Props to the guy who played Beverly Marsh's father in "It" because he really made that character super creepy.

@CountScrofula I would certainly say so, normally I have low expectations for horror films, and also for Stephen King movies. They usually follow the same pattern, starting out really nice and creepy for about thirty minutes, and then they get stupid just after a half hour in or so because it gets ridiculous and far too unrealistic, with people traveling into other dimensions and stuff like that. But this one was fantastic. I liked the book too, but there were a lot of parts that could have been left out, including a preteen orgy that took place in a sewer cistern. Obviously the movie didn't include that.

What I think made it so good was the humor, it was scary but also really funny.

@BlueMetalChick Hey, glad it was a good adaptation! And you HAVE to leave stuff out of books when creating a movie. If you want the full experience of the book... well, read the fucking book, lol. And excluding the preteen gangbang was a wise decision.

I should bug you about your hoarded movie links. My rural connection is too shitty for my usual methods with some stuff.

@CountScrofula My general opinion in movie vs. book is that whichever comes first is usually the better medium. Because if something is made to be a book from the start, it's better as a book than it is as a movie. But if it's made for the big screen, to be seen and heard as opposed to read, it's almost always more enjoyable to watch than to read.

@BlueMetalChick Yep! Lone exception is Fight Club.

@CountScrofula Unpopular opinion but I liked the Hunger Games movies better than the books, I thought the books were awful, but the movies weren't too bad.

@BlueMetalChick Yeah you're right on those too, although I've only read a book and a half and seen one of the movies.