Adult Stan



Forgive me if this has been discussed, I'm new on here, but like it says in the trivia the writers wanted adult Stan to seem a little off. The strange furniture in his house is supposed to support that. Do you think him seeing the dead lights as a child caused him to be off? Maybe after that day he was a little off in the head?

reply

He was different in the miniseries than he was in the book. Personally I hated the changes they made to his character (also to Eddie's). Didn't like Richard Masur in the role, he just wasn't Stan, although the kid actor was all right other than being too old. But Stan in the miniseries was just a total wet blanket... he wasn't like that in the book. I don't know what you mean about the furniture though. I don't remember it being "strange".

The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.

reply

Yeah and the way he just turned and walked off after he said he was going to take a bath. That was strange.

reply

This was from the trivia section:

"The weird furniture in Stan's house was meant to signify that something is 'off' in Stan's life."

reply

[deleted]

Possible

reply

I don't know what you mean about the furniture though. I don't remember it being "strange".


In the commentary on the DVD it is talked about. The director specifically talked about how they made it off beat and just not quite right.

Stan was extremely uptight as a child. He was like that in the book as well as in the movie. He was very much into detail and logic.
What was going on was something that he just couldn't wrap his mind around. If it didn't make sense to him, he found it repulsive.
He really isn't portrayed much differently in the movie than he was portrayed in the book. Granted, the book gives us much more detail when it comes to Stan and his wife and their life together. They obviously couldn't go into each life in detail for the mini series....
I guess we differ on our opinion of Richard Masur as Stan. I had no problem with him or the young actor who portrayed Stan as a child. I feel that he and all of the other actors, adult/young were well matched.

If there was any change in the script that bothered me at all, it was that Eddie was stuck in life as a Mama's boy and a virgin in the film. As I recall, he had the fat whining wife in the book.....
The change is understandable though. In the book, he had pretty much married a woman like his mother. Why delve into all of that in such a limited amount of time?

I like the movie.... I LOVE the book.

"Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night"

reply

I always took it that Stan, trying to be the most rational, never forgot about It like the others (until Mike re-invoked the promise). It had never come back and Stan had consciously rationalised that this was because it had never happened in the first place.
The fact that the fear wasn't now buried in his psyche, but was assumed to be rationalised away, meant that the damage manifest it in other ways.

- Like Stan and his wife not having kids (although he claims to be keen on the idea).

- The decor choices in Stan's apartment are definitely not rational. There are too many table lamps, weird shaped vases with candy in. Ugly, old fashioned colours.


"Who can't use the Force now?! I can still use the Force!" - Yarael Poof

reply

None of them had kids, though. Eddie said the doctor told them Myra's weight was the issue, but I don't think that was it. Because don't forget Richie had a vasectomy that spontaneously reversed itself, had a healthy sperm count, and STILL didn't get anyone pregnant even though he wasn't using protection. And in the book, Stan expressed guilt over Patty not getting pregnant, saying "it's my fault". I don't think there's any reason to believe he was lying about wanting them, they just weren't supposed to have them because having kids forces you to grow up and they needed to retain their imaginations for when It came back.

The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.

reply

In the show though, there's no suggestion that either Bill or Audra or Bev and her partner want to start a family. Richie is a serial wedder but not a father. Ben is not attached. Ditto Mike and Eddie. When the subject was brought up in the group one of them says "No wonder" or something like that

Stan's character is the only one who it would seem should have kids and they even acknowledge the incongruity of them both not having kids.



"Who can't use the Force now?! I can still use the Force!" - Yarael Poof

reply

I disagree, even if you're going strictly by the context of the show (which I don't like to do because the characters' stories are abbreviated due to time constraints, plus a number of things were changed from King's novel). Just because Stan is the only one in whose story becoming a parent is mentioned doesn't mean he is the only one who "should have kids". Frankly I'm not even sure what that means... honestly, if you take any random group of seven 40-year-olds and NONE of them have kids, that's a little odd. I'm in my early 40's and of all the people I was friends with in high school, I can count on one hand those who, like me, have no kids. How would it not be odd for Bill and Audra not to have kids? Or even Richie, having been married a few times? Notice Bev got pregnant a few weeks after It was dead? That's because NONE of them "should" have had kids. None of them were meant to have kids as long as It was still alive. Stan is not distinct from any of the other six in this respect, I'm sorry.

The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.

reply

Just because Stan is the only one in whose story becoming a parent is mentioned doesn't mean he is the only one who "should have kids"


Should have kids in the sense that there is never any acknowledgement of It's influence in that matter for Stan. So it is more enigmatic in Stan's case that he does not have them, even if it follows that none of the seven would have them.

How would it not be odd for Bill and Audra not to have kids?


For Bill and Audra it appears that they are both very driven and have chosen to concentrate on their careers.

In the show, the others acknowledge that for them kids were not an option and they say "No wonder", recognising that it is It or fear of It that has prevented them. Whether their lifestyles themselves are an actual impediment to them starting a family is irrelevant when they all agree that it's "No wonder" that they haven't. Notice they don't say "So that's why I don't have kids".

Stan is presented completely differently in that he seems open to the idea, his wife is keen, yet it mysteriously hasn't happened. It's another symptom of Stan believing he's dealt with It rationally, unlike the others who have simply buried It.

"Who can't use the Force now?! I can still use the Force!" - Yarael Poof

reply