Sign up  |  Log in

It (2017 film)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1396484/

They are remaking movie adaptation of the Stephen King novel. I remember getting scared ****less by the first movie, when I was a kid. 

“The aliens on Mars cloned Hillary Clinton.” - Turd Furgeson

Thinking I’ll hold off until the remake of the remake. 

Is the book any good?

Sweep the Leg: "I’m tired."
KMeriwetherD: "Well, you were basically Legolas in the Battle of Water Cooler."

Carson wrote:

Thinking I’ll hold off until the remake of the remake. 

3rd time’s the charm.

This space available.

JBrowntown wrote:

Is the book any good?

It’s next on my list. I finished the Dark Tower series a few months ago and haven’t been able to pick up another book yet. From what I’ve heard from others whose opinions I respect, It is scary as hell. Looking forward to reading it.

It and The Stand were both pretty cheesy when brought to TV.  Although as a kid Tim Curry did succeed in scaring the ever loving **** out of me down in that sewer.  I’ll check this out.

Sweep the Leg wrote:

JBrowntown wrote:

Is the book any good?

It’s next on my list. I finished the Dark Tower series a few months ago and haven’t been able to pick up another book yet. From what I’ve heard from others whose opinions I respect, It is scary as hell. Looking forward to reading it.

Greeeat series. So many connections with the other king stories. Very interesting how he has many of them connected in that whole multiverse of his. Really looking forward to the HBO adaptation. Also really enjoyed misery. That scene with the ankles… freaky deaky.

The consequence of the propagation of second-order simulacra is that, within the affected context, nothing is "real," though those engaged in the illusion are incapable of seeing it

I, the machine, show you a world the way only I can see it.

I read the first Dark Tower book and thought it was OK.  I assume it picks up?  I need some fiction, I’ll give it another whirl.

ltj wrote:

I read the first Dark Tower book and thought it was OK.  I assume it picks up?  I need some fiction, I’ll give it another whirl.

It’s a commitment. All the books together are about as long as A Song of Ice and Fire, so give yourself several months to finish it. I thought the series was really well done. Their were certainly parts of the series that were slower, but each book is very different. 

My biggest problem with King - and this applies to every book of his I’ve read - he absolutely sucks at endings. I have to stop getting my hopes up that he’ll finally write a book with a satisfying ending.

Yeah I’ve been reading quite a bit of Neal Stephenson recently and he has the same problem. Cryptonomicon especially.  

Sweep the Leg wrote:

ltj wrote:

I read the first Dark Tower book and thought it was OK.  I assume it picks up?  I need some fiction, I’ll give it another whirl.

It’s a commitment. All the books together are about as long as A Song of Ice and Fire, so give yourself several months to finish it. I thought the series was really well done. Their were certainly parts of the series that were slower, but each book is very different. 

My biggest problem with King - and this applies to every book of his I’ve read - he absolutely sucks at endings. I have to stop getting my hopes up that he’ll finally write a book with a satisfying ending.

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

The consequence of the propagation of second-order simulacra is that, within the affected context, nothing is "real," though those engaged in the illusion are incapable of seeing it

I, the machine, show you a world the way only I can see it.

birdman12345 wrote:

Sweep the Leg wrote:

ltj wrote:

I read the first Dark Tower book and thought it was OK.  I assume it picks up?  I need some fiction, I’ll give it another whirl.

It’s a commitment. All the books together are about as long as A Song of Ice and Fire, so give yourself several months to finish it. I thought the series was really well done. Their were certainly parts of the series that were slower, but each book is very different. 

My biggest problem with King - and this applies to every book of his I’ve read - he absolutely sucks at endings. I have to stop getting my hopes up that he’ll finally write a book with a satisfying ending.

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

You’re assuming you know what satisfies me. 

What satisfies you/what would you consider to be a satisfying ending?

The consequence of the propagation of second-order simulacra is that, within the affected context, nothing is "real," though those engaged in the illusion are incapable of seeing it

I, the machine, show you a world the way only I can see it.

birdman12345 wrote:

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

I guess it depends on how you define satisfying endings.  I certainly agree that not all stories should have a happy ending, but it does seem as though many authors/screenwriters go out of their way to create twists at the end that really seem to have no basis in the overall story.  I don’t need to know the remaining life story of every character, but don’t make the ending so ambiguous that I don’t know who’s dead or alive, or who’s guilty or innocent.

