The first film adaptation of Pet Sematary from 1989 is largely faithful to the book (its screenplay was written by Stephen King himself!) and remains one of the most revered films based on King's works. If you compare the 89' Pet Sematary with the 1990 IT mini series, while both are very good, the finale to IT features a lavish special effects heavy sequence that doesn't quite hold up today. So if you're all in on remakes you could see how a new film adaptation of IT with today's special effects could be quite extraordinary, even if Tim Curry's Pennywise will never be outdone in your eyes.
Pet Sematary however doesn't feature such special effects. Nor have its sequences withered over time. The 89' film remains quite effective and holds up well today. Where one could see the need for a reattempt at adapting IT, the necessity for remaking Pet Sematary may seem less obvious. There are always huge chunks of story left on the table when adapting a Stephen King novel, but for the most part the 89' Pet Sematary adaptation captures the core elements of the novel. So a remake here feels less like an opportunity and more like a cash grab playing on our nostalgia.
"So how was it?" you ask?
It was good. This new Pet Sematary is a fairly solid film all around and maintains one crucial piece of the novel that was excised from the 89' film.
THE PLOT
The Creed family has just moved from fast paced city life in Boston to a slower, quieter life in the country of Ludlow, Maine. Purchasing an old farm house on the edge of a dense forest, immediately the family senses something strange about the property. Not far from the house is a macabre burial site, a place where the locals have come for generations to inter their pets, simply named the Pet Sematary. Their neighbor, a kind old man, talks of a place beyond the Pet Sematary, a place with powers to resurrect the dead. But those who come back are not the same. A dark force sets itself upon the Creed family, tragedy following, tempting them to travel beyond the Pet Sematary.
INITIAL IMPRESSIONS
First off, the advertising campaign for this film I felt was really strong. On a weekend where two movies I really wanted to see came out at once, Shazam! and Pet Sematary, I couldn't just see one. I went and did a double feature, something I haven't done in a long time. And it was worth it!
Pet Sematary is easily one of Stephen King's more potent stories, touching on very real human feelings such as grief, loss, and something every human being in history has wondered about: the afterlife and resurrection. If you could bring a loved one back from the dead, would you? These themes alone allow Pet Sematary to connect to people on multiple levels, and I feel the best stories have real human connections (there are exceptions to this, of course).
For myself, I was most effected by the very real thoughts of children in danger. Being a parent myself, the loss of a child is one of the greatest horrors I can imagine. This film really channels those fears well, the movie's greatest strength. The child actors deliver great performances, especially the actress Jete' Laurence who plays the nine year old Ellie. There is a genuine feeling of tension from Ellie. The cast in general is very strong, and John Lithgow was a great choice to follow in Fred Gwynne's footsteps.
This adaptation of Pet Sematary includes the WENDIGO myth, which was absent from original film. I don't know if someone can be a "Wendigo-enthusiast" but I think I might be one. I was totally geeking out and enthralled about the story's mythology being grounded in the Wendigo legend. It added an authenticity to the story and a deeper dimension to the narrative. And, as strangely as it sounds, including the Wendigo aspect adds real world mysticism, making the events feel more grounded (I know it sounds crazy, but that's how it felt). It called to mind the early colonial days in which settlers were going to places like Maine and elsewhere along the East coast... and disappearing. It felt as if the Creed family had stumbled upon one of those places.
I appreciated how the film played on our knowledge of the previous film and book, and subverted some of those expectations. But while it changed a few things, it still told the same core story.
Something about the movie didn't quite get me though. There's a plot device where Louis Creed sees visions of a deceased college student, Victor Pascow, that didn't work for me. It becomes a key plot device that's missing something. There wasn't a strong enough connection between Louis and Pascow established in the film, making it feel more contrived, more like a tired trope. It's the kind of thing I'd let slide in older horror movies, but not today. It's not a big deal though and didn't break the film.
Then there's the locations and sets. I loved the look of the Pet Sematary in the film, but it looked to me like the filmmakers went a little overboard with the location beyond the deadfall. I liked the scary forest and the swamp, but I felt the mountainous peak was a little much. A location like that in Maine would surely be noticed, nor very hard to find. Again, it's a nitpick and not a big deal, but a case where a different approach would've felt more believable to me.
THE VERDICT
For anyone who knows the previous film or the book, this is a dark, bleak story and this new film isn't any brighter. The film has a lot of great moments of scares and tension, enhanced by a strong cast of actors. It's a slower ride than 2017's IT remake, but hits a little closer to real human fears. There are major changes to the original story, if only for the sake of being different, but nothing that alters the trajectory of the story. Ultimately the same story is being told. I won't say it's better than the original film, but I don't feel its worse. Overall, this is another strong horror movie for the current horror boom.
Overall Ranking: 6 out of 10
Nude-O-Meter: 0 out of 10
For my thoughts on 2017's IT and other current horror films, check out these other posts below
No comments:
Post a Comment