FA+
Shop
455
Views
Views
8
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Traditional) / General Furry Art
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1000 x 701
File Size 127.3 kB
Report this content
More from AshleyFableBlack
The Derry-town, If-It's-Brown, Flush-It-Down Clown
Good afternoon to you, survivour of the 1100 page read and avoider of that one section of the book... you know the one I'm talking about... ewwww.... no... just... no. *tut-tuts* Bad Stephen.
So, something a bit different- as many folkes know, I enjoy a good ghost story, urban legend or dark fable and I really dig on a well-constructed horror flick. From the old-school classics like everybody's favorite "Nosferatu" all the way up to the modern fare of "Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark", gimme some good scares and well-constructed characters, maybe a moral lesson or something to make me go "EWWWW, DAT's NASTY!" and I'm on board.
Recently, I finally got around to picking up the two-pack of the new versions of Stephen King's "It" and I enjoyed them both like a huge-ass pile of all the wonderful things I'm not supposed to eat because they'll kill me or whatever... *shrugs* Doctors.
The experience has been another interesting example of the magnifying glass that is the internet hate machine and how I'm reminded again that it's really for the best to ignore it and the folkes who continue to feed it. Most of the complaints which I've seen self-ascribed critics go on and on about on social media or file-sharing sites, I really can't get behind. I thought the characters were all handled very well, Munchausen by Proxy Eddie Kaspbrak, trauma survivor Beth Marsh, Guilt-driven Bill Denbrough, Shy, good-hearted fellah who makes good Ben Hanscom, Desperately seeking order Mike Hanlan, Stanley Uris and his search for his own voice and especially the Trying-WAY-too-hard Ritchie Tozier. While I'm not generally a fan of CGI effects, I can't recall but maybe one point when they took me out of the movie.... maybe. Most looked pretty damn good. Although both movies are very lengthy(especially for a horror movie), I never felt bored or drained- I remained entertained and invested from beginning to end and some of the additions which were added in, changes to this character or that, I felt really added depth and weight to the story and the arcs at play. Ritchie, in particular, has brought me to tears now, I think four times, by the end of Chapter Two...
Damn but Bill Hader deserved an award for that performance...
I think the only real complaint I have seen which I will 100% get behind has to do with the sound design and implementation in Chapter One. It seems like the music and background noises are cranked up to eleven while the dialogue and ambient sounds are around a five or six. Although the score is great, it's often used at times which I felt silence or at the very least, a much more subdued use of the score would have had a much greater impact. *sets her chin* Good example- It's hard to be spooked by the dozens of grasping zombie arms as the pry their way through the door when the violins are shrieking so loudly you have to look for the remote to shut the noise down before you shatter every glass in the house...
So, as always, featuring mi esposa, la ardilla satanica oscura que sostiene mi alma sucia,
Sanita_Squirrel and a good look at how it's really not that hard to deal with child predators if you're not afraid to simplify things a bit. *snickers*
So if you haven't seen "It" give 'er a watch. Stay away from the sewers and if you should hear any voices from your bathroom drains, MOVE. Pack up your shit and get the hell out of that house. Love yourselves and Love each other. Ave Lucifer.
So, something a bit different- as many folkes know, I enjoy a good ghost story, urban legend or dark fable and I really dig on a well-constructed horror flick. From the old-school classics like everybody's favorite "Nosferatu" all the way up to the modern fare of "Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark", gimme some good scares and well-constructed characters, maybe a moral lesson or something to make me go "EWWWW, DAT's NASTY!" and I'm on board.
Recently, I finally got around to picking up the two-pack of the new versions of Stephen King's "It" and I enjoyed them both like a huge-ass pile of all the wonderful things I'm not supposed to eat because they'll kill me or whatever... *shrugs* Doctors.
The experience has been another interesting example of the magnifying glass that is the internet hate machine and how I'm reminded again that it's really for the best to ignore it and the folkes who continue to feed it. Most of the complaints which I've seen self-ascribed critics go on and on about on social media or file-sharing sites, I really can't get behind. I thought the characters were all handled very well, Munchausen by Proxy Eddie Kaspbrak, trauma survivor Beth Marsh, Guilt-driven Bill Denbrough, Shy, good-hearted fellah who makes good Ben Hanscom, Desperately seeking order Mike Hanlan, Stanley Uris and his search for his own voice and especially the Trying-WAY-too-hard Ritchie Tozier. While I'm not generally a fan of CGI effects, I can't recall but maybe one point when they took me out of the movie.... maybe. Most looked pretty damn good. Although both movies are very lengthy(especially for a horror movie), I never felt bored or drained- I remained entertained and invested from beginning to end and some of the additions which were added in, changes to this character or that, I felt really added depth and weight to the story and the arcs at play. Ritchie, in particular, has brought me to tears now, I think four times, by the end of Chapter Two...
Damn but Bill Hader deserved an award for that performance...
