Weber brings this story to life with a vivid performance. He ranges from delivering creepy and scary to sweet and poignant and nails each character. The book itself could have used an editor. It's got a compelling story but too many superfluous tangents. The Stand was long too, but I didn't feel like King was wasting my time. There were times in It where I felt he was. But he always does a great job with characters and drawing you into the story, and this is no exception. Listen for Weber's narration. It's great.
This was definitely the longest audiobook I've listened to. It sucked me in and didn't let go until I was done. The story is very detailed and I started to feel like I was part of it, like the main characters were people I actually knew.
I'm a technician that does a lot of driving for his job. I use the "windshield" time to listen to audiobooks.
First let me review the performance. Steven Weber does a masterful job of not reading, but telling this story. I can think of only one other narrator that might be better, and that would be Will Patton reading the Dave Robicheiux novels by James Burke, and that's only because I think Will might do female voices better. In the future I will probably add a few books to my wish list based only on the fact that Steven Weber is the narrator, he was that good in this book.
Now to review the story. It's a 44 hour marathon of a story. If it wasn't for King's innate ability to write so well, I can't imagine anyone making it through to the end. If King had slimmed the book down to 20-24 hours, it would have earned 5 stars from me. By hour 40 I was wondering how much longer he could drag this out? Does he get paid by the word? Thankfully he doesn't go into infinite detail like some authors I've read, and the story continues to move forward (and backward, and forward, and backward, and then forward again). I was fortunate and I bought this book on one of Audible's 4.95 sale, so it worked out to $1/8hours of listening. It's probably still a good deal at $15.
I've been a fan since Carrie was released, and this book illustrates King's ability to terrify better than any other. Over the years I've reread this book when I'm craving a good scare, great characters, and fluid prose. Listening to it brings a whole new experience. Definitely credit worthy.
Stephen King is a craftsman with a beautiful literary voice. His words flow casually and perfectly, and culminate in so many brilliant phrasings... it's like he's nonchalantly tossing pearls in the air! I have been talking about his skill with friends, and I have been told that IT is one of his best works. I recommend IT strongly, especially since the reader, Stephen Weber, is also outstanding. Weber has an impressive vocal range, and he has the instinct and talent of a performer.... bringing an energetic cadence to sentences that you know others would read flatly. I think listening to Weber read brought more to the novel than my own mind would have, had I read it myself.
I read the book several years ago. Listening to the audio version was great. However, a person unfamiliary with the book might have a difficult time following the story line.
I'm no stranger to Stephen King, but I never got around to reading "It." I saw the movie when I was a little kid and it scared the crap out of me! I didn't realize the novel would bring that fear to a whole different level! First of all, the narrator Steven Weber is a full-blown performer and he absolutely earned his paycheck acting the hell out of these characters! He brought every single one of them to life. The story itself is insanely horrifying. I like to read/listen to audiobooks at night while I fall asleep. This book would actually keep me up at night because of how freaky some of the scenes were. I remember being tightly huddled under my covers, unwilling to stick out my arm to turn off the audible app because I was scared by the scene that was currently being narrated! Not every author can do that!
Because of my appreciation for his craft and a likeness for his type of stories, I've been, and will continue to be, a diligent critic of Stephen King. He's good, better than good, he can be great. And when he is great, there's absolutely no one like him. His books are incredibly entertaining, quite nostalgic, and often quite lovely. That said, he can dance on the borderline of good fiction and soapy drivel ripe with over-plotted gas. To be fair, most all of his books/stories have a little bit of both (he frequently kisses you with quality while simultaneously slapping you with pulp and grotesque garbage). The key to King maintaining his superiority in any given novel is dependent upon which of these tendencies (quality vs. drivel) wins out in the end. Unfortunately, in King's newest novel, 11/22/63, drivel won. In 'Salem's Lot, only his second published novel, quality won. In 'IT', quality again won.
