User Reviews (508)

Add a Review

  • This is a very entertaining made for TV mini-series. It does a good job at jamming a book with more than 1000 pages into 2x90 minutes movie running time. The most important parts have been adopted, unnecessary fat was thrown out, little amandments have been made, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. The writers really tried to remain faithful to the novel and even mentioned side characters or story lines in short sentences for those who have read the book. The coolest thing, however, is that director Tommy Lee Wallace somehow managed to transfer that unique spirit of nostalgia, friendship and fear into his movie. Of course, the incredible cast deserves a lot of credit for that, too. Amazingly the child actors of part 1 upstage their adult companion pieces of part 2. The greatest performance of all, however, is given by Tim Curry, who really gives "It" a face, and a very scary one. He makes this movie what it is. In my opinion, it's the role of Curry's career, even outshining his part in "The Rocky Horror Picture Show".

    Now for the bad sides of "It": as a made for TV project this movie obviously couldn't get too graphic and violent and that's a bit of a pity. Stephen King's book is awfully graphic and the movie would have been twice as scary if they had shown a bit more gore. Mostly Pennywise just appears and shows his sharp teeth and that gets lame after a while. The other big minus of this film is its ending. It has to be said that the ending in the book is so bizarre it's unlikely it could ever look good on celluloid. Still, those crappy special effects were just disappointing and made me (and everyone else I know) go: "Is that what I've been waiting for the last 3 hours? That is the big climax?"

    Bottom line is that for a TV movie with such strict time limits "It" did a very good job at bringing this scary book to life. Nevertheless, I think the story should be retold properly and turned into a mini-series à la "Twin Peaks". The only problem is that it's going to be hard to find someone who can fill Tim Curry's giant clown shoes.
  • That's what most of the other commentators say, and I can't disagree. Part 1 (or the first half, depending on which format you're seeing it in) is great: pitting some excellent child actors (including future star Seth Green of Buffy the Vampire Slayer) portraying some in-depth characters fighting against a demonic clown. The second half seems more like a "gee-wow - look who we got" self-indulgence at casting Anderson, Thomas, Reid and Ritter, with very little to make us care about these folks. The ending is also an incredible dumbed-down letdown, although in all fairness I don't think they could pull off King's ending, and most of the audience wouldn't understand it if they had tried. There are a few touching moments in the last half, and Tim Curry couldn't screw up no matter how bad the writing is, but generally the two mismatched halves make for a mediocre film when it could have been so much more.
  • I first saw this on a rented VHS in 1991. I still remember the shopkeeper telling me to rent both the VHS as it was a two part series. Revisited it recently on a DVD. Saw the remake with my son in a theater. The remake was really good. The fat boy's acting n facial expressions were good. Coming back to the original, it has some nostalgic moments attached to it. Considering it was a made for TV mini series, it wasn't that gory n the special effects weren't that good. Also the pacing was a bit odd. The most striking thing about the film was Tim Curry's iconic, creepy performance as Pennywise the murderous clown. The only movie which had dealt with creepy clowns before this was Salva's Clownhouse. Maybe Stephen King borrowed the clown thing from Victor Salva n Salva borrowed the concept of the thing coming back after 23/27 years in Jeepers creepers from Stephen king. The plot is about a group of misfit children who end up becoming lifelong friends and how they unite to deal with the horror affecting them. It almost acting as a dark version of Stand By Me. Some scenes were really nostalgic, the ones showing them play down by the river and go on bike rides. Country life can b really fun for growing kids. The child actors are marvelous. We easily are attached to them.
  • Many critics have complained that Stephen King's It is an overlong film. However, considering that the book upon which it is based takes over 1,000 pages to tell its story, it is hardly surprising that the film version needs so much running time to cram in all the twists and turns. Besides, the three hour running time goes by quickly because the film is briskly paced and full of engaging incidents. Also, the depth of the story allows to us to really get into the minds of the characters, which is a rare thing indeed in a horror film, since usually the characters are hilariously shallow.

    The story unfolds like a two part mini-series (which is, I believe, what the film was originally meangt to be). In the first half, a bunch of seven kids in a small town realise that recent child killings are not the work of a murderer, but are attributable to a monster which awakes every thirty years. They track it down and very nearly kill it, but it just manages to escape. Thirty years later, the seven are all grown up, but they re-unite to seek out the monster when it once more awakens for its regular killing spree.

