Tessa Castro – Google

I liked IT Chapter 2 even less than the 2017 movie. I remember reading Stephen King's '86 novel back in 1987 & the cover alone scared the heck out of me. The movie made from it in 1990, in my opinion, is still the best version. Tim Curry's pretty hard to replace in certain roles. (ex: Legend & Clue 1985). I think that the newer version would have been better had they chosen an older, more seasoned actor than Bill Skarsgård...he just wasn't scary enough in either of the IT films. The only decent part of Chapter 2 is the ending with the voice-over, remembering Stanley & when they were kids together. That part was nice & sentimental. Otherwise the entire remake was a waste of time & people's money.

Am I the only one who didn't care for the IT remake starting from 2017? I remember reading Stephen King's '86 novel back in 1987 & the cover alone scared the heck out of me. The movie made from it in 1990, in my opinion, is still the best version. Tim Curry's pretty hard to replace in certain roles. (ex: Legend & Clue 1985). I think that the newer version would have been better had they chosen an older, more seasoned actor than Bill Skarsgård...he just wasn't scary enough.

Am I the only one who didn't care for the IT remake starting from 2017? I remember reading Stephen King's '86 novel back in 1987 & the cover alone scared the heck out of me. The movie made from it in 1990, in my opinion, is still the best version. Tim Curry's pretty hard to replace in certain roles. (ex: Legend & Clue 1985). I think that the newer version would have been better had they chosen an older, more seasoned actor than Bill Skarsgård...he just wasn't scary enough. I'm always going to favor this version from '90...the casting & just the time that it was made in. Some books/stories can't be duplicated