That's not to say there wasn't a whole armada of drivel-driven passages and chapters (whoa, mama, there were indeed!). But what won out, when all was said and done, when the monster was finally (Spoiler Alert!) defeated, was a well-wrought story with characters so memorable one could almost feel their pulses through the page.
I don't think this is King's best writing -- see 'Salem's Lot and The Shining for that -- but I do believe this will be his legacy. I know a great many King fans will argue this tooth and nail, as they probably should (defining an author's legacy while he or she is still around to shape it is like arguing Obama's legacy after only one term in office: you can critique and celebrate past accomplishments, but there's still plenty of time to add to, and reshape, prior triumphs and/or failures). These days most King fans celebrate his Dark Tower novels as his masterpiece. Don't get me wrong, I dig Roland's fantastical quest in search of the Dark Tower and the Crimson King, but as it stands (more on this in a moment), the Dark Tower books are not his best and lasting work. They could turn out to be, as King has stated he intends to rewrite the entire series, shaping the whole story into a more consistent, more interlaced work. I still doubt they'll surpass the longevity of The Shining or IT, but they could.
IT really has all the right components to be his legacy. In IT, King has a terrifying and (crucial to this point) original monster in Pennywise. He has a cast of remarkably realistic characters (typical King). But he also has Derry. Derry is probably the most emblematic of King's characters yet. The town is so multifaceted, so interesting and horrifying, one cannot help but see it, smell it, fear it. Derry is what makes IT shine, and the creature and the cast only contribute to the town's captivating quality. In the end, you hate Derry, and you love Derry. Derry is home. Derry is hell. It's really quite beautiful.
Where the novel fails is where King as a writer typically fails: deus ex machina. The characters are continually set on a track from which they have no realistic chance of faltering from expectations. This point is not novel. Many have blasted King for writing what appear to be over-plotted behemoths in which characters always defeat evil and always succumb to the same temptations and shortfalls, as if King were using a plot wheel to direct his novels... what will Bill do next?...spin the wheel...ah!, the wheel says "Find Old Friend"...Bill finds Silver, his old bike. This propensity for cliche and predictable plot points can sink a book dead in the water, especially one so large and seemingly cumbersome as IT. But, surprisingly, this failure does not sink IT. In fact, perhaps conscious of this failure in a book like this (in which he is basically interweaving two books, each with the same plot, same setting, but one in which the characters are old, one in which they are young), King gives himself an out -- fate, destiny, the Other, the Turtle. His characters and their seemingly over-wrought actions and emotions are continually guided by an outside force, a force which we do not meet. It is this force (and not bad writing) which propels them toward an inevitable conclusion. One could, of course, argue that whether or not the deus ex machina is an actual character, in this case the Other, or whether it is merely an unintended failure on behalf of the author, it's still garbage, still trite. I can't argue with this point. I think it's probably correct to assert that, in retrospect, no matter the condition of the plot device, it's still an eyesore. But it's not the lasting impression, which is my point with this novel.
IT is a great read. I recommend this novel to all fans of good fiction, King buffs or not. It's a long book, probably too long in many respects, but the far bank is well worth trudging through the muddy middle. Give it a go. I think you'll be glad you did.
I'm a horror nut! Zombies in particular! Epidemics, end of all things! Also enjoyed Game of thrones very much!
Yes. The mind of King is a demented paradise which a reader could live a lifetime while never getting a good nights sleep!
Honestly, when it came out that the 11 yr old girl allowed 6! Yes count em 6 11/12/13yr old boys to gang bang her in the sewer and nobody remembered?? I'm sorry but the party would been at her house eery weekend if I was 13!! I'd of never forgotany girl willing to catch the TRAIn! Stephen you dirty old man you!! Shame shame!
Up towards the top!
It is the only name! Unless maybe name it ..Under Derry, It waits!
Stephen you dirty ole man you!! Thinking back there was a lot of sexual parts with this 11yr old girl?? What's up with that?? Realism actually is all I cared about at that age!! Still is!!