JDreviews101

I cannot believe I was tricked into watching this repugnant soulless abortion, and the absolute worst part is that I wasted my hard earned money on the ticket.

When I first heard about this movie being made I immediately thought it was a very bad idea, but then after some time I learned that Nicolas Pesce was attached to write and direct, and it immediately gained my interest. After having enjoyed both of his previous films ("The Eyes of My Mother" and especially "Piercing") I decided to give it a chance and put all my faith in him. Some time later the cast was revealed and it grabbed my interest even more. I was definitely not prepared to witness such a miserable failure of a film a couple of months later.

The movie starts, first lines of dialogue are more than enough to warn the average moviegoer for the absolute mediocrity that will follow for the rest of the film. The script feels like it was written by a twelve-year-old who is starting to dip their feet into the horror genre, and it checks every cliché box you can possibly imagine. It's basically every bad thing put before in every horror movie ever crammed into an hour and a half film. I could not believe what I was witnessing on the screen, and 7 minutes in I was already preparing myself mentally for the possibility that I might have to walk out of the theater (luckily, I didn't).

By the end of the film I had rolled my eyes back so much I had a pretty intense headache. As soon as the credits start to appear I get up, ready to leave, but to my surprise when I turn over the theater was completely empty. It was at this point that I realized the entire audience had walked out. Never before in my entire life have I experienced such a denigrating and debilitating feeling: I was the last man standing. I had nobody to talk to or share looks with, so I decided to sit back again and rethink my life as the credits rolled. I made an oath to myself that I will never let be fooled into watching a horror remake/reboot ever again. I came out of the theater feeling empowered and refocused, knowing that never again will I waste my time and money in horror remake rubbish. Thank you, Nicolas Pesce, it was well worth it!

With the movie already having almost a thousand user reviews on IMDb I guess not many people are going to read this, but nonetheless here we go. After liking It (2017) very much I had high expectations for this movie, especially since the official cast was revealed.

It Chapter Two starts well for the most part, but as the movie unfolds you soon start to realize that some of the adult characters are pretty much the same as their younger selves, and it seems that they haven't matured at all in 27 years. I understand that the adult characters had to be 'recognizable' for the audience to re-establish the emotional link we had with the kids from the previous film, but you really CANNOT write a kids dialogue intended for adult characters that are supposed to be grown-up and mature human beings.

The screenplay of the first film, written by Chase Palmer, Cary Fukunaga & Gary Dauberman, worked very well because of these two main reasons: 1) the lines of dialogue were INTENDED for kids and 2) because Gary 'evil clown' Dauberman did the least amount of writing on it. I don't know what happened that Chase Palmer and Cary Fukunaga were not brought back together to work on the screenplay for It Chapter Two, and letting Gary 'evil clown' Dauberman take the wheel on his own is probably one of the worst decisions Warner Bros has ever made. Because of his sloppy, careless and lame writing It Chapter Two suffers tonal inconsistencies and misplaced humor throughout most of the film, and it is definitely not Andy Muschietti's fault as I'm sure as a director he did his best to keep the script's tonal mess at a minimum.

The actors did pretty well with the material they were given, but for me the standouts were definitely Jessica Chastain as Beverly, Jay Ryan as Ben and Andy Bean as Stanley (although his presence was fleeting). Bill Skarsgård was once again great as Pennywise although, because of the dumb dialogue by Gary 'evil clown' Dauberman, at times it sounded like a completely different character. In addition, Teach Grant was surprisingly good as an adult Henry Bowers. The kids were all fantastic once again. On the other hand, we all know that James McAvoy is a great actor, but he really needed to work on his North American English accent a bit more here, as in some instances you can hear his Scottish accent creeping in. Unfortunately, I have to say that Isaiah Mustafa, Bill Hader and James Ransone delivered the weakest performances of the movie. I can't understand how you can give dramatic crying scenes (exactly four of them) to a comedic actor that has stated before in interviews that cannot cry in front of a camera.

The overuse of CGI was annoying at times, and that was one of my main complaints with the previous film as well. Cinematography, editing, sound and music were all great. Benjamin Wallfisch crafted a truly beautiful score for both movies, and definitely elevated some of the scenes by making them more emotionally powerful, especially in the first film.

All in all I was disappointed with It Chapter Two, and it was mostly due to the sloppy and careless writing of Gary 'evil clown' Dauberman.

It looked fairly decent since the beginning - the chemistry between the characters was satisfying, the cinematography and landscape shots were nice and sleek, and most importantly the premise seemed very promising. At some point I wrongly thought this was going to be a nice psychological thriller, but as the plot began to unfold it became evident that soon it was going to have a lame creature twist, and that because of it the final act was ultimately going to be a huge letdown. It's very disappointing to see a movie that has a massive potential to blow our minds away but then it all falls apart unnecessarily on the third act. It started off feeling like a fresh and new take at the horror genre and ended up with the cheap vibe of a Syfy original movie. It's basically another weak and unconvincing monster flick to add up to the pile. I'm definitely starting to lose my faith in upcoming Netflix feature films.

