"IT" Wasn't What I Expected

Rating: 6/10 (23 September 2017)

I despised the made-for-TV movie, and this theatrical version only fared slightly better. Here is how I summed up this one by character portrayal:
1.) The naive Beverly Marsh from the mini-series was portrayed more like the naive Beverly Marsh from the novel. But the Beverly Marsh from this updated-retelling was portrayed like a nymph who knew more about her sexuality than she was suppose to know. Her father (stepfather in the novel) was portrayed in a way to have us suspect that Beverly kept his bed warm at night. But thankfully, at least they included the scene with Beverly and the blood-spraying bathroom sink.
2.) Ben Hanscom was portrayed accurately (save for substituting his love of "Highway Patrol" for "Boy-Bands"; which was an awkward change, but no big deal. He was just the right size as portrayed in the novel, and bullied by the Bowers gang in the same way. But the problem I had was the missing encounter with "The Mummy" (who was "IT"). This was instead substituted for a basement encounter with a headless corpse. But overall, I'd say Ben Hanscom was more on the mark.
3.) Although Bill Denbrough had the stutter down-pat, the person portraying him was just too darn tall. This was one of the same problems I had with the TV version. In fact, most of these actors were too tall. He was also too demanding that they help him find his brothers killer, as if they had no choice in the matter. In the novel he was more begging/pleading for help. Bill's father was more of a grouch in this than he was in the novel. There should have been a tad more screen time for him to show his softer side.
4.) Richie Tozier was the same jokster as portrayed in the novel. Even though they showed the statue of "Paul Bunyan", they never showed his encounter with it when "IT" possessed it (tongue- twister). Richie instead had no personal encounter with "IT" until later (in the novel, Richie dismissed his encounter with Paul Bunyan as a bad dream). The only problem I had with Richie was that he spoke so fast that I couldn't understand much of what he was saying most of the time. And there were times all of them spoke fast. It was as if they were speed-reading their lines.
5.) Stan Uris had little to do in the novel just as he had little to do in the TV movie, and he also had little to do in this version; so his character was spot-on. He was more intellectually aware of what was happening and how impossible this all was. His mind could never come to grips with how something so unreal could be so real. Although they showed the standpipe in this movie, they never showed Stan's encounter with "The Dead Kids" when he ventured inside of it. Also, they didn't touch on his love of bird-watching (birds became his power of escaping "IT").
6.) Michael Hanlon's character was completely skewed up in this film. I can't begin to tell you how much they skewed up every detail of his being and his place in the Losers Club. For those of you who read the novel, you'll know exactly what I mean. What was up with that step-daddy? Where was his real daddy? What was up with that Sheep- farm? Where did that come from? Mike's role was so minuscule that his character was almost useless being there. And that's a shame since he was a major character in the novel. All he did was follow them around with little to say.
7.) Eddie Kaspbrak was another speed talker who I could barely understand at times. But at least they had his "size/height" correct. His fear of all viruses, diseases and bacteria was just as funny as in the novel, and his mother was near perfect. And thank goodness his encounter with the Leaper was included...just not his original way of escaping.
8.) Pennywise. Well, Scooby-Doo has a new voice if they ever need one. But I still liked this portrayal a lot more than Tim's (I know that's blasphemous for those who never read the novel and only saw the movie). I still had the same problem with "It" being a Clown for 90 percent of the film like in the 90's TV movie. In the novel, "It" only morphed into Pennywise when he wanted to attract children. He mostly became your worst fear in the novel. In both movies he mostly killed as a Clown.
In conclusion:
Beverly: too tall. Too sexual a persona. No Mother. Talks to fast. Bad portrayal.
Ben: No encounter with "The Mummy". Portrayed well.
Bill: Too tall. Well portrayed.
Richie: No "Paul Bunyon" encounter. No "Teenage Werewolf" encounter. Talks too fast. Still aptly portrayed.
Stan: No "Dead Boys" encounter. Portrayed well since his character was small in the novel.
Michael: Horrible. No father. No Mother. No encounter with "Giant Bird". Not enough dialogue to judge portrayal.
Eddie: Portrayed good.
I'll end by saying; the Losers Club entered the sewer via the Barrens, NOT the house on Neibolt Street (as shown in this movie). Their point of entry was from a sewer-cover in the Barrens where they played. And oh boy, did entering the sewer from that damn house suck up everything for me.
I'll give it a 6/10. But 6/10 ain't all that bad, because the TV movie is still worse, Imo.