I think the only real complaint I have seen which I will 100% get behind has to do with the sound design and implementation in Chapter One. It seems like the music and background noises are cranked up to eleven while the dialogue and ambient sounds are around a five or six. Although the score is great, it's often used at times which I felt silence or at the very least, a much more subdued use of the score would have had a much greater impact. *sets her chin* Good example- It's hard to be spooked by the dozens of grasping zombie arms as the pry their way through the door when the violins are shrieking so loudly you have to look for the remote to shut the noise down before you shatter every glass in the house...
So, as always, featuring mi esposa, la ardilla satanica oscura que sostiene mi alma sucia,
Sanita_Squirrel and a good look at how it's really not that hard to deal with child predators if you're not afraid to simplify things a bit. *snickers*So if you haven't seen "It" give 'er a watch. Stay away from the sewers and if you should hear any voices from your bathroom drains, MOVE. Pack up your shit and get the hell out of that house. Love yourselves and Love each other. Ave Lucifer.
Category Artwork (Traditional) / General Furry Art
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1000 x 701px
File Size 127.3 kB
Oh, and a final P.S. moment...
If you're one of the folkes desperately plunking out something to the effect of "Why didn't the clown just EAT them? That movie is Stupid!" Please, have the presence of mind to realize that you're trying to apply your sense of logic as a theoretically average human, to the thought processes of a timeless, shapeless, nigh-invincible Lovecraftian Horror from beyond time and space which literally eats the emotional state of fear. So... yeah. Just let it go.
If you're one of the folkes desperately plunking out something to the effect of "Why didn't the clown just EAT them? That movie is Stupid!" Please, have the presence of mind to realize that you're trying to apply your sense of logic as a theoretically average human, to the thought processes of a timeless, shapeless, nigh-invincible Lovecraftian Horror from beyond time and space which literally eats the emotional state of fear. So... yeah. Just let it go.
The book describes that as "salting the meat" and is also why It prefers to prey on children, because adults are harder to frighten, we've already accepted the mundanity of the world and are less apt to jump at the shadows and cower in fear in a darkened bedroom. One thing It isn't hesitant to do to adults though is to enhance and invigorate intense emotions like rage and hatred, which we see a little of in the movies but isn't outright stated. The book had multiple murders and outright massacres attributed to Pennywise through the years (the lumberyard strike union-buster being a particularly bad one), and I can see why they couldn't go over that as much in the films since they were long enough already.
It is a massive read with some dodgy elements which have become infamous, over-shadowing the work- understandably so- but still a worthwhile read as a whole. Good to know someone besides me has trudged through that tome!
Though you do touch on my original point. Thank you! One thing I've gotten very tired of seeing from amateur "critics" of films online is the attempted passing off of their disagreement with a characters actions or inability to understand their motivation as "criticism" or the belief that a character is poorly written. The entity(Pennywise) is stated as being possibly millions of years old(as understood by the characters in the movie) and extra-terrestrial with abilities on a supernatural scope and when I see such feeble mockery as "that's dumb because I'd do it differently" used in circumstances like this it smacks as very hollow and weak.
I understand that books generally afford MUCH deeper insight to characters than film as they often give much greater access to internal monologue and motivation, however in "It" many "critics" just seem to be pretty lazy to me in their assessment because they choose to manufacture comedy rather than use the ol' grey matter.
Though you do touch on my original point. Thank you! One thing I've gotten very tired of seeing from amateur "critics" of films online is the attempted passing off of their disagreement with a characters actions or inability to understand their motivation as "criticism" or the belief that a character is poorly written. The entity(Pennywise) is stated as being possibly millions of years old(as understood by the characters in the movie) and extra-terrestrial with abilities on a supernatural scope and when I see such feeble mockery as "that's dumb because I'd do it differently" used in circumstances like this it smacks as very hollow and weak.
I understand that books generally afford MUCH deeper insight to characters than film as they often give much greater access to internal monologue and motivation, however in "It" many "critics" just seem to be pretty lazy to me in their assessment because they choose to manufacture comedy rather than use the ol' grey matter.
That's the thing people complained about the most about the second movie: The length, and the ending. They forget that It was always a psychic entity and that narratively it would make sense for the Losers Club (which the book establishes as all having the Shining, in the scene where they send hospitalized Mike Hanlon the warning about Henry, which gave them significant defenses against Pennywise but also made them extra alluring to him) to actually defeat him with a psychic beatdown. I don't think defeating him the same way they did in the book would fly, the previous movie would've needed more hints about Maturin and frankly it would've been difficult to properly portray Bill entering that psychic zone mid-battle to talk to Maturin in the film. Quite honestly, I think moviegoers and critics would've bitched a lot more since it would stop the action dead and come across as really damn cheesy. Even cheesier than the "giant spider bullshit" of the 1990 TV movie.
There's some plot points that were clearly cut for time, like bringing Henry back only to defeat him minutes later. I think they only brought him back in the film because it was such a big deal in the book. The "backstory quest" they added probably could've been excised in favor of the Mike and Henry fight, I think they were just trying to do things differently than the miniseries and probably had some studio influence say "People really liked the kids, let's use them more in the sequel and just de-age them!". I don't know. I still really enjoyed it but I hate that if I hadn't read the book, I'd likely be on the side of the haters, because a lot of key stuff was either cut or just never really hinted at or explained.
