The list of Stephen King’s books and stories that have been made into movies and miniseries is tremendous in the numeric sense. Some have been amazing; some have... not. The author himself penned the screen play for Rose Red; I might be the only person who actually loved THAT 2002 miniseries.
1984's Children of the Corn turned into a series of movies, each one depreciating in cinematic value and probable budget. Some of the movies have even been made a second time. What is it that so often goes so horribly wrong in this process?
I understand that King’s books are often long and even in miniseries some characters must be combined into one person. I have always found it beneficial to read the book before I watch the movie whenever possible. While the book is always better, I really have enjoyed some of the movies. Often, however, the second cinematic portrayal leaves a lot to be desired. The remake of Salem’s Lot (2004) may be the worst. Although the remake of the original 1984 version of Children of the Corn (in 2009) was closer in story to the original story, I didn’t enjoy it. The new Carrie (2003) opened to mixed reviews, some stating that the character was less likeable and seemed less vulnerable.
My favorite Stephen King book ever brought to film was the IT mini-series (1990) which starred the likes of Richard Thomas, Annette O'Toole. John Ritter, Tim Reid, Richard Masur, a young Seth Green and, of course, Tim Curry as the venemous killer clown Pennywise. This is the project I most want to see remade, yet the one I also worry could be the most disappointing remake. To aid all concerned, I have composed a short list of rules that I think may help would-be film makers not botch a remake and ruin my dream. A few things could be done in a little better and a few bits shouldn’t be 'mucked up'.
So here, as my own Christmas present to the Powers-That-Be is the following list that should help would-be producers produce a halfway decent remake...
continues... >>>
"Could Be Better..." Department:
1. Explain the rivalry between the turtle and the spider. The subject is important; the turtle is benefic while the spider is malefic; the former creates while the latter destroys. The subject wasn’t well explained in the first 'IT'.
2. Although IT remains my favorite King-based movie, by today’s standards the spider looks a bit hokey. I’d like to see it look a bit more surreal; conversely, I don’t want a poorly made CGI fakey-bakey looking creature.
3. Give a tiny bit of depth to Henry Bowers. His abject asshole-ishness and sudden descent into insanity is never really explained in the movie satisfactorily, except that he sees the spider and BOOM-he’s in an asylum. While he isn’t the primary antagonist, his only motivation seems to be that he is a psychopath.
"Don’t F*ck With It..." Department:
1. Becky’s interaction with the old woman in her childhood home was magnificent. Ideally, I picture someone like Judi Dench as the old woman. (Well, this is MY fantasy remake, now isn’t it?
2. Ben’s haiku to Becky. Don’t change a bloody word. The poem is one of those small details that seems inconsequential to film makers but means everything to King’s fans.
3. The age group of the characters. The fact that so much time has passed is very important. The individuals in the “losers’ club” have gone their separate ways and fully established themselves in their separate lives. If the remake was full of twenty-something box office dreamy-faced kids, I might actually implode.
4. The “vibe” of Pennywise. While finding someone to play the character as ingeniously as Tim Curry would be a daunting task, the combination of goofy clown antics and evil menace makes the character of Pennywise perfect.
"Be Careful When Considering..." Department:
1. Budget - don’t go all cheap on me here. Also keep in mind story is the most important thing.
2. Casting - while the actors don’t necessarily have to be well-known, they do need to fit those in the author’s original book.
3. Overuse of CGI-while special effects can be improved from the original movie, don’t get all crazy.
4. The screenplay - a shot for shot remake seems unnecessary, but don’t make a different movie entirely; just explore a few different areas.
5. The movie could be set in modern times, but don’t overuse today’s technology. In other words, please don’t 'cell phone' and 'tablet' everything to death.
I suppose what I am really trying to say is... please remake IT and please don’t make a damned mess of the whole thing.
Oh, and - naturally - I want to approve both casting choices and the script before anything goes anywhere!
