Big Screen Adaptation of Stephen King’s ‘It’ Closer to Freaking You the F*ck Out

Thursday, July 1 by

This is why I don’t do laundry anymore.

Back in 2009, Warner Bros. hired screenwriter Dave Kajganich to tackle a big screen adaptation of Stephen King‘s novel It. I’ve never read the 1,104 page book because come on, it’s over 1,000 pages, but the 1990 mini-series scared the living crap out of me when I was younger. It ruined so many things for me, including chinese food, sewers, old ladies, Jonathan Brandis, and sewers. In fact, Googling images of Pennywise the Clown just now triggered my post traumatic stress disorder and my bladder.

Dave Kajganich spoke recently to the Stephen King fansite Lilja’s Library, and told them how he’s working on damaging our psyches with a killer clown again:

I told the studio from the beginning that I felt I needed to be able to write for an R rating, since I wanted to be as candid as the novel about the terrible things the characters go through as kids. They agreed and off I went. … I think the biggest difference [between the big screen adaptation and the miniseries] is that we’re working with about two-thirds the onscreen time they had for the miniseries. That sounds dire, I know, but it doesn’t necessarily mean two-thirds the amount of story. I’m finding as many ways as I can to make certain scenes redundant by deepening and doubling others.

I can’t image how he’ll take over 1,000 pages of source material and cram it into a two-hour film. Obviously a lot will be cut, but will all the crucial elements hold together is the question. Also, Tim Curry delivers such a fantastic performance in the original mini-series it’s going to be hard finding someone who can top it. But the bigger question here is, what’s up with Richard Thomas’s mole these days?

Yep, still enormous.

 

Do you like this story?

More about...

,