He's 27. Tim Curry was 44 or so when he played the character in the mini-series.
Just my opinion, but I don't find IT's appearing to the children as a young clown very convincing - not when he's wearing a centuries-old costume. Having him shown as an older character is more interesting, because it suggests IT is an entity that's been around for a very long time, and that IT can't quite mask this fact when in the guise of the clown. It conjures up a sense of gravitas and decay.
I will eventually get round to seeing the film again, but I wasn't immediately impressed by Skarsgard's performance anyway, aside from the question of age.
"Worthington, we're being attacked by giant bats!"
Post by masterofallgoons on Feb 14, 2018 16:26:06 GMT
I don't know if it makes a difference. He's sort of ageless in the movie, and the makeup could have masked the age of whoever was the under those prosthetics. I think the issue some people have with his age probably has more to do with the character design than the actor. He's designed to have not only a young look, but the proportions of baby or a doll. It grew on me a bit, but I do think it's weird and off putting and probably on purpose.
Ultimately, I'm ok with it. I do have a soft spot for the Tim Curry look, but obviously this one wants to distance itself from that so we have a very different approach. I hope in the second chapter that they sort of play around with the aging effect. Not necessarily making Pennywise himself look like an older human clown, but maybe showing his ancient nature through decay or damage or something.
The baby clown design must have been there to begin with, because Bill Skaarsgard is such an odd and creepy looking dude naturally, that I would have assumed his appearance was partly why he was cast, but they made him completely unrecognizable.
I also hope that in the second chapter he is able to personally play some of the other forms that Pennywise takes for a bit a continuity.