What was the meaning behind the underage gangbang?

>chases a killer, shape-shifting clown that lives in the sewers
>performs an indian ritual
>meets a giant intergalactic turtle named Maturin
>guardian of the "Beams" along with a 40 ft. cyborg bear
>killer clown is actually a bunch of floating orbs
>child gangbang
do people really like this shit?

Not to mention it's well over 1000 pages. Saw the book in the store and it's a huge brick.

its one of the best examples of serious character developement in modern lit

If I just watch the 2 hour movie instead will I still get the jist of it? I'm interested, just not enough to read a >1000 page book.

Stop making this thread, I swear I've seen this or some variant of it at least 3-4 other times in the past week.

it's just an ad for a movie, once it's out of theaters they'll put their advertising spend towards some other product

the movie is about half of the book so no

>What purpose does portraying an actual action one will probably engage in and it's effects and consequences have vs actions will you hopefully never have to carry out?

Try communicating your thoughts without green texting. I'm not going to try and interpret whatever the hell your saying.

>not being able to understand basic English
>being on a literature board

My phone corrected the its to it's, but apart from that it's perfectly easy to understand, don't be retarded

Talk about paranoid.
People talk about things that are in the public eye.

I don't speak stupid. I don't even try. I'm sorry if that bothers you.

friendship is magic

seriously, just read the book. he explains it in the scene.

C O C A I N I U M E X T R A C T

Why don't you explain it? That's the purpose of discussing literature on a forum.

>ur teh pervretLOLXDDD!!1

I loved this book as a kid, but never got round to re-reading it.

would it hold up to scrutiny from a more mature mindset, or is it shitty schlock?

When I read the book, I was starting to lose interest, but this scene gave me the boner to carry on. Maybe it was for that. I guess King snuck in the gangbang to see if his readers were paying attention, or if he's just get blind praise by people who are devouted fans of his (but rarely actually read his books).

As it turns out, it took 30+ years for anyone to talk about the scene. In the height of the evangelical movement in the 1980s, no one was outraged.

Wasn't the 'logic' behind it was that it removed the power from the word 'it'? As in, after the gangbang, 'it' would refer to sex rather than the monster?

I think this is explained in the book, but it's been a while since I've read it.

The clown represents a malevolent trickster god that feeds off of fear. Also, clowns are an easy go-to for a horror thriller (convenience factor).

The mother spider (its true form) represents its nature, an eight-legged web-ensnaring chaos-weaving force, that consumes the spirit of childhood (imagination and wonder).

Sex being symbolic of the hero's overcoming of the great monster / dragon is ancient. The female organ represents the unknown for the male, the unknown being where the deepest fear harbors from. By triumphantly connecting with the feminine (having sex) you overcome the boundary between yourself and the unknown and you renew your relationship with it, changing that fear into love.

If I'm reading into it too much and King is just a hack, I don't care. I like my interpretation better anyway.

>basic English is stupid

Greentext is a crutch for stupid people who can't express themselves.

>a medium that allows for the faster expression of ideas reduced to the simplest possible degree so ideas are communicated clearly and without obfuscation (which implies a good understanding of the ideas, hence partially implying intellectual) is a crutch for people who can't express themselves

-hence partially implying intelligence

Stephen King said something like this but in simpler terms, i.e., lost of innocence, becoming an adult.

We're honing our craft and approaching the platonic ideal in here, user. If you can't get with that I suggest you return to your easy on the carrots playpen.

but it's so ironic, user. That implies it's not the simplest possible degree of communication.

all Stephen King is schlock, but some of it is enjoyable schlock

It was really common for kids to have gangbangs in the sewers in the 50s. ask your parents

What implies that?

All of that sounds really cool out of context

This is probably the most serious response in the thread, and while I want to believe Mr. King had a thoughtful purpose behind it, I can only conclude that hes just a degenerate who included a pedo self service scene behind a mask of convoluted jargon as defense... I've heard, jokes aside, that he even wrote his "self insert" character as the one who enters the girl last, but idk if thats true

>If I just watch the 2 hour movie instead will I still get the jist of it?

Of the character development?
Fuck no. The movie blazes past, none of the characters are properly developed and some of them get literally no development at all. Stan and Mike have like, Stan and Mike both feel like they could be cut from the movie entirely without anything being lost, that's how little screentime and dialogue they get.

Not to mention that even in terms of barebones plot the movie is only has half the content of the book with the rest to come in a sequel.

Read the book if you want a story that is supported mostly by the merits of meticulously detailed character development, watch the movie if you want to jump in your seat from loud music stings and shit popping onto the screen.

The old TV mini-series, though seriously, seriously flawed in many respects, does a far better job of actually developing the characters than the new movie, mostly due to the increased runtime.

Read it. You'll probably enjoy it and pick up a lot of details you missed. The slower pieces of Derry history and life are much more enjoyable as you get older.