    The acting is very goood, especially John Ritter as a successful architect and Tim Curry as the terrifying Pennywise the Clown. There are some spooky moments, but nothing that I would describe as absolutely horrifying. This is an unusually deep and detailed horror film, well worth seeing.
  • If you are of the King generation (lotsa books, bookstores, drugstores with books, tobacco stores with books, no computers or personal devices) then you probably have your own views on his place in the creative continuum.

    My view is that his "early" works (including IT, THE STAND, SHINING) were his best. Wonderfully warped. And great fun to read.

    That was the good news. The bad news is that, with rare exception (eg - SHINING) the B-grade studios that made easy money doing "tv movies" (you had to be there, otherwise you would not understand) generally snapped up his stuff and then did cheap, low-talent adaptations.

    Wotta waste.

    IT was one of King's more interesting works and this is one of the less awful adaptations. For insiders, most of the fun is in the first few scenes where one of the "characters" himself a writer explains that he has a job adapting his own work: "If anyone is going to mess it up, it may as well be me." The inside joke is that King himself was brought in as co-writer here because so many of the earlier TV adaptations were a disaster.

    Again, one of the better ones. Lots of interesting faces here and there, including Ritter (an unappreciated dramatic talent) and Otoole looking radiant.
  • Most know the story, a killer clown that terrorizes kids in a little town on the east coast. But many don't know this TV mini series follows the book much closer than the new release in 2017. This series is split into two parts. The first part is excellent. The second part is fair. What makes the first part of the film so good is the characters who play their roles. All seven of the children in this film are great actors/actresses. We are able to identify with them and follow them through the 1960s town of Derry Maine. Tim Curry who plays Pennywise is exceptional to say the least. He plays the clown that will forever terrify kids and grown ups for years to come. Overall the kids who play the part are great actors, with a good script, and beautiful cinematography throughout the entire first series. One of my favorite films!
  • STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs

    Adapted from the epic novella by Stephen King,It is set in the town of Derry,Maine,in 1960.A series of gruesome child killings are going on,which seem to replicate similar events that happen every 30 years in the town,rounded off by a big disaster that causes similar confusion and devastation.Seven young kids are drawn together over the course of the summer to face off against a psychotic bully named Henry Bowers and his gang,as well as coming face to face with the perpetrator of the horrific killings,a monster which generally takes the shape of a clown named Pennywise (Tim Curry).One day,they decide to go down in to the sewers and confront and kill It once and for all.They believe they have done this,only to get a call 30 years later informing them that this is not the case and that they must now abide by a promise they made as kids to return once again to do battle with It if it ever returned.Now,as mature adults instead of naive kids (and therefore finding it harder to believe) can they be as successful?

    Very rarely do adaptations of King novels translate well to the screen,with only a handful of exceptions,and the producers of this two parter certainly had an even harder job on their hands turning a book of over 1000 pages in to a film adaptation.Under the circumstances,one might say they haven't done too bad a job,but they've had to edit out a lot of key sequences (and even characters) from the book,and as a result,they've ended up with a script that's had to leave out a lot of the original source material,and so you don't get the full effect of the book,which was a real door stopper of a book that took forever to read but engrossed you right to the end all the same.So as you might expect this film adaptation isn't as good as that but it's still an impressive, scary enough effort all things considered that spreads out an epic story engrossingly enough.

    On the acting front,the child actors (with the exception of the one who played Bowers) fare better than the adult actors,with the exception,of course,of Tim Curry in terrifying form as Pennywise (one of the scariest characters in the history of cinema,never mind the fact he only ever appeared in a TV movie) and possibly Harry Anderson.Some of them are laughably bad in parts(especially the one playing the adult Bill when he tries to stutter,so sad when young Johnathon Brandis played him so well).Pennywise always gave me the creeps,possibly in a way no other horror movie character could,and nothing else is scarier in the film.But maybe scares aren't the main aim of the game here,this being a Stand By Me style King fable of friendship over-coming great evil against all odds.

    Overall,this is a decent enough effort taking on the challenging task of turning an 1000+ page book into a feature adaptation,where it's easy to see where the cracks are showing but easy to appreciate for the things it gets right.***
  • People were terrified of swimming in the sea after the movie "Jaws". This movie did to me for clowns what "Jaws" did for swimming in the sea. After watching this, clowns will just never be the same to me again. The unrecognizable Tim Curry portrays a very scary and perhaps even somewhat classic horror character. Pennywise/It surely is one scary looking character!

