Order by:

Add your comment

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

Comments 1 - 8 of 8

HyliaFischer's avatar

HyliaFischer

It has some nice horror setpieces, but it's a lot weaker than the first movie.
It's way too long for its own good and the child protagonists were much more enjoyable than the adult versions.
You may argue that the novel is very long and therefore needs time and you're right, but they still just left out the wrong things.
The first movie had a better balance between horror parts and character drama, while this is mainly horror and jumpscare setpieces that go on for 3 hours.
2 years 11 months ago
bklooney's avatar

bklooney

They wanted to make a movie based on a book about revisiting childhood traumas, but they also wanted a whacky Evil Dead property.

It Chapter 2 also doesn't trust it's audience to be able to know when the clown is present hint spoiler and constantly gives it away instead of trying to scare the audience with tension.

This constant diffusion of tension is especially bad in scenes that are taken from the book. I don't need scenes to be the same as the source material. But when adapting a known property, there is a tension between what the audience is familiar with, and what the adaptation might try. For instance, spoiler.

Some nitpicky things include Bev's abusive relationship which doesn't come back. Since it is irrelevant to the rest of the story, and to the developement of the character, why even have it?

The creative team involved set themselves an admittedly hard task as the adult portions of Stephen King's IT are much less interesting than the experiences of the children. I think the same holds true here.
2 years 11 months ago
Emiam's avatar

Emiam

6+/10
10 months 4 weeks ago
GreyDragons's avatar

GreyDragons

I haven’t read the book, but the premise was great. Also visualisation was 10/10, the scary stuff was detail all the way and really good. Was i scared? No. The jumpscares were just jammed together most holding no intricate fear background like the first. It could’ve been a good story. But the story telling was very annoying, opening issues and then neglecting then for the rest of the film and just whipping up random irrelevant stuff. It wasnt anything near as funny as the first. The horror was meh, except like 20% of it.
2 years 3 months ago
thyron's avatar

thyron

I liked it far more than the first movie. Real life stuff is much scarier than fantasy monsters.
1 year 6 months ago
BLJNBrouwer's avatar

BLJNBrouwer

Beep Beep IT
2 years 11 months ago
Dawizz's avatar

Dawizz

We all know that only White people can be bad, right? spoiler.When the pendulum swings back and chops some heads off all the lefties nut jobs will be pikachu face asking why? That scene is a small part of why the pendulum will swing hard very hard. Btw I've been a Democrat for decades (probably longer than a lot of folks around here have been alive). Only saw it for the check, and I regret doing it..
2 years 1 month ago
Falkhorn's avatar

Falkhorn

Only an excellent horror movie would be able to jam in hilarious pieces and still be terrifying. Although the movie was almost 3 hours long, it didn't feel long at all. Perfect pacing, perfect atmosphere and a great monster that plays with the protagonists in funny and horrendous ways.

In my opinion, this is far better than the first one. I laughed my ass off and a shat on it too, a thing that I would've never thought possible before.
2 years 11 months ago
View comments