top of page

Updated: Jun 27, 2022

A deep dive into what IT (2017) has to say about the nature of childhood and fear in the face of relentless technology, and how it sits within the major subgenre of the horror film remake.



Children are nothing like we were growing up in the 70s, 80s and 90s. When you ask them how they are, they do not ask about you. When you ask them about school, they claim to know everything anyway. When you ask them what games they like to play, they do not say tag, exploring or good old totem tennis. They say Candy Crush, Minecraft and other tablet and phone applications you may or may not have heard of. The classic “You’re grounded” punishment is highly likely to disappear as children would often rather stay inside on their devices than play outside with friends. Instead, parents are threatening to reduce their “iPad privileges” (clearly this is a much more up to date and effective form of parenting). 


Technological change has affected the centennial generation to such an extent that their attitudes and values are no longer indicative of what older generations, even millennials, would consider to be ‘child like’ and ‘childish.’ This is why films like IT (2017) are adored, despite the evil clown, for their depiction of a traditional childhood experience full of adventure, and outdoorsy children that reflect our younger selves. The power of films like this, and film remakes which are often overlooked, is their ability to invoke this nostalgia. However, this is inevitably a melancholic experience. As technology is seemingly hindering the ability for today's children to be children, these films have been rendered beloved classics. With all answers available at the touch of a button, the need for imaginative play has been limited and, so to have audiences appreciated films that preserve the traditional childhood experience.  



The role of film adaptations, like IT, as a vivid presentation of an ideal and nostalgia childhood has become essential in a society dominated by technology that Beck has labelled an age of "reflexive modernity" (Beck (1994), 2). Since Beck made this reflective commentary however the technological embroilment of society has heightened with the advent of social media. The plentiful quagmire of entertainment and ability for people to cheaply play out their lives in the cyber realm through social media platforms has effectively transformed our attitudes. The value given to our "social selves" and the experiences these afford has established a belief that if an event is not mediated, it never existed and thus, rendered childhood memories less precious (Wilkens & McCosker (2014), p. 291). Children watch and learn as we create who we are online with pictures and text and have come to value the real world through consumption of commercial goods and this social media prism. In light of such monumental changes in the manner in which social interaction is being performed in this new age, it is not surprising that adults are consigning greater value, subconsciously at least, to films like IT and seeking more remakes of their favourite classics.  


All generations are immersing themselves into the technological lifestyle, however, it is the older generations that are perceiving this stark behavioural shift. I can still remember being in year 6 on the bus home where one boy was sitting alone listening to his iPod. This was the first time I had ever seen an iPod and I remember thinking how strange and sad it seemed, to wire yourself up up and away from the world. Now, I and almost everyone around me does this on commutes, while walking between classes or down the street. It is as if we constantly want our own personal soundtrack playing to replace the sound of the birds and the laughter of people who could be our dear friends. In this sense, the insights of Gitlin are particularly poignant and telling. In his analysis of the purpose of the remake, Gitlin calls these adaptations “consumer society’s tribute to our hunger for a stable world” (Drazen, 2003 p. 9). The past, or idealised past at least, is a safe and comforting place for the audience. Therefore, it is something we as a society want and are more than willing to invest in. Many powerful resources back future developments. “The future condition of society may be better” but fears of something “essentially different” propelled by technological change have made the adaptation an important cultural product (De Tocqueville, 2003, 170).



While the ways in which people can stop what is happening is incredibly limited, it is important to remember that our attitudes and beliefs are formed, and greatly depend upon, the cultural products we consume. English author, Edward Bulwer-Lytton said in his play, Richelieu; Or The Conspiracy (1839) that “The pen is mightier than the sword”. Contradicting the idea that actions speak louder than words, Bulwer-Lytton acknowledges the power of the written word and, thus, human communication technology to make a change (Gee, A. (2015)). While the written word is still a powerful tool, being a film student, I wish to assert another cliche: a picture is worth a thousand words, and since the Hollywood standard for film making is for footage to be shot at 24 frames per second, film in this respect is the most powerful medium of communication in terms of ideological formation. Using this theory, I will assert why the horror film IT (2017) communicates the above in a succinct and effective way. 