This space available.

#FreeCVM #FreeTurd #2007-2017

Hahahah

higgmond wrote:

birdman12345 wrote:

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

I guess it depends on how you define satisfying endings.  I certainly agree that not all stories should have a happy ending, but it does seem as though many authors/screenwriters go out of their way to create twists at the end that really seem to have no basis in the overall story.  I don’t need to know the remaining life story of every character, but don’t make the ending so ambiguous that I don’t know who’s dead or alive, or who’s guilty or innocent.

I get the preference, but come down on the other side on this.  I think the authors are trying to make the somewhat theoretical view that the story’s about the journey and not our need for closure.  If no authors finished stories at some point I’d want more complete endings, but as an occasional novelty used by select writers, I don’t mind.  Plus, King tends to leave things open to create a feel that the horror may be continuing and leave a mystery around it.

#FreeCVM #FreeTurd #2007-2017

He us just leaving the story open to create the possibilities of sequels, for instance “It 2: The Return”, or “It 3: Spawn of It”.

“The aliens on Mars cloned Hillary Clinton.” - Turd Furgeson

Black Swan wrote:

higgmond wrote:

birdman12345 wrote:

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

I guess it depends on how you define satisfying endings.  I certainly agree that not all stories should have a happy ending, but it does seem as though many authors/screenwriters go out of their way to create twists at the end that really seem to have no basis in the overall story.  I don’t need to know the remaining life story of every character, but don’t make the ending so ambiguous that I don’t know who’s dead or alive, or who’s guilty or innocent.

I get the preference, but come down on the other side on this.  I think the authors are trying to make the somewhat theoretical view that the story’s about the journey and not our need for closure.  If no authors finished stories at some point I’d want more complete endings, but as an occasional novelty used by select writers, I don’t mind.  Plus, King tends to leave things open to create a feel that the horror may be continuing and leave a mystery around it.

Theres nothing people fear more than the unknown

The consequence of the propagation of second-order simulacra is that, within the affected context, nothing is "real," though those engaged in the illusion are incapable of seeing it

I, the machine, show you a world the way only I can see it.

higgmond wrote:

birdman12345 wrote:

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

I guess it depends on how you define satisfying endings.  I certainly agree that not all stories should have a happy ending, but it does seem as though many authors/screenwriters go out of their way to create twists at the end that really seem to have no basis in the overall story.  I don’t need to know the remaining life story of every character, but don’t make the ending so ambiguous that I don’t know who’s dead or alive, or who’s guilty or innocent.

So you didn’t like the ending of the Sopranos? 

For me, a satisfying ending doesn’t have to fall into a category of happy, definitive, or even absolute closure. It should be rewarding though. King’s The Stand is a great example of this. I read the unabridged version and 800 pages later I got to what was perhaps the lamest ending of any book I’d read aside from King’s Dome. It’s a testiment to King that I still really enjoy his books. 95% of the content is really great. Just those last few pages you can almost hear King say, “screw it. Aliens did it. The End.”

Edit: American Psycho (some of you may know I’ve read this a couple times) is a good example of a book that doesn’t really even have an ending and I consider it to be a fantastic way to end Bateman’s story. So there doesn’t even need to be closure. Basically, the author just needs to illicit any emotion other than “god damn it, that was lame” from me and I’ll consider it a good ending.

^ Didn’t watch the last few seasons of te Sopranos.

This space available.

higgmond wrote:

^ Didn’t watch the last few seasons of te Sopranos.

What? Go home now and do it. Seriously. Take a sick day.

Sweep the Leg wrote:

higgmond wrote:

birdman12345 wrote:

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

I guess it depends on how you define satisfying endings.  I certainly agree that not all stories should have a happy ending, but it does seem as though many authors/screenwriters go out of their way to create twists at the end that really seem to have no basis in the overall story.  I don’t need to know the remaining life story of every character, but don’t make the ending so ambiguous that I don’t know who’s dead or alive, or who’s guilty or innocent.