    To be honest without the character Pennywise/It this two parts TV-movie wouldn't had been very well watchable or recommendable. The movie has a typically awful looking TV-movie visual style and the actors and storytelling aren't much good either. I have quite some fantasy but I'm just no big fan of Stephen King's horror novels. The story and the moments in it are just always highly unlikely, silly and over-the-top. "It" is no exception on this. Another major disappointing aspect of the movie are the special effects and the awful ending that is just a major let down and just isn't fitting and doesn't seem to have an awful lot to do to the earlier scary moments and the character Pennywise/It.

    Still for the fans of the horror-genre, there is plenty to enjoy. The movie has some good, original and well constructed scary moments and the character Pennywise/It should be reason enough for horror-fans to watch this two part made for TV movie.

    The cast mainly consists out of TV actors and aren't much good or likable. Funny thing is that the children cast is possible better and more likable and believable than the adult cast members. It was especially fun to see an extremely young Seth Green, who already acted in the same manner as he still does today.

    Silly, bad looking but still scary and recommendable.

  • Warning: Spoilers
    IT looked very appealing when I first saw it, and it was. Tim Curry played a very interesting Pennywise and was probably the only one who could do the job right. The cast of kids I found to be very good as well as the adult cast. The movie from the beginning to just before the climax of the end was very enjoyable and very thrilling, but that's only before the end. The ending was the only thing I was most disappointed about. How they killed IT was very stupid. Kicking and punching a giant spider isn't going to do the job. And now that I think about it, at certain points of the film, the acting was kind of flimsy. The only actor that stayed strong throughout his whole performance was Tim Curry. Overall, it's a very good film and worth watching for a few good scares.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Ommy Lee Wallace has made many lasting contributions to genre filmmaking, first on John Carpenter's Dark Star and Assault on Precinct 13 before appearing as The Shape/Michael Myers in the original Halloween, writing Amityville 2: The Possession, co-writing and directing the original Fright Night Part II and acting and being part of the effects team for The Fog. But this film cements his legacy, with a great build and plenty of scares within the limitations of television.

    Originally airing from November 18 to 20, 1990, screenwriter Lawrence Cohen turned 1,138 pages of King into a two-part, three-hour TV movie. Wallace - and others - have commented that the first night is near perfect story-wise, but it falls apart on night two.

    The story concerns The Lucky Seven, or The Losers Club, a group of outcasts who learn that the shapeshifting creature named Pennywise has taking and killing children in their hometown of Derry, Maine. They first battle him in 1960 as teenagers before coming back to battle him again in 1990.

    This might sound like a broken record when it comes to King movies, George Romero had originally been signed on to direct the project when ABC had planned for an eight-to-ten-hour series that would play over four nights. He left the project due to scheduling conflicts, but he would finally direct a King adaptation, The Dark Half. This is considered one of the most faithful treatments of the author's work.

    That said, we're here to talk about It, which begins with Georgie Denbrough playing with the paper sailboat that his brother Bill (Becca fave Jonathan Brandis) has made for him. As it sails down the sewer, he encounters Pennywise (Tim Curry, whose work in this movie led to thousands of nightmares of 90's kids), who gnaws his arm off and leaves him to die.

    The Losers Club comes together when Bill and Eddie Kaspbrak welcome the new kid, overweight Ben Hanscom. They're soon joined by Beverly Marsh (Emily Perkins from the Ginger Snaps series of films), Richie Tozier (Seth Green), Stan Uris and Mike Hanlon. They all have two things in common: they're bullied by Henry Bowers' gang and they're all encountered the evil of Pennywise. They soon learn that every thirty years, the shapeshifter comes back to town to claim the lives of children.

    When Stan is ambushed by the gang, Pennywise (or It) emerges and kills two of the gang members. Henry is left traumatized and left with white hair. He eventually confesses to all of the murders, although he didn't commit them. Stanley and the rest of the Losers learn how to use their imagination to stop the creature and drive it into the sewers before making a vow to come back to Derry if it ever comes back.

