Will Poulter cast in 'It': Why diverging from the original is a good thing
-
Molly Driscoll Staff writer
Viewers who remember actor Tim Curry鈥檚 depiction of the terrifying clown Pennywise in the miniseries adaptation of Stephen King鈥檚 novel 鈥淚t鈥� may be surprised by the depiction of the character in the upcoming 鈥淚t鈥� remake.聽
According to , actor Will Poulter, who starred in the films 鈥淭he Maze Runner鈥� and 鈥淲e鈥檙e the Millers,鈥� will be taking on the role for the film version directed by 鈥淭rue Detective鈥� helmer Cary Fukunaga.聽
Mr. Poulter is 22-years-old and Mr. Curry was 44 when the 鈥淚t鈥� miniseries debuted. According to Variety writer Justin Kroll, the studio behind the remake, New Line, wanted a younger actor to portray Pennywise and Mr. Fukunaga 鈥渃ould not say no after being blown away by Poulter鈥檚 audition.鈥�
鈥淚t鈥� follows a group of children growing up in 1950s Maine who encounter a strange, evil force. Years later, they must battle it again as adults. 鈥淚t鈥� producer Dan Lin previously stated that the book (which comes in at more than 1,000 pages) will be adapted as two films.聽
So is it a good move to radically rethink the depiction of one of the book鈥檚 most memorable characters? Some of the best remakes and reboots have been those that have separated themselves from the original film in some way. If a remake doesn鈥檛 do so, then why is the movie being remade in the first place? In recent years, Christopher Nolan鈥檚 鈥淏atman鈥� films set themselves apart from the campy originals by making Batman鈥檚 Gotham City a very dangerous place (and Heath Ledger鈥檚 Joker far less fun-loving than actor Jack Nicholson鈥檚 portrayal). The 2009 film 鈥淪tar Trek鈥� (which, while not a remake of a particular 鈥淪tar Trek鈥� story, featured new actors taking on the iconic original characters) weren鈥檛 afraid to add new plotlines like Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana) being romantically involved.
Other recent movies have shown the benefits of not being married to their source material as well. The 2013 movie 鈥淲orld War Z,鈥� which starred Brad Pitt, was based on the book of the same name by Max Brooks but, as noted by writer Bryan Enk, is 鈥渁n adaptation鈥� essentially in name only.鈥� But the movie version was still satisfying viewing. Monitor film critic Peter Rainer gave the movie a B-, writing that 鈥渄irector Marc Forster is very good at amping up the terror鈥� [actor Brad Pitt] is never less than believable while facing off against this pandemic.鈥澛�
