Ça : Chapitre 2

Si le livre original de King était une spécialité culinaire, alors le film Ça : Chapitre 2 serait un ragoût préparé avec les mêmes ingrédients. Ce n'est pas dégoûtant à proprement parler, mais cela est loin d'être une expérience gastronomique. Alors que la première partie de Ça était un solide début d'histoire sur l'adolescence avec une dimension d'horreur appropriée, sa deuxième partie ressemble plutôt à une comédie d'horreur que même ses créateurs ne prennent pas au sérieux, et ils ont le besoin constant de démonter les moments plus sérieux et effrayants avec des insertions comiques et d'autres moyens aliénants (citations de films, musique inappropriée). L'histoire schématique souffre de plusieurs défauts dramaturgiques, les scènes d'horreur sont souvent ridicules voire parodiques, et Ça lui-même incite plutôt à rire qu'à être effrayé. C'est une routine de genre moyenne, qui recycle les motifs de nostalgie de l'enfance et de camaraderie, remplace la construction de la tension par des bouffonneries, des sursauts et des effets visuels numériques, et à part quelques bonnes performances d'acteur et quelques scènes remarquablement réalisées, malheureusement, cela ne présente rien d'autre de méritoire. La question se pose donc à nouveau, est-ce qu'il ne vaudrait pas mieux traiter Ça sous la forme d'une série épique, qui, contrairement aux films, pourrait être vraiment impitoyable, plus étendue dans son récit et plus inventive dans son approche de la tension et de la psychologie de la peur ? (05/09/2019)

En ce qui concerne la narration d'une histoire dramatique et la représentation des personnages c'est moins cohérent que le premier volet, ça fait davantage série B réchauffée (la quête d'artefacts personnels est le quart le plus faible du film). D'un autre côté, c'est plus dense en événements, avec plus de monstres, bien que cela soit insensément incorporé ou volé de quelque part (la tête d'araignée a enfin trouvé plus d'espace). Par moments, ça m'a amusé, par moments ça m'a ennuyé, et dans l'ensemble ça m'intéresse si peu que je n'irai pas voir le troisième opus. (13/09/2019)

The anticipated It: Chapter Two didn't live up to the high expectations, according to the reviews, and didn't surpass the first part, but it is still an outstanding horror experience that comes out as a clear winner thanks to this year's weak competition. The film may be three hours long, but it passes by quite quickly, is entertaining enough, has drive and enough horror attractions to keep your attention, something that can't be said for the new Tarantino film, which has a similar running time, but only the last 10 minutes are interesting. Pennywise could have been in the scene more times, but I enjoyed other forms, and one there was one scare that gave me a heart attack. It's not that scary, but I felt uncomfortable with all the scenes. The best sequence is definitely when the group starts looking for their tokens. I had a great time with the film, it looks expensive, the humor works at times, the references are amusing and everyone involved plays it to the hilt. James McAvoy rules! 80%! (12/09/2019)

The problem with the second part of It lies in the fact that the director wants to make it in the same way as the first part. The adults, however, cannot work as well as kids in the similar world, because that world was created with kids in mind. The mysterious and fantasy atmosphere stems from the fact that we perceived the world exactly the same when we were kids. That’s why the first It and Stranger Things turned out so well and are so popular. In It: Chapter Two, there’s no reason to believe the craziness on the screen; it just seems like the screenwriter got high and wrote down anything that came to his mind. (06/12/2019)

It: Chapter Two was supposed to be a sure-thing 4-star horror film this year. But the creators said NO! Sod it! Was there anyone aware of what the strengths of the first one were that made it so well received? Obviously not. So I will tell the creators. The performance of Bill Skarsgård as Pennywise the Clown. But in the second one, “IT” in its unmodified clown form appears in only about thirty seconds in total (in a three-hour movie!!!). That’s not much time for Bill to do anything. All the other appearances of IT are a stupid and surprisingly poor digital mess without any acting. A digital mess isn’t scary! Then there is the chemistry between the characters. It worked perfectly for the children versions. It had that Amblin’s atmosphere of childhood adventures, where the viewer wants to be part of the gang, even if they would have to face unpleasant things. In the second one? Zero chemistry. A heavenly cast that isn’t used at all. Bill, Eddie and Beverly are useless, Richie holds up a bit, but he fell from a different film (a comedy, actually), the rest are just there. And thirdly, the well drawn relationships between the characters, which in the second chapter is non-existent. They don’t speak like people, they just throw one-liners because there’s no time for anything in this special-effect circus (which is a paradox in a three-hour film!!!). The film has no main theme that the words from the characters could address. Everything moves boringly and linearly at a striking pace to the mandatory final underground. The three-hour run is really indefensible. Especially the last hour, that is monotonous and repetitive to death. When I realised that I will have to put up at least five times (it didn’t get to the black guy) with the obligatory wheel of “a character goes somewhere in Derry, they remember an incident from their childhood that happened there – IT scares them in a flashback – and back to the present, where IT scares them again”, I felt like getting up and get a snack at the McDonald’s next door, sure that I wouldn’t miss anything. And the worst is that I didn’t miss anything – this in fact happened. But damn it! If it was at least a good horror film. But in this respect, they wanted to make a blockbuster out of It and every single potentially scary scene is ruined by some stupid joke. In short, the disappointment of the year. Thank goodness King’s book was split in two films, so we got at least one solid piece, and we can pretend that this one doesn’t exist. (04/09/2019)