‘It’: Stephen King’s Iconic Horror Novel Gets A Triumphant, Terrifying Adaptation [Review]

When it comes to Stephen King stories, few have resonated quite like his 1986 novel “It.” Checking out the book from the library was something of a taboo right of passage for young kids, as was watching the not-as-scary-as-you-remember-it 1990 television adaptation (directed by John Carpenter confederate Tommy Lee Wallace). Pennywise the clown, in both print and portrayed by Tim Curry in the TV movie, became an iconic face of evil, as memorable and often referenced as the slasher movie stars of the same period. As years passed, King himself would be haunted by the story, referencing it in a handful of novels (most notably his brilliant time travel saga “11/22/63.”) And it’s easy to see what made “It” so impactful. It was a novel that played to King’s strengths, serving as a beautifully rendered coming-of-age story that elegantly combined psychological and supernatural horror along with cosmic science fiction; in the back half it artfully ruminated on memory, loss, and the psychic impact of youthful experiences. For a large swath of people, it also heightened and intensified a more widely accepted fear of clowns.

Now “It” is back and ready to scare an entirely new audience.

Set in 1989 instead of the original novel’s 1958, “It” begins with Bill Denbrough (Jaeden Lieberher), who helps his younger brother Georgie (Jackson Robert Scott) construct a paper boat. When the boat gets trapped in a storm drain, young Georgie is confronted by Pennywise the Dancing Clown (Bill Skarsgård), who offers to return the boat to Georgie. It doesn’t end well. Several months later, the story resumes with Bill and his rambunctious group of friends (collectively known as the Losers’ Club), searching for answers to Georgie’s disappearance (and the disappearance of other kids in their sleepy hamlet of Derry, Maine) while systematically being terrorized by the nightmarish clown and a very real neighborhood psychopath named Henry Bowers (Nicholas Hamilton). Of course it’s up to the kids to band together in order to defeat both the terrestrial menace and the otherworldly presence of Pennywise, which means putting aside their differences, squashing petty squabbles and, worse of all, spending time in the town library during the summer.

Originally developed by “True Detective” mastermind Cary Fukunaga (who exited over budget cuts and a creative clash with the studio), this new adaptation is helmed by “Mama” filmmaker Andy Muschietti, who makes a number of notable changes that go beyond the temporal shift of the story’s setting, mostly for the better.

In King’s novel, the kids’ fear manifested itself as both personal demons (like hypochondriac Stanley Uris, played brilliantly in the film by newcomer Wyatt Oleff, being stalked by a lurching leper) and pop cultural (a number of the Universal monsters made appearances); in this new adaptation the kids are all terrorized by things from their own lives (a creepy painting that hangs in a synagogue, the singed hands of loved ones that died in a fire, etc.) While it would have been interesting to see the filmmakers simply transport the references to the new 1980s framework while maintaining King’s intent (imagine Freddy Kruger showing up), Muschietti’s approach gives you a deeper understanding of the characters while also working to heighten the terror. It’s just scarier.

The ending, too, has been heavily reworked although explaining why and how would necessitate a trip into deep spoiler territory. Maybe the biggest surprise, especially to those familiar with the story, is that the back half of it just simply isn’t there; it’s just the stuff with the kids. So while there’s an emotionally satisfying conclusion at the end of the movie’s 135-minute runtime, it’s still only half of “It.” And you know what? That’s just fine.

It’s striking how much this new version of “It,” despite all of the changes, alterations and adjustments, feels like the original novel. King’s themes of childhood friendship, the closed-off nature of small Northeastern communities, and the destructive power of fear all get a muscular workout, and Pennywise, as an avatar of terror, is spine-tingling (even though the movie establishes that there is a very clear ceiling on how many times a scary clown can jump out from behind something and be effectively terrifying). All of the kids embody King’s characters wonderfully, and Muschietti, working with frequent Chan Wook-Park cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung and composer Benjamin Wallfisch (who provided the music for another 2017 horror gem “A Cure for Wellness“), gives the small town story an appropriate grandness with all of the tactile texture that goes along with it.

Occasionally, though, the movie feels like it has bitten off more than it can chew, even with its expanded scope. Scenes and sequences sometimes feel disjointedly slapped together, like there were connective moments in-between that were, for some reason, left on the cutting room floor. (For a great example of this, watch the children’s wardrobes change abruptly from one moment to the next.) Some of these concessions seem to be made in order to keep the runtime manageable, but others seem more baffling. Why would there be multiple references to a turtle (both in Georgie’s room and while the kids are out horsing around) if that is never paid off? (A turtle assists in the book’s climax but due to its inherent silliness or the fact that it’s connected to uncertain “The Dark Tower” saga, is not present here.) Also, for a story obsessed with the fleeting innocence of youth, “It” drags, particularly in its final, visual effects-filled act.

But even with these minor complaints, it’s hard to deny that “It” is anything but a triumph. The craftsmanship is impeccable, the performances incredibly strong (there are none of the telltale signs of poor child acting that bogged down things like the early “Harry Potter” films), and the fidelity to the source material, in spirit more than specificity, is admirable and appreciated. Had the story given even more time to breathe, it would have been one of the greatest Stephen King adaptations ever. As it stands, it’s simply a very good one. But who knows, when the second half of the movie is released and a new set of actors are able to inhabit these characters, maybe it will take on a larger, more important dimension. But make no mistake –  you’ll float too with “It.” [B+]