My first impression of the movie based on Stephen King’s book It was mixed with fear and a bit of disappointment. On one hand, I was disappointed there was minimal female engagement, with Beverly being one of the only girls in the entire movie, that it was pretty predictable and long. On the other hand, the graphics were quite terrifying and the coming-of-age story of The Losers cut the tension at times with humor and touching moments. I have google searched over and over again certain aspects of this movie. These include different searches with contrasting keywords such as “toxic masculinity and the new Stephen King remake of It” “masculinity in It” “gender roles as presented in It,” “It’s presentation of gender,” “coming-of-age story in the movie It 2017,” etc. I was searching immensely for any critique of the movie that delved into gender roles presented in the movie.
I realize it is a relatively new movie in theaters so critics have had various responses and I have not had the chance to read them all. Since I was looking for a specific critique of the film's presentation of masculinity, I was biased in my search of reviews. However, this was because I was looking for a review not of the movie itself but rather analyzing the content of the film. This includes how gender roles and stereotypical masculinity and femininity were portrayed in the actions and representations of the main characters. I also realize that this movie is based on Stephen King’s miniseries It and I understand that the characters were based on those in the book, as well as the scenes and actions of the characters. However, as for arguments that say “well they were just following the book,” if you read the miniseries or even simply look up on google how the adaptations over the years (1990's It versus 2017's It) differ from the book, then you will realize how the producers and writers of the new movie could have produced it much differently.
I finally found an article during my extensive search on Vanity Fair that sparked my interest. The article is titled “The New It Is a Compelling Coming-of-Age Story—for the Boys, at Least” by Laura Bradley. If this were my article, however, I would change the end of this title to ‘for White Boys, at Least.’ I saw a similar theme in which this article and another on Vanity Fair mentioned this film as a coming-of-age story. I saw comparisons in the new It adaptation with that of Lord of the Flies, in which it was a coming-of-age story that presented toxic masculinity as a main theme. I dislike having to quote large, direct pieces from an article, but the author of this piece hits the nail on the head so perfectly, that I could not have said this as eloquently.
“Unlike her male friends, Beverly often comes off as a hollow archetype in the film. The movie places less of an emphasis on her interiority, and more of an emphasis on the desire she stokes in others—her hormonal male friends, her horrible father, even the bullies who target her at school. That leads to some great comic moments—but given the pivotal role Beverly plays in King’s novel, it’s hard not to wonder why the film decided to scrap her heroic arc—and replace it with a typical damsel narrative instead.”
-Laura Bradley (2017)
I feel similarly about Beverly’s role in the recent film. From the very beginning of the movie, a bag of wet trash is thrown on her and she is called a slut by the mean girls of the school. As the movie progresses the audience is shown persistent slut-shaming of Beverly, by peers and adults alike. Beverly has an abusive and oddly sexual father who is also a persistent problem. Then, Beverly decides to meet up with The Losers one day and strips down to her undergarments with the boys and sunbathes as they all admire her longingly. This simply seems odd for a girl with a reputation of a slut, who may or may not be dealing with sexual, as well as physical, abuse by her father, and is hanging out with a group of all boys. Seeing as this turned out to be somewhat of a coming-of-age story for The Losers, and by The Losers I mean the group of boys with a single female companion. Beverly was constantly objectified and degraded throughout the film, and I can say that this is not typical behavior from girls who have been slut-shamed and/or who may be sexually and physically abused. The fact that the producers did not think of adding Beverly’s reaction or have anyone to stick up for her for that matter was a plight in my eyes. To add sensitive issues and/or acts of toxic masculinity and not then explain the issues or have someone debunk or stand up to them is a terrible losing factor for the movie.
As I was in the theater watching the movie that started at 11 p.m., there was a 13 (or so) year old boy sitting behind me laughing at the group of Losers consistently making sexual jokes. He was viewing the movie with his mother and father who were laughing along. To me, watching this type of movie is showing that teenage boy, and others, how to act amongst his friends. The film is showing this boy and others how masculinity should be presented, such as how to make sexually explicit and vulgar jokes about mothers and sisters, and/or objectifying and degrading women in general, and how this is what makes someone funny and popular amongst their group of friends. Although I must say that King’s idea of teenage ‘nerds’ or ‘losers,’ i.e. the underdogs, becoming heroes is a good topic and a feel-good coming-of-age story, this could have been represented differently, or at least could have taken some retaliation from the other boys, Beverly, or any other characters throughout the flick.
This movie seems to be devoid of any real moral conclusion for women and men, particularly for younger boys and girls. Perhaps the moral of this story is much like early Disney Princess stories, Beverly was the damsel in distress that needed saving, which the boys did, particularly through the saving first kiss from Ben. How interestingly similar to Sleeping Beauty or Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. Lastly, the tale ends with the fairytale kiss that Beverly and Bill shared after she was moments from slipping away. So yet another story ends with teenage romance and the awkward boy wins the pretty girl.
But above all, the issues with the representation of boyhood to manhood stems from how masculinity is portrayed in these movies which send messages and gives concrete examples of how masculinity should, and can, be enacted by young boys to benefit them. This movie shows expectations of how to be masculine, with the boys putting each other down, fighting, and even fawning over a woman, as if this is what it means for ‘boys to be boys.’ What they are actually showing is a heterosexual normative of white boys being boys, which is also showing an expectation of toxic masculinity. This movie is yet another form of damaging media that shows the difficult expectations boys are expected to perform in in order to uphold the correct form a masculinity, or hegemonic masculinity.
Actually, the main problem I had with this movie was not that these boys presented a form of toxic masculinity, but rather that no other protagonist or any other character throughout the film counteracted, argued, or fought against the certain harmful behaviors portrayed. These include the slut shaming, i.e. multiple people on multiple occasions in the film referring to Beverly, bullying, i.e. calling the boys ‘sissies’ and ‘babies, and the heterosexual degrading and demeaning jokes, i.e. about having sex with mothers and sisters.
All in all, I thought the movie It largely underrepresented the female role and Beverly’s character specifically. It largely represented a white, heterosexual coming-of-age male role and presented different forms of appropriate masculinity (in the forms of hegemonic and toxic masculinity). Lastly, It did nothing to insist that any of the sexual jokes and/or abusive sexual comments and demeaning and derogatory name-calling towards women specifically should be called out, counteracted, and fought. These were not viewed as a persistent problem in the film, rather they were viewed as comedic relief and simply ‘boys being boys.’