Too many changes from the book, but the casting/direction is fantastic

Rating: 8/10 (10 September 2017)

First off, let's be clear. This was the best King source material EVER, and the TV version was a joke. This first-part attempt at the source material is infinitely better, from the casting to the direction to the production design, etc. It's a little odd to take the childhood setting from the late 1950s to the late 1980s, but whatever. The screenplay also shortchanges the backstory of the Mike Hanlon character, but whatever. There are some other changes which don't hurt the narrative, but readers of the book will wonder WHY they were made (i.e. Neiboldt Street house, etc.). And yes, for the readers of the novel, THAT SCENE is not included, either. Whatever. The screenplay does a good job with the child characters, allowing the child actors to shine in their roles (again, with the exception of the short-changed Mike Hanlon character here -- racism?!). The film looks good, cinematography- wise, and again, the production design is awesome even with the time shift to the 1980s. At times, though, it feels like you're watching STAND BY ME or CARRIE even. Was that intentional? Whatever. You should enjoy this movie, although the Pennywise demise is a little strange at the end, hollow as it should be. Too bad we have to wait so long for the second act.