    Thirty years later, Mike (Tim Reid from TV's WKRP in Cincinnati) is the only member of the Losers Club to stay in Derry. When It returns and begins killing again, he brings everyone back together. Bill (Richard Thomas, Battle Beyond the Stars) is now a famous horror writer married to Audra, a gorgeous British actress (Olivia Hussey, Black Christmas). Ben (John Ritter) is an architect. Beverly (Annette O'Toole) has grown up to be a fashion designer but has transitioned from being abused by her father to being beaten by her husband. Richie (the late, great Harry Anderson) is a comedian. Eddie (Dennis Christopher, Fade to Black) runs a limo service. And Stan is a real estate broker who decides to kill himself rather than come back home to face It.

    Meanwhile, Henry has escaped from the mental institution with the help of It. His goal? Kill the rest of the Losers. The shapeshifting monster also draws Bill's wife to town.

    Mike is hospitalized after being stabbed by Henry and the five remaining Losers head to the sewer for a final battle. That's when the movie falls apart, as the monster can never live up to King's words. If you ask nearly anyone, they always bring this up. That's because it's true.

    All of the Losers but Eddie make it out, with Beverly and Ben reconnecting and Bill saving his wife. But at this point, most people have been scorned by the spider that Pennywise becomes.

    That's because it's hard to beat just how scary Tim Curry is in this movie. Supposedly, he unnerved the cast so much that many avoided him during the production.

    The movie eliminates some of the problematic parts of the book for me, such as Beverly taking the virginity of all the male characters in the sewer, but retains Audra becoming a victim who needs to be rescued. Tommy Lee Wallace has noted that he doesn't think that it works dramatically in the movie or novel.
  • ouija-515 November 2001
    While the acting in this version of Stephen King's It, is for the most past good, (who can argue with Tim Curry as the clown), it none the less was stripped of a lot of its themes to be put to television. It follows the general premise of the book but omits huge sections of the occurrences that happen to the children, some of which are vitally important to the character development and plot. We lose some of the most beautiful aspects to their relationships this way. Also, the structure of the novel, which although overwhelming, is supremely successful, and is again lost in the film. While they could have made it much worse, I must urge people to read the book first. It's scarier, deeper, more complex, and a far better story.
  • In 1990, when a mysterious serial-killer attacks children in Derry, Maine, the local librarian Mike Hanlan (Tim Reid) feels that something is wrong in his hometown and calls his childhood outcast friends that formed the loser club and that are presently successful professionals Bill Denbrough (Richard Thomas), who is a writer of horror novels that is working with his wife Audra (Olivia Hussey) in a movie in Hampstead, England; the awarded architect Ben Hanscom (John Ritter) in Houston, Texas; the designer Beverly Marsh (Annette O'Toole) in Chicago, Illinois; the entrepreneur Eddie Kaspbrack (Dennis Christopher) in Great Neck, New York; the comedian Ritchie Tozier (Harry Anderson) in Beverly Hills, California; and Stanley Uris (Richard Masur) in Atlanta, Georgia. Each one of them recalls when Bill's brother Georgie (Tony Dakota) was murdered by an evil entity with the appearance of a clown named Pennywise (Tim Curry) and how Bill had summoned them to defeat the creepy monster in the sewer of the town and their oath that they should reunite and fight against Pennywise in case of its return. In their reunion, Mike tells that every thirty years Pennywise returns Derry to kill children and they are capable of destroying the evil force with the power of their friendship.

    In the early 90's, I saw "It" on VHS with about 160 minutes running time and in that occasion I loved the first part of the story and I found the conclusion very disappointing. At that time, I did not know that the movie was edited, limited by the storage capacity of a VHS. I have just watched "It" on DVD with 192 minutes running time and now the long story makes sense. The first part, with the tale of friendship of the six boys and the girl, is really creeping and engaging and better and better; however the pace in the second part, when they are adults and return to Derry, is slow and I was a little tired while watching the movie. Despite of the running time and the lower pace, I liked this movie a lot. Further, it is great to see the talented Seth Green and Emily "Ginger Snaps" Perkins in the beginning of their careers. My vote is eight.

    Title (Brazil): "It: Uma Obra-Prima do Medo" ("It: A Masterpiece of the Fear")

    Note: On 18 Dec 2017 I saw this film again.
  • "It" it's possibly the best TV adaptation of a Stephen King novel. Ok, that does not mean anything, because TV adaptations from King's novel usually leave a lot to be desired (Langoliers, The Stand...); but it is the one I've enjoyed the most.

