MovieChat Forums > It (1990) Discussion > Weird the acting is better from the kids...

Weird the acting is better from the kids


The adults are just awful

reply

True, they are overdramatic. The second part of the story was always the weakest, if they ever do another I would recommend starting almost from scratch for the second half. The kids portion should actually be two films, there is enough material there.

reply

The worst one for me is adult Bill. He’s supposed to be the leader, the glue that holds the group together. As kids you can see why. Young Johnathon Brandis had screen presence. He stood out from the others, and it’s easy to see why others were drawn to him.

Adult Bill is the opposite, he can almost blend in to the background. John Ritter outshines him in just about every way. Maybe he should’ve played Bill instead.

Adult Richie kind of sucks too, but I think it’s because of the script. Harry Anderson did as much as he could with it.

reply

i like both segments equally good. john ritter and annette o'toole - very good. only problem with adult segment is lame endings as everyone know.

the remake howevers....

reply

The remake, however, is better in every way. Go on, say it.

reply

remakes is shitters. for philistine.

remake is bad actor & bad film makings. typical millenniums movie. new clown also not scary.

reply

Well, I don't like this relatively BORING 32-yo 1990 shit, and I saw it aged 18 when it first came out.

reply

yes but you are bogtrotting philistine, AMJF.

reply

Why? How? I don't even know you.

reply