The nostalgic elements in IT, and films adaptations of this style, express as much about the time in which they are produced as that which they are seeking to replicate. As suggested by Lizardi, the “...remake gets to the business of providing new material for nostalgic fans under the guise of re-imagining” (Lizardi, 2014, 128). In doing so these films convey a particular frame of the past that is most cliche or desired. At first, it may seem odd to think of IT, a horror film set in the 1980s, as an expression of the present when it is deliberately set in the past. However, “horror films… have the nostalgia bred through character expository remakes” that allows them to express both the time they are set and that which they are made (Lizardi, 2014, 129). In contrast, Cyberpunk science fiction films like Metropolis (1927), Blade Runner (1982) and even the Terminator franchise (1984-2015) fail to do this. Although they seem do a wonderful job of of showing us the possibilities of our world if technology goes too far however, since science fiction is often linked and equated to the fantasy genre, viewers do not perceive the places shown as a version of their own world or as a realistic depiction of their fate. Instead, they see them as made up, dystopian realms that are a long way from the possibility of redemption. They appear too different and fargone in comparison to the present in order for it to be considered the same place in the future. Instead of calling people into action, they make them think, “How absurd. That would never really happen.” 



The world of the film IT (2017) is not merely an imagined possibility but a representation of what the world was like in 1986. The film reconstructs a not so distant past which most of the film’s target audience lived through of are at least familiar with thanks to cultural products like 80s teen film classics. In this sense, by utilising a ‘present to past’ rather than a ‘present to future’ audience to film positioning (the latter used in science fiction films like Blade Runner), the audience look back at a world that has already happened, one immortalised in history and in their own memories. There is no room for doubt in its validity as there is in futuristic productions which only show a person or a group of people’s predictions for how the world might look. As a result, instead of seeing the present as happy and the future as possibly catastrophic, the past becomes the ideal while the present in comparison seems dystopic in many ways, especially when you consider the aspects of your happiest childhood memories it lacks.  


As well as being a horror film and a horror film remake,  IT is a remake of a remake. It is a film based on the 1990 mini series which was based on Stephen King’s 1986 novel. This is essential when considering what IT is trying to say. While remakes often get a bad reputation for being cash grabs or rip offs, it is important to keep in mind that the new version, as accurate to the original it may seem is made by a new team of people in a different historical and cultural context. According to Lizardi, “Using contemporary remakes to fully exploit nostalgic content for profit is problematic enough, as those who know the product are constructed as compelled to follow the newest version of the property.” (Lizzardi (2014), p. 131) Thus, people often write these films off as they are made largely because of the certainty of their commercial success. However, while this may be true, it does not mean it cannot have any ideological power. Rather than judging the new film based on its awareness as a commodity and on fidelity to the original source, it is important to consider the reason behind the director’s choices of selection and emphasis, what was added, left out, changed, left alone or modified. Additionally, unlike horror remakes like Carrie (2013) which places the narrative into the present day in order to prove its relevance, IT is made in 2017 but set in 1986. This allows it to present a ‘new old’ and demands of the new team of producers to emphasise 80s characteristics in order for the setting to appear authentic. This obviously was not needed when the 90s series was made thus the mini series lacks the nostalgia and reflection on a time gone by that a period piece can invoke. 



In the original IT television series, something that definitely strikes you is the remarkable representation of childhood, growing up, memory and friendship. Unlike typical victim characters in slasher series like Friday the 13th, the kids are not just fodder for the gore factor. They do not just wait around or make obviously futile efforts to save themselves, leaving the audience feeling sure of their soon demise, nor are they like a group of two-dimensional, hot camp councilors waiting to be slaughtered. Instead, the children are all well fleshed out characters with distinctive personalities, strengths, fears, hopes and dreams. They are not only likeable but loveable, making the audience invest in their story and care when they run into trouble. In terms of their fears, they remain almost the same as the original series but with a few important tweaks. 