    This is an story about the fear itself. Your fears as a child, and your fears as a grown man. It's kind of a parable: when you're an adult and you think everything is under control, that monsters and ghosts doesn't exist, that they can't scare you anymore... Well, you're wrong: as "It" clearly shows, adults are much weaker than children when it comes to face your fears. At least that's my interpretation of this story of seven friends who had to fight against some kind of evil pressence in their little town when they were kids, and have to do just the same 30 years later, when they had almost forgotten of each other and what it happened.

    The first part of "It", in which the children are protagonist, is way much more exciting that the second one (with the adult characters). That first part has reminded me (in some way) of another Stephen King's adaptation: Stand By Me. Definitely it is much more entertaining. I haven't read the novel, so I don't know if they've made a good work adapting it (if it's exact enough), but I suppose that other reviewers will have talked about it.

    And there's not much more to say. The special effects are a little better than in Langoliers (no big deal, anyway), and though there're lots of ups and downs in the script, "It" achieves it objective: to entertain.

    PS: Pennywaise's character is the most histrionic and crazy performance of Tim Curry since Frank N'Further.

    My rate: 6.5/10
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The majority of the people I know who have seen It all say the same things. "I saw this movie when I was a kid and I'm still scared," or "It's the best movie ever!" After finally seeing it myself, I have to disagree. It is by far the worst book-to-movie adaptation I've ever seen.

    Why, oh why did they have to turn Eddie into a Mama's boy? In the book he's married. MARRIED. The "I've never been with a woman and now I'm going to die a virgin" line at the end of the movie didn't make sense. Eddie is a great character. Why did the movie have to ruin him?

    So many important things were cut. What happened to the house on Neibolt Street, the underground clubhouse, various characters that were left out, Eddie's leper, or Bill dealing with Georgie's death, just to name a few? And I just HAVE to mention the ending. The spider was so fake it wasn't even funny (okay, kind of). It wasn't dramatic enough either. Nobody looked the least bit scared. It was just, "Oh golly, let's go down in the sewers and kill It once and for all." It wasn't turned into a climatic moment like in the books. The characters acted as if what they were down in the sewers was as natural as walking to the corner store and buying a loaf of bread. Wouldn't most people be terrified, thinking, "Oh my God, I'm going to die!"

    This movie was terrible, don't waste your time on it. Read the book, and then wait for the remake. I'm hoping it will be a lot better than this piece of garbage.
  • "It" (1990) is a two-part horror TV series about a clown named Pennywise who scares kids in a little town every few years to kill them. In the first part it's about a group of children who gets haunted by the clown. In the second part it's about those children as adults.

    Tommy Lee Wallace created with "It" a nostalgic horror classic, especially for 80s kids. Nowadays the "movie" looks less scary, not least because of the FX and animations. But this shouldn't be a critic point due to the fact that it was only a TV production in the 90s.

    The actual major point of criticism is the ending of the series. I don't want to spoil, but it is a huge disappointment. In the first part of "It" the plot was thrilling and it's ending was rounded off well. But the second part failed through it's showdown. Part 2 is weakened by the adult cast too. In spots, they played their roles a bit bad. However, Tim Currys performance as Pennywise is outstanding. The cast of the cildren is also very authentic and as a group they go very well together.

    That's why "It" gets from me 6.5 out of 10 points.
  • The 1990 version of "IT" most certainly has a good story, and this is definitely a good interpretation of the novel.

    However it just suffers from catering to a too broad audience in terms of having a fairly low rating, because a lot of scenes could have been so much more convincing with more graphic details of violence and horror.

    Good and wholesome entertainment, and the movie (or mini-series, as it actually is) never really ages or becomes boring to watch. I have watched it many times since 1990 and still revisits it every now and again.

    There is lots of value to the movie which, makes it a movie you can watch again and again.

    "IT" has a very nice cast and they performed quite well. Tim Curry was so well-cast for the role of Pennywise, and brought his devilish charm and wits to the character. While Pennywise in this version is nowhere as diabolical or evil as in the 2017 remake, then Tim Curry certainly gave a lot of children nightmares back in the 1990s.
  • 9/10 because its old and cheesy. Not the best horror Stephen King ever did and most will see this and Carrie and believe they know his work, but do not base it on those style films alone. Stephen King's best work is when he dives into the darkness of human kind and takes you with him. But this review is about the original IT and this is an iconic movie regardless of how out of date it may be now. I would suggest anyone going to see the new one, see this one first and even read the book if you can. Tim Curry is one of my favourite actors and his role in this film is in my opinion, what makes the film. Compared to the clown in the new film, he is by far the best for the job.
  • Although being a child of the 80's and a long time reader of Stephen King novels I've never gotten around to watching this classic until now, and man, I'm glad that did!

