Monday, September 11, 2017

IT - Return of the King

Well. Get ready to see a lot of scary clowns this Halloween.

Like, even more than usual.


It probably shouldn't be surprising how very (very) good Andres Muschietti's adaptation of Steven King's legendary novel ended up. When you boil it down, the story (well, the half of it that was the basis of the film) of "a group of kids find out their town is home to a horrific monster that preys on children and they decide to band together to stop it" is a crackerjack hook. But what makes King a tricky beast to adapt is the one-two punch of the sheer density of his world building, and the tone that permeates even his most horrific work.

It solves the first problem rather neatly - rather than a sprawling, interconnected narrative that jumps between past and present (through two time periods as well as interludes covering more than a century), Muschietti focuses in on the lives of the outcast "Loser's Club" as children, saving their return to Derry, Maine as adults for the now-certain sequel. These 7 kids (age 11 in the book and here 13 or so) come together because of their shared persecution at the hands of school bully Henry Bowers and because of their increasingly dangerous run-ins with a demonic shape-shifting clown. De-facto leader "Stuttering" Bill, motor-mouth Richie, hypochondriac Eddie, neat-freak Stan, new kid Ben, fearless smoker Beverly, and outsider Mike (the "home-school kid") are instantly familiar and are brought to life beyond their simplistic archetypes by a truly incredible cast of child actors - which is lucky, given that most of the film's 135-minute running time is devoted to them interacting solely with other children/adolescents.

It is forced to excise or streamline a lot of even the half of the story it chooses to tell, but layers texture of the town's bloody history and horrific apathy into the foundations of the film's visual storytelling. Cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung (a.k.a. "the guy who shot The Handmaiden) juggles tonal styles as easily as he frames background scares and lore references. Not only does this take the form of a load of Easter Eggs for fans of the book (some of them quite literal), but it also paints a picture of a town that's full of rot and devoid of help. King's original novel was an allegorical dressing-down of nostalgia for the 1950's, positing that this era only seemed so idyllic because adults who grew up then chose to forget the horrors of the past. Switching the setting to "the past" being the 1980's is a brilliant move, given how that era's "morning in America" was essentially cosplaying the '50s. The film never outright states this, but through the neglect or abuse of the adults as well as casual sexism and implied racism, it's still there. Even the music reinforces this fester, with Benjamin Wallfisch's score segueing from Amblin-ian whimsy to eldritch terror just when you were getting comfortable in a scene.

The other issue of capturing the tone of King's prose is one that is less simple, but no less ably handled. The relentless violence committed on the helpless could easily sour the film as a piece of entertainment, but - like King himself - the film has a near-defiant streak of humanism deliberately set against the awful goings-on in Derry. Part of this comes from the cast, who are immediately empathetic (even if some more lightly-drawn than would be ideal - this movie needed more Mike), but Muschietti also nails the balance of humor and catharsis that permeates the book. It is a scary movie, make no mistake. There are at least 8 set pieces deliberately designed around terrifying the characters and the audience, and they work like a well-oiled haunted house under a full moon. But while the film is determined to keep your adrenaline pumping, the overall effect is more like watching a MARVEL Studios movie than a modern horror flick. Big laughs, huge fist-pump moments, thrills, and heroes you immediately root for. And when this movie lands a beat, you can almost feel the ground shake.

Unfortunately, there are a couple beats that come off as more awkward or retrograde than you'd hope for in a film from 2017, even one set in the 1980's. One of the Losers in particular gets dealt a slightly bum hand leading into the finale, and after a film so completely full of characters slipping past one-dimensional roles, it's a bummer to see one of our hearoes seemingly walk backward and slip right into one. The story beat is dramatically functional and works and you can see why it was there, but. . . well, that's kinda the issue. It's a moment of being all too aware of the strings and knowing they could have done something better with them.

Overall, It is a hell of an achievement. Fans of the book will no doubt find many of their favorite details or scenes cut or altered, but the big stuff - Georgie's fate, the formation of the Losers, the showdown with the Bowers gang, the House at Neibolt Street, the triumphs and terrors in the Lair of It - is pulled off with aplomb. Pennywise emerges as a horror icon who can stand alongside Freddy Krueger and the Alien, but the Losers are the beating heart of what makes this movie a winner.

I can't wait for the reunion in It: Chapter 2.

No comments:

Post a Comment