In the original IT television series, The main protagonist Billy, like in the 1990 series sees visions of his brother Georgie. He is terrified of the guilt he feels around making him the boat that led him to the drain where Pennywise was and for not going along with him as he was ill. Stanley in the TV show saw ‘it’ as decomposed bodies who claim to be the prior victims. In the new production, Stanley remains the hardest to convince of the reality of the situation and rather than just being of the Jewish faith is the son of a controlling rabbi while he prepares for his bar mitzvah. His mother is not shown. In the new film, instead of zombies, he sees a woman with a horrifyingly contorted face that chases him. Perhaps this could represent his fear of earning his absent mother’s disapproval. Beverley Marsh was originally confronted in her bathroom by voices coming from her sink followed by a massive explosion of blood covering her and the entire room. When confronting ‘it’ in the Barrons, ‘it’ takes the form of her father who says how he worries about her. The new production more deeply explores the possible meanings behind Beverley's visions. Like how Stanley is approaching becoming a man, Beverley has just got her period. Her distress for growing up and becoming a woman is amplified in the 2017 film by her father’s clear sexual abuse towards her. Considering this, the bathroom blood scene takes on similar significance to when Carrie White in Carrie has her first period and becomes traumatised by the actions of the other girls who bully her and the prospect of becoming something she does not understand. 



Originally, Ben saw an image of his father alive and well although he had died in war. In the remake, he is instead chased by a headless body in uniform that most likely represents what he imagined was left of his father. Mike 1990 saw ‘it’ as a bird, a pretty general fear to harbour however in the new film, he sees ‘it’ as hands reaching out from a closed door, trying to escape from fire. This mirrors Mike’s experience of having to watch his parents die after only he was able to escape. He fears a similar kind of guilt related fear as Mike does. Eddie originally was attacked by the showerheads themselves in the shower room at school. He was afraid to go in as he was afraid of germs. 2017 Eddie however is confronted by a heavily stylised leaper who appears practically zombified and the epitome of filth. Lastly, Richie was afraid of Teen Wolf after going to see the movie with his friends but in the new film, he states that he is simply afraid of clowns. His true fear however is revealed to be of disappearing, becoming another victim of ‘it’ that would soon be forgotten along with the other children. 


While their fears are psychologically and stylistically amplified, the children are able to face and conquer their fears by the end of the film. In the original 1990s two part series, the children carried their fears well into their adulthood as shown in the second part. After remembering what had happened 30 years ago when they were children from Mike who had stayed in the town, all of the characters become just as if not more afraid than they were before. In addition, Billy begins to stutter again and sees Georgie, Stanley committed suicide and Beverley is shown to be in an abusive relationship with a boyfriend who treats her similarly to how her father did. Ben who in the last 30 years had become handsome and rich is still terrified of the bullies from his past and had not confessed his love for Beverley. Eddie is still taking placebo medication and living with his overprotective mother who convinced him he was sick when he was young. In the 2017 film, even though the children’s burdens and fears are far more great, they are all able to conquer them by the end of the film. Rather than narrowly beating Pennywise, The boys confidently come together to save Beverley who had been captured, allowing Ben to have the perfect prince charming kiss opportunity. While they are all different, each of their victories empower the children to face the villain head on as now unafraid heroes. In the end, they seal their victory with a blood promise to return if ‘it’ ever returns. In this scene, while surrounded with nature and greenery, the children each allow Billy to cut their hand with a piece of broken glass then join hands in a circle. The ritualistic and blatant display of willingness to bleed for each other is incredibly heartwarming but also sad when compared to the shallow human relationships of the modern world, where such physical contact and sacrifice is limited.