    Having seen the 2017 IT-movie only a couple of days ago, and found it pretty lousy, I figured I had to give this one a try as well. And man, was I surprised! This movie is actually really good. Sure, the special effects are horrific, but the cast is great and the storytelling above par. Possibly the best Stephen King movie to date.
  • Phantasm011 September 2006
    Warning: Spoilers
    To start things off honestly: "It" is probably one of the poorest book adaptions I've seen in quite some time. After reading the book and finding an extraordinary piece of writing, an amazing work of art, I was thrilled to see the movie. I knew it couldn't be all that the book was, but I hope for some semblance...

    And some semblance is what I got... and that's all. The deep, thoughtful construction that helped build the novel, where both the stories, the side of 1958 and the side of 1985 (the years are changed in the movie, but there's nothing wrong with that) are shown alternatingly, starting with 1958, moving ahead to 1985, and back again, creating a heartfelt atmosphere. The movie instead plays the older part in the first segment, as one full flashback that tries to cram way too many events into one bit, whereas they should have simply tried to organize their own way of telling, and the more recent events in the second half. It seems like every event in the children's section is segmented into 15 minute episodes, just trying to pile notable events in from the book, and it doesn't work. It might have worked better if they kept the construction that King originally established, but even then it would have hardly stood, as they took the events for no reason.

    And even with this chronological sorting, they seemed to actually forget scenes and had to tack them on later as additional flashbacks that had little to do with the scene, but desperately needed introduction earlier.

    Gone is the unifying theme of the group: They each escaped It. That's there, in a way, but it's moreover just tossed in for scares, and horribly stupid ones at that. Gone is the leper with the three-foot tongue that chased Eddie down the traintracks. Gone is any fear or tension when Bill rides off on his bike with Stan (it was Richie in the book, but that's not important...It's supposed to be a moment of escape, but they just simply ride away, ruining all reason for Silver to matter until the end, when the makers suddenly remembered that they needed it.

    And then, the worst two bastardizations. It's OK if Richie encountered a werewolf instead of a giant statue. It's OK if the scene with Georgie at the start was during the day, stealing what could have been a truly horrific scene (maybe cause it was made for TV, that lightened it.) It's OK if the whole point of Henry's return is gone (maybe not... but I'd have let it slide.) And it's OK that they cut out the kids being lost after first believing they killed It (definitely because of the made for TV movie... hell, even a theatrical movie... I don't see that scene, even in suggestion, ever reaching film if this movie were to be remade and I'm not going to reveal it, you'll just have to read the book.) And gone is the origin of It. No, those things are forgivable... let's get to what isn't.

    Personal Bastardization: I felt jipped when they finally confronted It and the whole deadlights business was dumbed down. It wasn't supposed to be hypnotic, it was a staring contest, that would eventually lead into the Ritual of Chud. This point is missed. And then the Turtle (don't ask, read) is also gone, losing the relation to the universe that Stephen King set up in the novel. It's no wonder that the scene of Patrick Hockstetter and his demented fridge (aside from it being made for TV and that scene would never be allowed), as the dealings of the Other weren't explored or even mentioned. I wanted to see how they portrayed the whole scene and they didn't even have it, which ruined the entire final confrontation at the end.

    Universal Bastardization: The vow to return. In this, they easily walk out of the sewer and look outward, where Bill has them promise to return. In the novel, they crawl from there, exhausted and bewildered. Instead, there is no forced promise; they do it themselves, cutting their palms with a glass Coke bottle and making a blood pact that they would return if It was still alive. And the meaning disappeared as well, but I won't get into why, for fear of telling too much of the book, which I truly hope the readers of this review will read.

    OK, I suppose I should get onto why I let this have two stars instead of one if I hated what it had done to the book, right? There are some beautifully horrifying scenes, such as when Beverly exits her childhood home and sees a balloon bouncing down the road, laughing. The sharkteeth in Pennywise's mouth aren't used well, but they look scary. And there was the great scene when they were children, where they hold hands in a circle and Stan suddenly finds himself holding hands with the clown. The acting is decent for a TV Movie and there are a few notable celebrities.

    These few things aren't enough to make the movie good, and it really would only be scary for young children, who probably shouldn't be watching it anyway.