And we never got the badass flying leech death scene of Patrick Hockstetter that was in the book. That would've looked badass with today's CGI.
There's some plot points that were clearly cut for time, like bringing Henry back only to defeat him minutes later. I think they only brought him back in the film because it was such a big deal in the book. The "backstory quest" they added probably could've been excised in favor of the Mike and Henry fight, I think they were just trying to do things differently than the miniseries and probably had some studio influence say "People really liked the kids, let's use them more in the sequel and just de-age them!". I don't know. I still really enjoyed it but I hate that if I hadn't read the book, I'd likely be on the side of the haters, because a lot of key stuff was either cut or just never really hinted at or explained.
And we never got the badass flying leech death scene of Patrick Hockstetter that was in the book. That would've looked badass with today's CGI.
Even Pennywise has nothing on The Great Orange Douche-Weasyl.
That's a damn good point, hon... probably work on other slasher-types as well.
"What're ya gonna do, Jason? Kill me with your little machete there? Go on. Do it. Did you see what that ass-hat tweeted today?" *weeps silently as the goalie-masked killer sits next to them and offers a hug*
That's a damn good point, hon... probably work on other slasher-types as well.
"What're ya gonna do, Jason? Kill me with your little machete there? Go on. Do it. Did you see what that ass-hat tweeted today?" *weeps silently as the goalie-masked killer sits next to them and offers a hug*
Yeah... There's really not much in terms of a dream-demon or pithy one-liner that compares to the last three-and-a-half years in the states, is there?
I'm just picturing Englund giving a heavy sigh and letting his potential victim go, re-thinking his life-choices... "Damn... I got nothin'... "
I'm just picturing Englund giving a heavy sigh and letting his potential victim go, re-thinking his life-choices... "Damn... I got nothin'... "
The Stand! Its been forever since I read that one. I recall liking it well enough but not being wowed. It was a hefty tome that really felt it's length in places. I'd be interested in seeing an expanded edition just to know what was added in to that beast.
I think the last one of his I read was Gerald's Game and before that was... The Dragon's Eye, maybe?
I think the last one of his I read was Gerald's Game and before that was... The Dragon's Eye, maybe?
The Eyes of the Dragon was awesome. A damn shame it never got a sequel (possibly due to the backlash King got from hardcore fans for writing fantasy instead of horror, which inspired him to write Misery). Yes, Thomas Delain and his trusty butler Dennis get a passing mention in The Dark Tower, confirming it was set in Mid-World, but that's about it.
I think out of Kings work the only one that ever really got me was Geralds Game. It squicked me bad and made it hard to finish the book, but it was still a decent story from what I remember.
I actually wanna re-read IT. I first read it in 8th grade and really wanna see how this newer movie matches up to the book.
I actually wanna re-read IT. I first read it in 8th grade and really wanna see how this newer movie matches up to the book.
Gerald's Game was his experiment delving into psychological thrillers, and both Gerald's Game and it's sister book, Dolores Claiborne, center around physical and sexual abuse and the trauma inficted from childhood to adulthood (both movie adaptations did a great job actually I'd say). The pivotal events of both books (the murder of Mr. Claiborne and the molestation in Gerald's Game) happen during the same solar eclipse, and King even has Dolores see Jessie, though distantly, on the park bench. I can see that being a pretty rough read, especially if someone has had traumatic abuse happen to them or their loved ones.
Well said! *applauds happily* I believe you phrased that in a much more concise manner, love. Thank you.
For me, it's kind of like the kids in the horror movies when they're running through the woods from the masked killer.
Plenty of folkes say that the movies are bad because the kids do stupid things, trip over everything, keep stopping to look back, trying to hide under a leaf- but it's easy to make those judgements when you're a average person, mid/late 20's or older, sitting on a couch in a nightie with a huge bowl of nachos and six friends, all laughing and riffing on a movie. Might be that if you were a dumb teenager, just saw your S.O. get stabbed in the head and are now covered in their blood, running through dark, unfamiliar forest as you're pursued by their murderer, you might just show some panicky judgement too...
For me, it's kind of like the kids in the horror movies when they're running through the woods from the masked killer.
Plenty of folkes say that the movies are bad because the kids do stupid things, trip over everything, keep stopping to look back, trying to hide under a leaf- but it's easy to make those judgements when you're a average person, mid/late 20's or older, sitting on a couch in a nightie with a huge bowl of nachos and six friends, all laughing and riffing on a movie. Might be that if you were a dumb teenager, just saw your S.O. get stabbed in the head and are now covered in their blood, running through dark, unfamiliar forest as you're pursued by their murderer, you might just show some panicky judgement too...
Thank you for the kind words. :)
Eh, horror movie cliches... some people just roll with them, even enjoy them, some people nitpick. Currently, nitpicking and nerd arguments are popular "hobbies", though no one will admit to enjoying that.
The thing is, most people don't know how they'd react in a real emergency, because they've never been in one.
Eh, horror movie cliches... some people just roll with them, even enjoy them, some people nitpick. Currently, nitpicking and nerd arguments are popular "hobbies", though no one will admit to enjoying that.
The thing is, most people don't know how they'd react in a real emergency, because they've never been in one.
Comments