maxresdefault

With the release of the new movie adaptation of Stephen King’s It, unsurprisingly this month’s What’s the Difference? from CineFix is covering the book vs the 1990 mini-series.

The It mini-series come out on video – yes VHS, yes I am old – when I was just at the start of my teenage years. The adolescent characters facing the genuinely scary Pennywise was too much for me. Tim Curry’s portrayal of the demonic clown left me sleepless for a week. It is the only movie to have ever had this much of an impact on me.

I mean Pennywise is already a scary clown. But he turns into a giant nope. In Australia we’re wary of tiny nopes. A giant nope is a ticket to nightmares.

nopenopenope_e5af97_2685388

So guess what book I refuse to read and which recent adaptation I won’t be watching.*

Although, apparently the new movie is genuinely good:

*Yeah, I know, I probably wouldn’t find it scary now. I probably will eventually read the novel and watch the new movie. Maybe.

8 thoughts on “Book vs Movie: Stephen King’s It – What’s the Difference?

    1. Don’t worry, those are dangerous Nopes, just there to catch flies.

      Good to know it isn’t scary. Might give it a read then. I have The Stand on my shelf to read. My wife loved that, so looking forward to it. Also have Pet Cemetery in paperback. Can’t remember what I have on ebook.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. My experience, so far, with King is that he’s not a terror author. I don’t feel like I have to leave the lights on at night after reading him. But what he writes really disturbs me. Which is why I limit myself to one King book a year đŸ™‚

        Liked by 1 person

  1. So, these thoughts are mine, based on what I remember. I was a fan of the Goosebumps books when I was six or seven. So naturally I thought I was perfectly capable of handling this miniseries when it was released. To say I was terrified was an understatement. But I was hooked. I dropped those Goosebumps like a bad habit and started reading a Stephen King. It was quite engrossing, but not so much scary. I liked the way the news reports were presented, and even the narrative of Pennywise. But the chemistry with the Loser’s Club was really the core of it. Of course, there that strange scene in the book that unified the kids and allowed them to become adult’s all in one go. I’ve seen the miniseries from time to time over the years and remember those frights with find appreciation. But I waited to watch It again in favor of having a somewhat cleansed palette. The theatrical version of It was so far beyond what I’d hoped for, that I saw it again a second time this past weekend. The new Pennywise isn’t like Tim Curry’s portrayal, where he was apt to start cracking jokes, laying on actual clown humor over the few “scary” moments. Bill Skarsgard’s version is childlike in nature, but he has a deep hatred for kids. You can tell from the first, and notable more infamous “Georgie” scene. The way he terrifies his victims before attacking them is almost like marinating his food just the way he likes, and when the kids are good and terrified, he’s ready to save them for hibernation time. He toys with the kids in an almost animalistic way, much like a lion might play with a gazelle before ripping out its throat. But when he does this, his movements are erratic and very unpredictable, which is ultimately what makes Pennywise so terrifying. Of course, after my second viewing of the movie, I went back to watch to miniseries. I have to say, it doesn’t do the movie justice. I spent most of my time rolling my eyes and wondering how I was actually that scared at all in the first place.

    Also, those nopes are quite scary. Loved the meme.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. No, not a baby. I remember begging my mother to give me my baby blanket back, I was so terrified. Looking back, I question how I was so scared, but I do know that I was. The movie definitely suits the world we’ve grown into.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment