Why "It 2" is worse than the 1st part, but it's worth watching

After the success of the first film, director Andy Muschetti was obviously given more freedom and opportunities. Therefore, the second part came out on a larger scale, and the cast was full of stars. But this is what made the picture more controversial. It has several important drawbacks. However, there are also enough advantages.

Problem one: longer is not better

The duration of the first part was 2 hours and 15 minutes. The second film is half an hour longer. This is partly justified. The 2017 tape was a completely linear story, where events developed sequentially.

In the sequel, the authors must first introduce the matured heroes who, in a strange way, have forgotten almost everything that happened to them. Then use flashbacks to make them relive the past. And at the same time, there should also be enough time for a new story.

But the trouble is that not 27 years have passed for the viewer, but a maximum of two years, and the memories of the events are still fresh. And so scenes from the past sometimes seem superfluous. Moreover, some of them are taken directly from the first picture.

And in those flashbacks, which tell about later events, it is not very possible to worry about the heroes. Even if the viewer has not read the book, he is directly shown: they all survived and grew up, so there is no real danger for children.

As for the events that unfold today, it is possible that the filmmakers were held hostage to the too voluminous and detailed original by Stephen King.

Muschetti in the same way tries to tell as fully as possible about the heroes themselves, their relationship, about the origin of Pennywise, the strange cult of the Indians and much more.

But almost three hours of timekeeping brings almost no benefit, but only slows down the pace of the story. Instead of developing heroes in action, they are allowed too long to discuss the same fears and understand themselves.

For philosophical fiction like Blade Runner 2049, this slowness was acceptable. But for horror it is destructive: between the terrible scenes, the fear is already forgotten and sometimes it becomes boring.

Problem two: star cast only interferes with the film

The fact that the sequel will definitely be removed, it became clear soon after the release of the first part. And then everyone had great fear. The young actors played surprisingly well, there was a chemistry between them, and the teamwork in the frame looked amazing. And therefore, many doubted whether adult actors would be able to convey the depth of relationships and emotions that children showed.

The answer turned out to be ambiguous. On the one hand, the authors acted quite wisely: they invited the stars of the first magnitude to the main roles. There is no doubt about the talent of James McAvoy and Jessica Chastain, so the roles of Bill and Beverly were in good hands.

Comedian Bill Hader has conquered everyone with his TV series Barry in recent years, and it's hard to imagine the best candidate for the role of joker Richie. The rest of the actors may look a little weaker at some moments, but they are great for portraiture.

Except for Jay Ryan, of course, but everything is in line with the original. His Ben, who suffered from excess weight as a child, lost weight with age and became a handsome man. And, again, the image is beautifully chosen. It would seem that such a squad simply cannot play badly. But another problem arose.

Heroes no longer create a team feeling.

Due to the fact that experienced actors in general scenes draw attention to themselves, that very chemistry is lost. Now these are solo outputs of specific heroes, and not general work. Moreover, in the case of McAvoy, it is even more difficult: most of the time he appears separately from other characters.

It is difficult to say here whether the problem was in the inconsistency of filming schedules or whether the director decided to give more time to the most popular artist. But it seems that all the characters were filmed independently of each other, and then the action was supplemented with general scenes.

In general, this is the norm for modern cinema and TV series: it is easy to see that in many projects where there are several central characters, the characters are most often divided into groups of two or three people and are shown separately.

But the problem is that throughout the film, the heroes of It 2 repeat that the main thing is to stay together and be a team. And the viewer sees only individual actors.

However, all of the above is just nagging about the tape. They, of course, spoil the viewing experience. But still, the picture has more advantages.

Dignity one: it is a good development of psychological and social problems

The first part of the new film adaptation of "It" presented a slightly different take on the plot of Stephen King. In Andy Muschetti's version, the main evil is not Pennywise himself, but people: cruel teenagers who attack the weak, parents who persecute their own children, indifferent passers-by who do not want to notice crimes.

This realism made the idea of classic horror more social and lively, bringing the film more into the genre of a psychological thriller. And in this regard, the continuation successfully develops the topic.

The children grew up a long time ago and went to different cities. And at the very beginning, the story throws up the first important idea: everyone wants to remember only good things about childhood. This topic is especially relevant now with the general fashion for nostalgia.

Bad memories are erased, leaving room only for pleasant moments and people. However, this is what makes the heroes repeat their mistakes.

And again, Muschetti shows examples that seem to have been spied on in life: the heroes marry those who are similar to their cruel parents, and cannot get rid of childhood complexes, even being successful people.

And when they get to their native places, all the problems of the past fall on them with renewed vigor. In the film, this is justified by the action of mystical forces. In life, it is simply a return to traumatic memories. Once again, all creepy creatures can be considered not a manifestation of supernatural evil, but simply a reflection of everyone's fears.

That is why the ending of the tape is slightly different from the book original. It is more realistic and offers a different way out of the situation: the point is not in the victory over evil, but in the refusal to be afraid.

And, by the way, they joke about the ending in the film more than once. It is not for nothing that Bill was made here not only as a writer, but also as a screenwriter, who in no way succeeds in the endings of his works. Exactly the same is often accused of Stephen King himself. He never hid that he associates himself with this character. And the more funny the cameo of the king of horrors in the film looks.

Dignity two: the scale of horror is growing

Well, those who liked Pennywise's special effects and antics the most in the first part will definitely like the sequel.

Pennywise from the 2nd part of the movie "It"

Bill Skarsgard is given even more time here. And sometimes you get the feeling that the authors followed in the footsteps of the creators of "It" in 1990. Then the performer of the role of the scary clown, Tim Curry, was simply allowed to improvise and fool around on the set.

Here, Pennywise's antics and frantic movements become even more. Plus they are spiced with great special effects: you can see that the budget went not only to the actors. The clown transforms into many strange creatures, and the picture constantly balances on the verge of funny and scary.

Screamers, as before, do not just appear regularly: they are dumped in packs of 3-4 in a row. And this creates an interesting effect: the viewer already wants to relax, and another splash is thrown at him.

At the same time, all the horror classics are in place: a room with mirrors, rivers of blood, nasty insects, tentacles, twisted limbs. In general, everything that fans of the genre love so much.

By the end, all this goes into not quite necessary philosophy. But on the other hand, the scale of special effects is growing, and therefore one can even forgive the authors for excessive pathos.

Bottom line: this is still one of the best horror films of the year

The horror genre is now experiencing a rebirth. But for the most part this is due to unusual author's projects like "Reincarnation" and "We". But the classic horror films with terrible monsters and screamers are increasingly failing, remember at least another "Slenderman".

And in this regard, "It 2", like the first part, successfully keeps itself apart. It seems that the tape talks about important topics and the central actors play out the drama perfectly, but at the same time the plot does not go into absolute allegories, as it was in Solstice.

There are enough simple scarecrows here, and the director's talent and budget allow not to overload the picture with darkness, helping the viewer to enjoy the spectacle to the fullest. Therefore, "It 2" is still a good horror that will leave pleasant impressions.