top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 238 points 3 months ago* (26 children)

Hey now, let's be clear. Stephen King did not have the clown defeated by a bunch of outcast youths gangbanging in a sewer. That's just patently incorrect. Every single part. No, he had the ancient terror disguised as a clown temporarily banished by summoning an ancient turtle from the dawn of time and engaging It in a battle of wills. Completely different and, in fact, perfectly reasonable. Anyone that's actually read the book knows the outcast youth sewer gangbang happens after that and actually has no bearing on the plot whatsoever. Stephen King's not some freak writing a book where the entire plot hinges on a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other to save the world, no; he's a perfectly normal guy writing about a bunch of traumatized kids screwing each other for no reason at all. Bet you feel real silly now, huh?

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 176 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    What the fuck are you on about? Nothing you said is remotely true, this is a gross misinterpretation of the events depicted in the book.

    It's not a gangbang, it's a train. They go one after the other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    I thought that in order to be a train they should be connected to each other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 3 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

    There is an old painting about this. Tho they are adults.Gay ottoman erotica from 1700s where everyone forms a circular chain with their dicks and ass

    (Tuhfet Ul-Mulk by Shayk Al-Misri, 1773)

    (This is illustrated version of the Turkish translation from 1400s and there is an older, Arabic version from 1300s according to carbon-dating)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Was there not some time traveling component? Like their future selves had to find each other again and come back ti their childhoods. I thought that was what made the "children having sex" part not as triggering as it sounds,because they were actually adults. Mind you, it's been years since I read the book. I might be misremembering things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago

    No, it is even more bizarre. They have sex because the group is lost in the sewer and apparently this makes them know where they are, somehow, so they can leave, which they then do. It adds literally nothing to the plot, apart from really shoddy symbolism of growing up.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    I remember it being for the need to destroy their innocence or something

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 53 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    I went into IT with an open mind and was prepared for that scene. Kept thinking that it probably made a lot of sense since many King fans had said it had a very beautiful reason behind it.

    Then I get to it. And it's just stupid. Genuinely stupid.

    The kids are scared of forgetting each other, because that is the power of IT. It makes people forget as they grow up.

    So they want to do something meaningful to remember each other. And Bev is like: y'all can fuck me.

    And I am over here like: how are the boys supposed to remember each other if they only fuck you? If that scene was supposed to make a lick of sense, the kids would have an orgy with each other and not just the boys lining up to have sex with one girl.

    I can go along with weird and uncomfortable ideas in books if they make sense. In this case, it made no sense. But people either seem to defend it because they just go along with the premise or they defend King because he was high or some shit.

    I'm not defending bad storytelling. IT has a lot of cool concepts in it and no one can write about small communities like King can, but I'm not gonna pretend like the kids having sex is some clever narrative device. It's very, very stupid.

    I also think the Turtle is goofy af.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Tbh if my first time was a train of my bros all with the same chick, i'd probably remember them for a very long time even without a proper orgy. Though i'd probably remember them all for helping to defeat an eldritch sewer fiend anyways.

    Still sounds like a stupid thing to put in a horror story about teenagers though..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 42 points 3 months ago

    I am fairly certain that Stephen King was molested as a child, it's a recurring theme in his work in a way that seems less like an attempt to depict a general/universal fear and way more like he's just working through his own trauma. IT isn't even the best example, he's got a short story called The Library Policeman that is not subtle about it at all. Incedentally, I first read that short story in elementary school, worked better as a stranger danger warning than anything else.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    Cocaine is a hell of a drug...

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    It would have been so easy to just not write that part. Or her character like that at all tbh

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (47 children)
  • [–] 28 points 3 months ago (41 children)

    The book has child porn in it. A group fuck where they all fuck the girl.

    Not joking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 41 child comments
  • load more comments (36 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    I went in knowing nothing about the book other than there was a supernatural clown in it. When I read that scene I had to stop, then go online to find an explanation of what the fuck I just read (to be fair, I was also pretty confused by the denouement in general) and how it is related to the plot. I was absolutely baffled by the amount of people saying they thought it was fine to have, some people even said it was a good allegory for leaving childhood.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    "And you thought I was fucked up? I didn't have anything to do with that! I just eat children!"

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›