While all film genres have a purpose, horror is one of the most provocative. While almost every viewer can experience fear in a reactionary way like in ‘jump scares’, a horror film is never really scary unless it has a connection to reality. The Ring American film series adapted from the original Japanese film, Ringu and its prequels and sequels incites a fear of old technology. Even in this technologically advancing world, simple things like an unnamed video tape can pose a threat. Fear of the old is also evident in haunted object films like Annabelle (2014). The Final Destination slasher series stars death itself as the killer, reminding us of the possibility of the inevitable, the horrifying suggestion that humans are not in complete control over their own existences. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre film series, though it be excessive sometimes to the point of being comedic (especially in the second installment), successfully shows just how far human brutality can go. The fact that Leatherface’s crimes are based on the real American serial killer, Ed Gein, also known as ‘The Butcher of Plainfield’ heightens the real world relevance and emphasises that even though people may be afraid of monsters, humans themselves are capable of being the most monstrous of all. 


In terms of the monster, IT arguably is conceptually one of the scariest horror films, as the monster takes the shape of the victim’s greatest fear. It does not only reference something in the real world but what will effect them the very most. IT’s Pennywise, like The Thing (1982) is a being undefined and unnamed, emphasising that its ability and strength is far beyond any mortal creature of this Earth. It’s existence also has a transcendent, God-like power. Arguably, a deity would not exist if there were not people who believed and worshipped them, keeping them alive through ritual and stories. Similarly, Pennywise only exists as long as children are afraid of monsters and it only eats children because that is what monsters are believed to do. Unlike a human murderer with a motive and a conscience, Pennywise only exists to cause despair and to feed in order to insure future chaos. A motiveless killer is impossible to reason with thus demands physical destruction, a task made even harder when it is only children who are able to see it and what it does. 



However, as said above, due to the children overcoming the fear that haunts them, even the great monster, Pennywise does not stand a chance. The defeat is heroic and only possible through teamwork, a concept that has been heavily assaulted by the rise of the belief in individualism. Particularly in the West, people believe that to get something done, you must do it yourself in order to truly reap the reward of being an independent, capital producing citizen. However, there is only so much that an individual can achieve on their own. People do not like to admit this, an attitude that allows works of true collective action to fall through. When faced with the enemy that is the human desire for growth and improvement, the only possible way to change things is to work together as a team. This change in thought however must first occur within one individual at a time. Through this heroic and far more idealistic remade production of IT, this cry for help clearly shoots through, breaking through hundreds of red balloons to get there. 




References


Beck, U. (1994), Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, John Wiley & Sons, UK


Bloch, R. (2008), ‘The Shambles of Ed Gein’, True Crime: An American Anthology, Library of America, New York

De Tocqueville, A.(2005), Democracy in America: And Two Essays on America, Penguin Classics Ltd, London, United Kingdom 


Dika, V. (2003), Recycled Culture in Contemporary Art and Film: The Uses of Nostalgia, Cambridge University Press, New York


Drazen, P. (2003), Anime Explosion!: The What? Why? & Wow! Of Japanese Animation, Stone Bridge Press, Berkeley, California

Forrest, J. & Koos, L. (2002), Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory and Practice, State University of New York Press, Albany


Gee, A. (2015), ‘Who First Said ‘The Pen is Mightier Than the Sword’, http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30729480, accessed on 2/10/17


Kawin, B. (2012), Horror and the Horror Film, Anthem Press, London, New York


Knoppler, C. (2017), The Monster Always Returns: American Horror Films and Their Remakes, Transcript- Verlag, Bielefeld


Lizardi, R. (2014), Mediated Nostalgia: Individual Memory and Contemporary Mass Media, Lexington Books, Lanham, Boulder, New York, London


MacCabe, C. & Murray, K. & Warner, R. (2011), True to the Spirit: Film Adaptation and the Question of Fidelity

Varndell, D. (2014), Hollywood Remakes, Deleuze and the Grandfather Paradox, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK


Wilkens & McCosker. (2014), The Media & Communications in Australia, 4th Edition, Chapter 17: Social Selves, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW


15 views0 comments
bottom of page