    With the same budget and time space, a decent movie of "It" could have been made. Instead, there's this trash. I can only hope that someday, there will be another version of this created, one that captures the emotion, atmosphere, and incredible imagination that formed Stephen King's masterpiece of a novel, "It."
  • Dark_Fox9 March 2003
    Warning: Spoilers
    the book has thrilled me for many evenings and nights, so I wanted to watch the movie. But; what is this? This is horrible! One of Kings most gruesome books has been transformed to a story for children (rated 12+, I think it's PG)!! this will not stand!! That stupid clown is nothing compared to what It is in the book, and making It look like a giant spider at the end is just too bad for words, creating a monster that looks like a spider is plain dumb cashing in on an old human fear and not worthy a King-film. They lost most of the good scenes, reduced good scenes to bad or dull scenes and the 'deep thinking' of the book (It being an alien that landed thousands of years ago, other good aliens (the giant turtle), the cruel history of the town) are completely gone. If you liked the book, I don't think you should watch this piece of crap.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I couldn't believe someone has actually liked this movie. It's horrible by all senses. To say it's better than the book is a true atrocity. The book was wonderful, explaining the true nature of children and they're understanding of fear. The movie is more a stupid parody.

    This may come as a spoiler, so be aware, and if you don't want to read it move to the next paragraph. I actually laughed at the end, when they exhibited that stupid spider-puppet as the final monster. if some thing like that would approach me, i'll just smack it right into the ground, although i'll probably need a bigger shoe. It was horrible, yes, but horrible not because it was scary, but because it was a huge joke at the author's intentions, i'm sure. a real amusement.

    I'd be laughing if i hadn't known what a true master of horror Stephen King is, but i'm mostly sad that his best book never got to have a good movie. Sad, sad, sad. This movie shall get a minor 1, and never to be watched by me again. Nor anyone else, i hope. A true atrocity.
  • Of all the video versions of Stephen King books this is one of my all time favorites. The Stand and Dolores Claiborne were also fantastic, but for plain old horror IT stands out. Tim Curry's laugh was terrifying (but I have always been terrified of clowns), Harry Anderson's/Seth Green's off the wall humor was relieving, and all the performances were great. Dennis Christopher (who I have loved since Breaking Away and Fade to Black), Richard Thomas (still a writer, but other than that quite different from John Boy), John Ritter and Jonathan Brandis (RIP), Annette O'Toole, Tim Reid, and the other young actors who played them as children were all super. This story seemed to be Stephen King's answer to Ray Bradbury's "Something Wicked This Way Comes." Just scarier and more geared to adults.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Highly entertaining adaptation of King's beloved literary work. Far better than its ratings would suggest. I didn't want to like this movie. The cast was a motley crew at best, and the screenplay wasn't like the book. But what I found when I bought this movie was: it was better. INFINITELY BETTER! All the "fat" has been trimmed out of the screenplay and what is left is the core of King's story.


    Okay, before I start this, let me say, I don't care about the turtle (the other "good aliens"), the omitted sexuality or anything else King put into the novel. I read the novel over and over for years and I loved it, but as with all "adaptations," there will be changes. Accept it and move on.

    The smarmy casting threw me off a bit at first. I thought, "Jeeeeez." But I was delightfully surprised by the performances of the actors (both adult and child) in this artfully written and perpetrated attempt.

    It wasn't truly what I would classify as "horror," but the moments were tensely suspenseful, and the acting was top row.

    The story is of seven children, brought together once again as adults to face an ancient evil; an evil they have defeated once before.

    The town of Derry is more than just quiet. It has a history of mass disappearances and indifference concerning the untoward events which occur there. A mysterious shroud of forgetfulness lies over this town, and soon after leaving, most forget everything that happened. But Derry has one asset. It has Mike Hanlon (Tim Reid/Marlon Taylor-12), a dedicated friend to the other six, head librarian, "Lighthouse," and Keeper of Derry.

    A phone call to the rest of the "Lucky Seven" brings them together once again and, as they slowly begin to remember the things which happened all those years ago, also serves to outline and reshape their lives forever.

    Is the magick that brought them together so many years ago, still in them? Will they win against Pennywise a second time? Will they survive? This is a good movie. It's adequate as an adaptation, having been changed, as adaptations are; the very WORD adaptation comes from adapt, meaning to change to fit. It's decent as a horror movie; scary in places and has a consistent storyline. It's not what I'd call true horror, but more...suspense.

