The Pennywise clown from the 90 movie was far better than the one in the pictures in my opinion. He looks like a Jester now. Part of what made IT creepy was that it was a normal sort of clown. Leave it to Hollywood to redo a movie and butcher it.
shareNot alot of people think about the possibility of Bill outdoing Curry's performance. It is doubtful, but it is possible.
shareI personally like the new Pennywise look, I'm glad it's totally different from the mini-series look because it sets the two apart. I like that it's an old fashioned style, it reflects how old It really is. The costume is also closer to how King described it in the novel.
shareDid King describe in the novel how the kids are playing Mario Brothers and watching Ghostbusters and Ninja Turtles?
shareNo, did I mention he did in my post? I said the description of Pennywise was closer to how King described it. Nope didn't mention Mario, Ninja turtles or Ghostbusters. Here's an idea why don't you keep repeating the same asinine comments over and over again, that will change people's opinions and even if it doesn't at least you'll be getting some attention.
shareI don't know why people keep citing this. The costume is nothing like King describes it in the book, save for that it is silver.
"“Want your boat, Georgie?' Pennywise asked. 'I only repeat myself because you really do not seem that eager.' He held it up, smiling. He was wearing a baggy silk suit with great big orange buttons. A bright tie, electric-blue, flopped down his front, and on his hands were big white gloves, like the kind Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck always wore."
Now from what I can see in the costume design, his suit is not baggy in the least, there is no tie (though I think omitting that was a good decision in both adaptations), his gloves are not big, they are rather skin tight, and he doesn't resemble a circus clown ( as is stated in the novel), or like a cross between Bozo and Clarabell.
To say they didn't take massive liberties with the costume is farm from the truth. The 90's miniseries, like it or not, was a ton closer than the current.
It's ridiculous to see how some poeple get their panties in a bunch from one, single, promotional, still, picture. Bunch of fúckin crybabies.
The losers didn't even agree what the clown looked like before the smoke ritual in the Barrens.
Love that they're doing something different with this and don't copy-paste Currys look. "Oh noooo. The suit isn't baaaaggy. Oh buuuuh hooo hooooooo."
They stay close enough to most of Pennywises description in the book (especially love the yellow eyes, and the pompons on the shoes). Also, in that archaic costume it does indeed look like their's a rancid reek coming off him, much like Stan described.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mind citing some examples of other descriptions from other characters? I haven't read the book in years, but I sincerely doubt they described him as a Victorian era clown.
I am not saying the costume can't work, but I don't understand why people say that It is "closer to what is described in the novel", when obviously, It isn't.
Another fun thing. People who admit not to have read the book in years, claiming that the costume is nothing like King described it, and that the old Pennywise was a ton closer to the book's description - mostly because they went for a victorian look with this one, a look or "era" a bunch of 11 year olds couldn't describe if they wanted to. Never mind that they got the color of the suit right as well as the color of the eyes as well as something as trivial as orange pompons on his boots. Mini-series Pennywise bothered with none of that.
I'm reading "IT" right now to complete my Dark Tower experience. You must know how it is with a plus 1000 pages book, you can't just go back and find a specific sentence, especially since Pennywise is described in passing most of the time. To me the new costume hits a bit closer to the mark optically. I reserve final judgement until I have seen Pennywise walking, talking and most importantly, in all of his forms. Maybe then I'll throw around with words like "obviously" too, who knows.
Books are a uniquely portable magic. ~Stephen King
There's plenty of points where 1990 Pennywise might be closer to the book, but this Pennywise is so in these ways:
- silver suit with orange pompoms, it always seemed very specific that Pennywise had little color in his suit.
- orange hair
- silver eyes (hinted at on the jack in the box)
- red paint It's mouth that could be blood. Obviously they took this to the next level by drawing the smile through It's eyes, but 1990 Pennywise only had some lipstick
- the promo shows him floating and not casting a shadow, and set pictures show his balloons floating in unnatural ways
As for Victiorian era clown, the oldest image they find of Pennywise is a woodcut from the 1700s. They see him in lots of other pictures from throughout history. You can see how they interpretated this as his suit being a conglomerate of different clown styles from the last couple of centuries.
When Georgie sees Pennywise in the storm drain, before the moments when they start describing him with blue eyes, etc., it seems that the description is coming from an objective point of view rather than Georgie's. By the way, I don't know why you're citing orange, when it is described as tufts of red hair on either end in the novel.
I am fairly sure that you're referring to Mike's Dad's photo when you say woodcut photo, but in the book I remember them saying that it is from the 1800's, since the 1700's makes no sense, as America wasn't even founded 'til 1776, nevermind Maine not becoming a state 'til 1820. Victorian clothing wasn't translated to the States either really, so it is nothing that those kids would really be familiar with, which is odd since projections of It are supposed to come from their own mind.
Speaking of which, these kids were growing up in the 50's, and in the movie, the 80's. What mind of either generation conjures up that image when asked what a clown looks like?
I will concede that we haven't seen all of It's forms, but when looking at it from this stance, how does any of what It looks like make sense so far?
By the way, I don't know why you're citing orange, when it is described as tufts of red hair on either end in the novel.
I am fairly sure that you're referring to Mike's Dad's photo when you say woodcut photo, but in the book I remember them saying that it is from the 1800's, since the 1700's makes no sense, as America wasn't even founded 'til 1776, nevermind Maine not becoming a state 'til 1820. Victorian clothing wasn't translated to the States either really, so it is nothing that those kids would really be familiar with, which is odd since projections of It are supposed to come from their own mind.
Speaking of which, these kids were growing up in the 50's, and in the movie, the 80's. What mind of either generation conjures up that image when asked what a clown looks like?
At least the clown has a large "light bulb" head clearly made of flesh, that could be one of it's saving features, and it gives you an idea that Pennywise is not entirely human (even before It acts aggressive).
"That's it. It bit into his arm-pit. Like It wanted to eat him, man. Like It wanted to eat his heart." shareIs it at all possible that Pennywise's look could have slight changes or evolutions (in clown form). Perhaps the lines from the mouth corners to his eyes may vary considerably based on character perspective. I have a feeling that in clown form he will still appear different in ways.
share