Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2019 23:02:34 GMT
Let's pretend, for a moment, that the novel doesn't exist. It is too different an entity from the films to be used to answer questions regarding plot holes specific to the films. As a narrative, if a film adaptation of a novel presumes that all its viewers have read it (especially a 1000+ page whopper like It), it has failed to adequately tell the story. Thus, this is pertinent only to the film itself.
Moving onward from that disclaimer...if the adult versions of the Losers club have all entirely forgotten about their childhoods in Derry, and the friends made there, how the hell did Ben remember Beverly enough not only to keep her signed yearbook page in his wallet, which would only suggest perhaps some inexplicable compulsion, but also to remember her with such clarity that he smiled at it and actively sought it out for comfort/confidence over the course of his 27-year absence?
How did Stan remember without provocation that "It's back, isn't it?"
These people were stricken supposedly with such circumstantial amnesia that not a single one of them remembered knowing of anyone named "Mike." Yet Ben remembered Beverly enough to keep her signed yearbook page in his wallet for 27 years? Why is his love strong enough to overcome, whereas the love Richie had for Eddie (apparently) was not enough to allow them to keep in touch?
Give me a break. This movie was enjoyable upon viewing, but upon contemplation devolves into a pile of CGI ass.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Sept 26, 2019 0:01:13 GMT
I don't think any of these can be explained away completely, although the Stan thing could've been instinct and the fact that his fear of It outweighed the others'.
I won't disagree that the movie was a big, bloated, aimless mess. If I didn't have the novel as a reference point, I'm not sure I'd have been able to get through the whole thing in one sitting.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 26, 2019 1:29:33 GMT
Well in the book...
Yeah, it doesn't make much sense with the Ben thing. He could have held on to the poem as a way to remember, or maybe just knew it was something important but couldn't clearly understand why.
With Stan I think the idea is that it all came flooding back when he heard Mike's voice, but yeah the rules of that weren't really clear.
And in the book...
In the book I don't think it was so severe. They sort of forgot things and had hazy memories, sort of like an exaggerated version of the way most people think of their childhood friends. I thought it was odd that they made it so literal and extreme in the movie.
|
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
 
|
Post by northernlad on Sept 26, 2019 1:32:28 GMT
It's been awhile...I mean years since I read the novel. I watched the movie and enjoyed it for what it's worth. But yeah...some of the CGI in it made me feel I was watching a movie about people going through a Halloween Haunted House. I had to shake my head at that.
Not sure your questions about their selective amnesia can be answered either.
And I just want to say that one thing that always bothered me about the story was Stan's suicide. I never liked that aspect of the story nor did I fully understand how It effected him that greatly that he'd rather end his life than go back.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 30, 2019 14:41:21 GMT
It's been awhile...I mean years since I read the novel. I watched the movie and enjoyed it for what it's worth. But yeah...some of the CGI in it made me feel I was watching a movie about people going through a Halloween Haunted House. I had to shake my head at that. Not sure your questions about their selective amnesia can be answered either. And I just want to say that one thing that always bothered me about the story was Stan's suicide. I never liked that aspect of the story nor did I fully understand how It effected him that greatly that he'd rather end his life than go back. King's novel is really a sprawling and convoluted shaggy dog story with brilliantly written passages that really don't amount to much by the end. It, or is that IT, can't be taken that seriously and any inherent flaws in the emotional narrative will become more pronounced by the translation to screen. The mind is more adept at filling in the gaps. It takes a lot of skill of depth to fully translate the emotion of fear visually without becoming corny or trite in the process. Using excessive cgi to compensate for a lack of deft handling and clear vision is superficial and hollow.
I haven't seen Chapter 2 yet, anticipating going tomorrow, but I wasn't overly impressed with the first routine installment and the daunting length of this second one just doesn't make it appear appealing whatsoever. I'd reverse that I think. I'd say his book is an emotionally satisfying and deeply felt story filled with effective characterization and drama, with some really weak passages here and there. For the most part the best of the book is all the less crazy stuff and when the imagination runs wild it can get a little silly. Some of that stuff could have been scaled back effectively in the movies, I think, but particularly in the 2nd movie they opted for less character and plot and more CGI. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 2, 2019 16:08:47 GMT
I would think the idea is the amnesia isn't immediate it's something that happens over time, but leaves a slight subconscious fear in their minds, so when they all left Derry they may have kept in touch a little at first but doubtful given this would be before modern communication became what it is, and like most kids they would put their past behind them as the forged new lives in college, but with the fear or influence of It keeping them from returning to Derry to reconnect to their past, so that by the time of the movie they don't recall each other properly, Ben may not remember Beverly but subconsciously the picture of her he kept could always have brought him happiness even though he has no true memories, so to him she may have always been the girl he was crushing on in school he never got the nerve to talk to and all he has left is the picture and his feelings.
I dunno I always found the idea to be backwards that those who left forgot but not those who stayed, like shouldn't It's influence which keeps everyone from asking too many questions impact those inside it's hunting grounds more than those outside of it, in the past it kind of had to make sense as that's the only way to lure the Losers back by having a Loser stay behind and call for them, but in the current day they could have kept tabs on Derry via social media and stuff and so you have the reverse where Mike has forgotten what happened to them but the others haven't, but their drifting apart is just a normal drifting of friends who went on separate paths, they could blame It but deep down they all know that was their choice to do so, something which they have to address to be strong enough to face It again, then you could have some things where they don't remember be due to It now exerting it's influence on them, which creates a clock they have to beat, they need to stop It before they forget everything, using the excuse that they forget easier now as adults because kids minds are more resistant due to a child's mind is still developing where as adults minds are developed and so are easier to "hack" as it were.
Just my random thoughts.
|
|
