This movie did clown around a little too much in the gutter. Regardless, it was amusing enough to overlook most of the flaws even if the story didn't quite flow right.

Rating: 6/10 (13 November 2019)

Considering the source material of the same name from author Stephen King is a muddled, excessive and highly gimmicky 1000+ page novel about a shadowy extraterrestrial being that exploited the fears and phobias of its childhood victims, by disguising itself with the form of Pennywise the clown (Bill Skarsgard) to devour them. It makes sense for director Andy Muschietti to try to split the work into two films 2017s 'It' & 2019s 'It: Chapter Two' with the first one focusing on a group of kids known as the Loser Club standing up against Pennywise with the other with them as adults returning to finish the job of trying to kill it. For the most part, the first part kinda work, as it wisely cut off nearly all the outrageous dated or highly offensive stuff like the under aged gangbang, cosmic turtles and the Universal Monsters cameos. Instead they smarter use unique newer scares, swim in a quarry as symbolic baptism and working as a team as the main reason they achieve defeating the creature. However in the sequel, it brought back certain parts really didn't work & wrote new stuff that seem really jarring. One of them was the whole date clichÃ©s stereotypical homophobic attack with a plucky individual has nothing to do with the main plot. It felt unrelated. Also, what is with all the focus on sexuality orientation? That was never the main focus in the novel. It felt a little tack on especially with Richie Tozier (Bill Hader). To add on that, why is Pennywise targeting fearless adults in the first place!? The film could do better if it start with the naive girl gone missing. It would keep true to the lore. Nevertheless, that wasn't the only problem. Another was the Ritual of ChÃ¼d which like the novel doesn't really go anywhere. As an excuse for Losers to help gain their childhood memories back, it's pretty weak & lame. They seem pretty well knowledge for the most part of the gang's own history before trying to seek their tokens. To add on that, the awkward flashbacks to their younger selves was somewhat annoying & highly repetitive. The callbacks to the previous film just add to the sequel's bloat and erratic pacing. Muschietti has over 4 hours of footage because of that. He states that he plans to use the unused footage for a possible future film or a super cut. Either way, the child performances in this movie didn't stand out as much as the last flick. Also the young thespians grew tremendously in the 2 years following filming. Because of that, they had to be digitally de-aged in some scenes. The final effect came across as uncanny valley bizarre for some audiences. In short, it's probably best that all the kid's scenes should had been cut to focus more on the adults for a tighter film. After all, I miss the catatonia kidnapping subplot involving actress Audra Phillips (Jess Weixler) than the group clumsily running around. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy much of their undertakings across town even if some of the clichÃ©s loud jump scares involving the creatures were pretty hokey and fake-looking like the CGI Paul Bunyan statue coming to life or like the leper attack with the oddly place random Juice Newton's pop song 'Angel in the Morning' playing in the background. Some of them had potential of being really scary like the witch. That's only if the filmmakers went 1980 'the Shining' room 237 route of showing a more realistic dead old woman rather than a silly wacky troll doll. Nevertheless I did had the most fun with the fear doors and the Pomeranian in spite of it not being that scary. It was funny. Even the bloodbath and being buried alive sequences were somewhat well done. However, there was still a tone problem. The way, the film intermixed comedy with the disturbing imagery aspect was a bit odd. Despite that, one thing the film should had drop was Henry Bowers (Teach Grant)'s subplot. Unlike the book, his presence here doesn't really add anything to the film. Plus it's really hard to believe that the character survived his giant fall from the last movie. At least, the film made the right decision by not adding abusive husband Tom Rogan (Will Beinbrink) to the mix. The movie only needed one villain: Pennywise. Once again Bill does a great job. Nevertheless the climactic battle between him and the Losers felt a little bit recycled from the last movie with the individuals overcoming their fears again. I would rather have the flood scene from the book. To top it off, I hate the film for making suicide seem like a good thing like some sort of noble sacrifice. Suicide is an incredibly tragic act and to frame it here as a calculated, heroic move is not only irresponsible, but dangerous. In truth, it doesn't make the group durable, it only passes the pain onto them, making it harder. To romanticize suicide, is going against the previous film's core message that working together make them all strong. As for performers playing the Losers. All of them individually were great in their roles with Isaiah Mustafa's performance being the weakest as he is given all the exposition dumps lines when it should had been Jay Ryan's character. Regardless all were great with their on screen chemistry with each other especially Hader, James Ransome, Ryan and Jessica Chastain with James McAvoy being the weakest due to his character not interacting much with the others. As for the cameos. I love Stephen King the best, but in the end, there's a recurring joke in this movie about a writer who cannot write a satisfactory ending to any of his novels. This is what I felt about this movie. Overall: While, watchable & lightyears better than the 1990 miniseries of the same name. This sequel didn't can't quite find the It-factor. It was mediocre.