    The storyline and the performances of the child actors is what fully redeems this movie. These kids (among them is Seth Green!) are true talent. I was also quite impressed with the adult actors' performances.

    To get consistently good, believable performances out of this rather motley crew of comics and has-beens took directing genius on behalf of Tommy Lee Wallace. This come as a genuine surprise, considering everything else he's directed has just STUNK to high HEAVEN...(Halloween 3: Season of the Witch! *gags* the ABSOLUTE WORST of the series, by the way!) It's entertaining and gives you a feel of having history; roots, as it were.

    I did, however, find that they left out one significant detail. They never explained the relevance of the clown's repetitious, "They float down here."

    It's a good movie. Watch it.

    This movie gets a 7.8/10 on the "TV" scale, from...

    the Fiend :.
  • This was a brave and well above average adaptation of a truly difficult novel. It is uneven at times. The first half is better than the second half, which isn't helped by a pedestrian script and a woefully miscast Richrd Thomas. IT is NOT the worst book to TV movie in existence, there have been a lot worse since then. As for the book, which is very good, it is still flawed. There is too much swearing(the children's harsh language and sexual desires are inappropriate), the character development takes far too long, the book has a very confusing structure especially in the latter half of the book, and Frankenstein is name of the inventor not the monster. Still the characters are well described, and the murders are gut wrenching. Also the way King describes fear is brilliant, and his attention to detail is unparallelled. I am not criticising the book, I am evaluating the pros and cons of both the book and the movie, or mini-series, to be exact.The movie is the closest to the language of the author. The children did miles better than the adults, especially Jonathan Brandis and Seth Green, and there was a Stand By Me-ish nostalgia, that generated a definite spark between the players. As for the second half, it started off well, and rapidly became pedestrian 45 minutes before the end, which was ruined by a poorly designed spider. Other than that, the effects and script were generally good for a TV movie. Tim Curry, one of my favourite actors, steals the show, with his almost exact portrayal of Pennywise. His career-best performance was a perfect mixture of creepiness and hamminess, like Jack Nicolson from the Shining( which was turned into a pointless TV series). He also DID NOT overact. He's a British character actor, and was the only mature actor who didn't play himself, and stayed consistent throughout the entire movie. Pennywise also isn't his poorly written role, that's Gomez in Addams Family Reunion. It was criminal he didn't win an award for his performance.Also the music by Richard Bellis is outstanding, and that alone captures the creepy mood. In the slower bits, especially with the children, it's hauntingly beautiful and makes the scene poignant. However, Harry Anderson badly underplayed the library scene, while Annette O'Toole showed the most genuine fright, which grew tiresome as the movie progressed. Most of the scenes in the book were unfilmnable for a low budget movie, so they did well in that aspect. Adaptation means to adapt, so accept that. No film I've seen is word from word to the book, it just isn't done that way. I know they missed things out, and all that, but there are some truly sensitive issues in the book that people wouldn't want addressed on screen, and there were some of the metaphysics like the turtle that I didn't understand. The fantastic Inspector Morse series had the protagonist changed completely from a sleaze to a sensitive human.See what i'm getting at. Don't bother about the remake, apparently it's 90 minutes, which isn't enough to condense a 1000+ novel in. Plus, it probably won't have Tim Curry in it, who at the moment seems to be the only person who can do the job right, even if he is a little reminiscent of the Green Goblin. In conclusion look out for It. It is not as good as the Shining, but far better than the dreadful Tommy Knockers. Only read the book if you're a true Stephen King fan( I'm not) or if you're 18 or over(I'm 16), unless you want to be sick for a week (you don't want that). I still recommend both the book and the movie.7/10 for my personal favourite of the Stephen King movies. Bethany Cox
  • t_barton6910 December 2001
    This is one of the best movies I have ever seen. It is Stephen King at his best. Scares the heck out of me every time I watch. I also thought the book was excellent and spent a week of security guard duty in a shack at a paper mill factory reading every page, I could not put it down. When the movie came out, I had to own it, and only the complete double tape would work, not the cut up single tape version. It has become a family tradition to watch this film several times a year. The kids love it and have to sleep with the light on for a solid week after. This is a film that makes you check the drain before washing your hands. I highly recommend the book and the double cassette video. Thanks Stephen King for a great book and film!
An error has occured. Please try again.