Since the opening scene you get a taste of the absolute mediocrity that follows for the rest of the film. There's so much wrong with it that I really don't even know where to start, but the first apparent serious problem seems to be the casting choice, and that's what probably made this movie fail in such disastrous proportions. This film needs to be shown in acting school as an example for how NOT to act, and I'm honestly very surprised that Whoopi Goldberg got herself involved in such an amateurish project, as there's a big difference between supporting a cause and agreeing to be part of a mediocre production. All the performances were terrible, but Sheen's acting in particular is so laughably bad that by the end of the movie I felt truly embarrassed for him. The script is extremely weak and lame - the dialogue between some of the characters is stupid and totally unnecessary in moments of tension that are supposed to be serious. The so called "comic relief" fails miserably and it clearly makes the scenes cringy and awkward for the actors themselves. The characters are so unlikable and annoying that at some point you actually stop caring about them, and when you have such a limited acting cast and this situation occurs you know the movie is in serious trouble. Generic camerawork and choppy editing makes the technical aspect of the production seem boring and unattractive. The overall tone of the movie is very confusing, as sometimes it feels like a low-budget horror film and other times it has the comedic vibe of a parody. All in all this has to be one of the absolute worst films of 2017.

The film starts very promising and engaging, but as the plot progresses it gradually decays almost until the first half of the third act. The story is very character-driven, and Denzel Washington does an amazing job at portraying a very interesting yet strange idealistic character. He has become such an experienced actor throughout the years, and he's so good and spontaneous in this role that even the rest of the cast seem to be dumbstruck by his performance. The script is a bit lazy at times, and the pacing of the unfolding events is noticeably inconsistent throughout most of the film. Writer and director Dan Gilroy choses the easy-way-out of significant plot points on several occasions, and it becomes a bit distracting after a while. On the technical aspect it seems to me that the directing, editing, cinematography, soundtracks choice and production design were all suitable for the film. Would watch it again just for Denzel's performance, but other than that it's nothing too out of the ordinary.

Here we have another clichéd and very unimpressive attempt at what could've been a strong, memorable revenge tale. Since the first few scenes and spoken lines of dialogue I knew just how uninteresting and predictably bland this film was going to be. Although the writing of the script is highly questionable I think the story should have been considered better as a soap opera. Alice Eve delivers an unconvincing yet borderline-acceptable performance. The acting overall is evidently deficient and it becomes distracting after a while. The climax leaves you unmoved and careless after a lot of weak acting and predictable plot points. On the other hand the cinematography and landscape shots are pretty nice as you would expect in any 'western' flick. The musical score is alright for the most part but at times it feels a bit out of place. Camerawork and editing are pretty average and acceptable. Production design is suitable although some of the sets look clearly unfinished and hurriedly made. All in all not recommended, do not waste your time in this. Go watch a real american western instead.

I was really looking forward to seeing this as the critics and reviewers were very positive about it. Although I'm no fan of Lanthimos I decided to go ahead and watch the film anyways - bad mistake. I knew beforehand it wasn't going to be the average psychological thriller flick, and that's exactly what sparked my interest for it. Now that I've seen the movie and thought about it for a while I have to say that I truly regret watching it, It's just not worth the time. The film relies heavily on metaphors and symbolisms that simply do not work for me. The direction and writing is highly questionable since the very first few scenes. The characters and dialogues are so monotonous, bland and emotionless that it becomes a huge distraction since the first few lines of spoken dialogue. It's obviously none of the actors fault as I'm pretty sure the outcome is exactly what Lanthimos wanted, but it is really painful to see such wasted acting talent in this poorly executed whim of a film. Sometimes actors have little to absolutely no creative freedom over their roles, and it certainly seems that this was the case here. The characters had basically no chemistry whatsoever as everything involving their interactions felt forced and dishonest. There are some scenes that are totally unnecessary and feel very out of place as they contribute absolutely nothing in the plot's development. At the end of the second act is when I really stopped caring about the characters and the movie itself. I wish I could say the opposite but even the musical score felt irritating since the very beginning. I guess the only positive things I could say are on the technical aspect - at least the camerawork, editing and cinematographic style are pretty slick. All in all not recommended, very disappointing.

It's always very hard for me to rate and review these types of films, but I'll try my absolute best here. A lot of people will not like this movie, as it is clearly not intended for the mass appeal. These art films rely almost entirely on aesthetic elements such as intricate and thought-provoking visuals, unconventional use of symbolism, creative directing, imaginative editing and experimental music. Here we have a surprisingly strong directorial debut by the Mulleavy sisters. The film is beautifully directed and edited all the way through. Some of the scenes are very artistic and aesthetically pleasing. The plot becomes hard to follow at times, but that is something you would totally expect in a film like this, as the main focus is clearly the art direction and production design. Peter Raeburn crafted a beautiful score that fits perfectly with the atmosphere and overall tone of the film. Acting is a bit weak at times by some of the supporting characters, but Kirsten Dunst delivers an amazing performance as you would expect from her in a leading role. If you're in the mood for a sad and melancholic arthouse flick, go ahead and give this one a chance, it might be a pleasant surprise.

An overall solid film by Zak Hilditch. I thoroughly enjoyed the way the story was told - the pacing is good, the characters are believable and the plot develops well. Directing, cinematography, editing and production design are all basically spotless. It becomes evident that Hilditch really knows how to properly adapt a good story by setting the right tone and using the adequate elements that always feel organic to the whole thing. The acting in general was just a bit above average, but it easily becomes my favorite Thomas Jane performance to date. For some reason I think it would've had a stronger female lead if Julianne Nicholson had been cast for the role of Arlette instead of Molly Parker. Nonetheless I think she did an acceptable job. If you're in the mood for a nice crime/thriller flick go ahead and give this one a chance. It should not let you down.