Although we do look back, the success of the first chapter of 'It' seems somewhat inordinate, the truth is that its virtues were very clear. After the debatable discussion of dividing the intricate flashback maze of Stephen King's novel In a more or less linear narrative, a functional and effective horror film is hidden.
Paying enough attention to human characters so that we may care about their destinies and enhancing the multiform and almighty ability that Pennywise already had in the novel, but without neglecting his banal and grotesque side, he acquired a very remarkable personality, which did not make it the revolutionary film that many wanted to see. But of course in a translation of the spirit of the original novel and in a carousel of effective, frantic and memorable substitutes.
The problems begin in this second part, perhaps, when all the failures we forgive in the first 'It' waiting for a second part, not only do not end satisfactorily but widen even more. The fascinating origins of the evil that devastates Derry, his repetition every 27 years, remains here as an anecdote, not as a cosmic draft event with implications that go beyond an arbitrary figure. Everything related to the death of several children in the celebration of Easter, the reasons why Pennywise is Pennywise and not something else... Where noted in the first part and are pointed here, but they remain definitely as notes.
It is not about adapting the book in its entirety or not. It is that Muschietti has set aside a series of themes that would have given great depth to the story and a dark breath that would have gone beyond the history of a multiform killer clown. In his obsession to pay attention to the most specific and melodramatic aspects of the story, such as the traumas of each character, the terrifying essence of the story is dispersed. The characters gain in density, but we move away from the reason why, among all the possible names for the monster, the Losers called the monster 'It'.
Does that mean that 'It: Chapter 2' is a disaster? It is rather a lost opportunity to make history in something beyond a spectacular box office or to be able to conjure a five-hour horror story of minimal consistency (although now, with miniseries such as 'The Curse of Hill House' and the like, that milestone has already been overcome). But above that, yes: in 'It: Chapter 2' there is a good amount of effective scares and memorable moments.
Undoubtedly, the attention that is still given to the group of protagonists stands out above any other element: 27 years after his first adventure, the only survivor who has remained in Derry, Mike (Isaiah Mustafa) calls everyone else to return to town. Together he said they will defeat Pennywise.
Thanks to the good work of the actors, how well they dialogue, in the distance, with their children's counterparts and how fortunate some of their traumas are, the Losers Club, even as adults, retains almost all its charm. A lot of the blame is on Bill Hader, giving life to the rich Richie, an authentic steamer full of tenderness that gives the whole a realistic continuous tension. His is also one of the best attack scenes of Pennywise, which also involves a monstrous statue of Paul Bunyan.
It is also very remarkable the visit of adult Bev to the house where he lived with his father and now occupies an endearing old woman. It is the best sequence of pure terror of the set and makes explicit everything that both the first installment and this inherit from the cinema of Japanese ghosts, in the rhythm of syncopated scares and in a certain aesthetic of the grotesque, which brings some moments to an adaptation CGI by Junji Ito.
A singular bittersweet taste remains in the mouth after 'It: Chapter 2': its virtues are incontestable. But the hypertrophy that leads it to include sequences removed from the first part and its unnecessarily derivative character puts it decidedly below its precedent.
Leave your comment!