'It' Is Too Big to Stay on the Small Screen!
Filed under: Horror, Deals, Scripts, Remakes and Sequels
Almost twenty years after it terrorized the boob tube, Stephen King's creepy clown is back.The Hollywood Reporter posts that It is slated to hit the big screen, courtesy of Lin Pictures and Vertigo Entertainment. Dave Kajganich, the pen behind the 2007 Invasion, has been tapped to adapt King's new work and bring it into the new millennium -- and out of 1958 and 1985. Kajganich is also becoming the new adapting man about town, taking on projects like Escape From New York and another King scare fest, Pet Sematary.
Back to It -- As you might remember, this is the story of a group of kids who take it upon themselves to bring this creepy, shape-shifting creature called Pennywise down, back in '58. They hurt it, flee, and then decide to bind themselves together in case they ever need to fight It again. In one of the most warped rationales ever, this involves not only blood, but the lone girl of the group having sex with all of her boy pre-teen friends. Years later, the thing, who often takes the shape of the classic creepy clown, starts killing again and the friends reunite for another baddie butt-kicking.
I'm betting that the kids become teens so that the sex can become a sexy, marketable aspect of the film, but other than that, I'm curious to see how this gets updated. But how about you? Do you want more It?
Follow me if you want to live.*
*Yes, that's really obvious.
Jeremy Renner Wants To Be An Avenger
Directors We Love: Jim Jarmusch
Indie Roundup: 'Sweetgrass,' 'Clarkworld,' 'Broken Embraces'
Shelf Life: Fight Club_thumbnail.jpg)
Watch: Famous 'Matrix' Scene Re-Created with LEGOs
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-13-2009 @ 10:40AM
Kurt said...
While I find the prospect of added pre-teen sex interesting (and by "interesting", I here mean "really freaking creepy"), I'm actually most concerned about condensing it to a single movie. I haven't read the book, only seen the TV movie, but the structure was great for what was essentially a two-part miniseries.
I would be surprised if a remake shared anything at all with the original apart from the most basic premise and a couple character names.
Reply
3-13-2009 @ 11:08AM
Mike D said...
Attach Frank Darabont to direct and I'd be happy. Anyone else and the movie will FAIL! Make it a PG-13 teen scream movie - it will FAIL! I'm done yelling now.
Reply
3-13-2009 @ 11:11AM
BLS said...
Ugh. The TV movie was horrible - if you're a fan of the book, which I am. The actors were completely, totally miscast. I was so crushed by how badly they adapted this the first time, I don't know if I could stomach a remake.
Reply
3-13-2009 @ 11:22AM
juwan808 said...
If done right, a remake could be cool. I loved the book, but absolutely hated the TV movie. The clown was sooo scary in the book, but a joke on TV. He was closer to the joker on Batman. I don't care about the sex bits, could take it or leave it. Get someone like David Fincher to direct. He'd make it right.
Reply
3-13-2009 @ 12:56PM
Mike said...
I agree with Kurt that it would be tough to squeeze this into a 2 hour movie. That being said, if it used some clever cross-cutting it could work
Reply
3-13-2009 @ 1:04PM
Jimmy said...
Considering this book was written back when King was writing novels in multiples of 100 pages I can't see how they'll condense this novel into a 2-hour movie with totally ruining it. Granted, all of King's monstrously huge novels have extraneous information that could be cut out (except for The Stand), it will still be hard to bring this movie in at 2 to 2.5 hours without making a mess of it.
Reply
3-13-2009 @ 5:20PM
Midnight13 said...
"It" is a difficult film to do well. The best of King's horrer novels, are frightening because they get into the character's psychy. The lines reveal to the reader what the character is imaging, as they are going through thier experiance. To put that up on the screen is almost impossible. That's why too many of King's works when adapted into film rely too much on scary visuals.
Reply
3-14-2009 @ 8:45PM
Michael said...
i'd be so upset if they remade this
Reply