Bending film genres

Rating: 8/10 (16 November 2019)

Director Andy Muschietti chooses not to play safe by mixing elements of gore and chaos with priceless bits of comedy, successfully breaking the barrier imposed by film genres. Instead of making a predictable type of horror, he crafted something much bigger than a film. From scares, drama and laughter to pain and tears, 'It: Chapter Two' had it all.
Growing up being surrounded by Stephen King's work has definitely made me appreciate these types of films and for me, the 'It' experience was even more entertaining because I got the chance to watch some of my favourite actors play some of my favourite characters. The cast was extraordinary; Bill SkarsgÃ¥rd, Jessica Chastain, James McAvoy, Bill Hader, James Ransone, Isaiah Mustafa and Jay Ryan played the adult versions of the Losers so elegantly, their performances being the highlight of the film.
Bill Hader- former cast member of 'Saturday Night Live' and writer and director of the Emmy nominated series 'Barry'- starred in this year's It as Richie Tozier. At first, Seth Green (who played 12-year-old Richie in the 1990 miniseries) showed interest in reprising his role. After Hader was proposed by 'Stranger Things' actor Finn Wolfhard (who played the younger version of the character in the 2017 film), the comedian was ultimately cast. Being a huge fan of his, made me beyond excited and very curious about how he would act in such different circumstances than the ones he was used to. I believe I speak for everyone when I say that Hader was the heart and soul of the film. Not only did he do a mesmerizing job (bringing joy to the viewers), he also carried the gravity of the script on his shoulders. He helped Muschietti's adaptation achieve the desired impact, making the entire audience fall in love with Richie. His dynamic jokes, including his "feud" with Eddie (James Ransone), gave depth to the story.
A pleasant surprise
It felt like a family film which is definitely unexpected, coming from a horror movie. It was more funny than scary, but this is a good thing because when it comes to 'It' the terror consists of gory and psychological details. Was it better than the first chapter? I would pick the new one over 'It' not necessarily because it was more frightening, but because it made me experience more.
It had a few general issues, but then again it is pretty hard to adapt Stephen King books into movies, especially one that is so beloved. Some might not like all the aspects of the film, because of the way they imagined the whole situation depicted in the book. The script blended well in this lively fusion of drama and horror, everything fell into place eventually, building up a great, enjoyable film.
The original piano piece "27 Years Later", which featured material from the previous film's "Every 27 Years" indicated the story's development while hinting Pennywise's return with an eerie approach. In fact, Benjamin Wallfisch's entire soundtrack implied the suspense and the dread that was meant to merge you in the plot.
The viewing experience
Watching it in a cinema makes a huge difference because the viewing experience is highly improved that way. The obvious advantage of watching 'It' in a film theatre is the fact that it gives a whole new dimension to the story and to the way Andy Muschietti chose to represent it on the big screen. If you are waiting to watch it on DVD, I feel like the entire setting will seem slightly sloppier. It just wouldn't be the same, something would probably seem off, but I assure you that, if you are a big fan of Stephen King's creations, once you watch it in a cinema you will genuinely fall in love with the adult Losers' Club.
The 2019 instalment serves such a satisfying ending which concludes the story perfectly. The atmosphere was magical in the last few minutes thanks to the emotional dialogues delivered by the cast. For a moment, I felt like all I wanted to do was stop the clock and let the film go on for another couple of hours.
It never felt too long; it actually got better with every moment. The runtime was precisely what made the film so delightful. The narrative could have been seriously messed up if the editing crew had decided to cut it down to less than 2 hours and 50 minutes.