So you didn’t like the ending of the Sopranos? 

For me, a satisfying ending doesn’t have to fall into a category of happy, definitive, or even absolute closure. It should be rewarding though. King’s The Stand is a great example of this. I read the unabridged version and 800 pages later I got to what was perhaps the lamest ending of any book I’d read aside from King’s Dome. It’s a testiment to King that I still really enjoy his books. 95% of the content is really great. Just those last few pages you can almost hear King say, “screw it. Aliens did it. The End.”

Edit: American Psycho (some of you may know I’ve read this a couple times) is a good example of a book that doesn’t really even have an ending and I consider it to be a fantastic way to end Bateman’s story. So there doesn’t even need to be closure. Basically, the author just needs to illicit any emotion other than “god damn it, that was lame” from me and I’ll consider it a good ending.

How did you find the ending of breaking bad?

The consequence of the propagation of second-order simulacra is that, within the affected context, nothing is "real," though those engaged in the illusion are incapable of seeing it

I, the machine, show you a world the way only I can see it.

Black Swan wrote:

I get the preference, but come down on the other side on this.  I think the authors are trying to make the somewhat theoretical view that the story’s about the journey and not our need for closure.  If no authors finished stories at some point I’d want more complete endings, but as an occasional novelty used by select writers, I don’t mind.  Plus, King tends to leave things open to create a feel that the horror may be continuing and leave a mystery around it.

I’m not really a horror guy, so I’ve not read King or even seen many of the movies/shows derived from his work.  I don’t always need closure either, but a lot of times it seems as though the author had a great idea for a story, but couldn’t come up with an ending so they decided to create some really artificial twist and called it thoughtful.

This space available.

birdman12345 wrote:

Sweep the Leg wrote:

higgmond wrote:

birdman12345 wrote:

Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.

I guess it depends on how you define satisfying endings.  I certainly agree that not all stories should have a happy ending, but it does seem as though many authors/screenwriters go out of their way to create twists at the end that really seem to have no basis in the overall story.  I don’t need to know the remaining life story of every character, but don’t make the ending so ambiguous that I don’t know who’s dead or alive, or who’s guilty or innocent.

So you didn’t like the ending of the Sopranos? 

For me, a satisfying ending doesn’t have to fall into a category of happy, definitive, or even absolute closure. It should be rewarding though. King’s The Stand is a great example of this. I read the unabridged version and 800 pages later I got to what was perhaps the lamest ending of any book I’d read aside from King’s Dome. It’s a testiment to King that I still really enjoy his books. 95% of the content is really great. Just those last few pages you can almost hear King say, “screw it. Aliens did it. The End.”

Edit: American Psycho (some of you may know I’ve read this a couple times) is a good example of a book that doesn’t really even have an ending and I consider it to be a fantastic way to end Bateman’s story. So there doesn’t even need to be closure. Basically, the author just needs to illicit any emotion other than “god damn it, that was lame” from me and I’ll consider it a good ending.

How did you find the ending of breaking bad?

Very good/awesome. If I take the entire 5th season and call that the ending, I’d say it started off pretty slow, but the third to last episode, Ozymandias, is one of the best episodes of TV ever. And the very end was about as perfect as they could have made it.

I feel like ozymandias was the real ending, and that the last 2 episodes were filler. But good filler.

The consequence of the propagation of second-order simulacra is that, within the affected context, nothing is "real," though those engaged in the illusion are incapable of seeing it

I, the machine, show you a world the way only I can see it.

“Mmmmmm, something…” - H. Simpson

I’ll probably go see this. The first time I watched IT as a kid, I got bored because clowns don’t scare me. Hopefully this one will be a bit scarier.

My co-worker saw this last night.  She said it was “fking scary.  Bring extra underwear.”  

Anybody else?  

82 > 87
Simple math.

i saw their box office sales. its one of the best for that category. as for watching it. i’ll catch it on netflix unless this chick im seeing keeps pestering me about it.

I love my cheese. I got to have my cheddar.

I seen in. On an IMAX, one of the biggest screens i’ve ever seen.

I thought the movie was pretty good for a horror…