¥rd’s subtleties that are the most effective things about this monster: his grin, his cadence, that creepy thing he does with his eyes. But even still it doesn’t take long to be numbed to Pennywise. Once again, the more creative manifestations of It are better, but few of these scares match up to the best horrors from the first movie. It may have had a shaky tone, but there were a couple truly memorable, terrifying moments (the library basement, the projector, the opening scene). The best scare of this movie is that one partially glimpsed in the trailer. A part of this may be due to a higher concentration of CGI-rendered creations (which hurts the climax a bit), yet some of the visual effects are very good, such as an approximation of young Beverly and a hallucinatory sequence between Beverly and Ben in the third act.
And if there is a saving grace to the film, it might be the cast. All of them really look the part as older versions of the previously established characters (especially James Ransone as Eddie), and while James McAvoy and his unconvincing stutter might be the weak link, everyone else is pretty solid. Jessica Chastain brings her usual dedication, overcoming some weak material in her characters’ arc (specifically some gratuitous domestic violence at the beginning), but the real standout is Bill Hader as Richie. Hader has proven himself exceptionally good with dark and serious material before (principally on HBO’s Barry), yet still manages to astonish as both the movies’ terrific comic relief and its most soulful performance.
Stephen King makes an appearance in this movie. It’s a surprisingly long cameo where he identifies Bill (who’s a famous author), and makes a curmudgeonly remark about how his endings suck–a meta reference to a criticism King has often received throughout his career. The ending to It doesn’t suck, in fact it imparts a resonant sense of equilibrium not common in a lot of horror. For its earnestness though, it’s sadly not earned. And thus is the pattern of this movie. Taken alone, there are a handful of great moments, scenes and emotions that hit exactly right. But there’s no question It Chapter Two doesn’t have the bite of its predecessor, and the uphill battle is hindered further by starkly poorer writing, muted creativity, and a preoccupation with nostalgia for another movie. One exchange sums up the consequent effect perfectly: “Shouldn’t we be running?” Beverly asks upon seeing a creepy apparition; nonchalantly Bill responds, “I’m kinda getting used to it.”


Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JordanBosch
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day