FILM REVIEW: PET SEMATARY (2019)

Ginger Nuts of Horror returns to the Pet Sematary

Whilst many sighed at the prospect of a new version of Pet Sematary I did not mind too much as I never had much love for the original film, which I saw on the cinema way back in 1989. One shudders at the sheer number of Stephen King adaptations which have hit the screens in the thirty years since we made that original cinematic journey to the Pet Sematary. The 1989 film was fairly faithful to the source material, this new version takes a more substantial detour from the book. However, I found the alterations in the third and final part to be an entertaining diversion, whether the many King diehards whom know the book back-to-front agree is another question.

This 2019 version was a solid, but unspectacular, take on what is an incredibly bleak book and very difficult to film without getting too schlocky or trashy. It is not creative enough to rank amongst the best of King adaptation, however, there are a lot worse on the market. Nine-year-old Ellie (Jeté Laurence) definitely has a much bigger part which cleverly alters the dynamics of the family unit and in particular the final third of the film. If film goers unfamiliar with the original King novel are encouraged to read the book they’re going to get a number of surprises that should be seen a major plus point in a story which is too familiar to many. As I said, the 1989 film was more faithful to the book, this adaptation strayed further, but could have updated even more by ramping up the evil and sense of threat, which seemed to be lacking from the overall atmosphere of the film.

The story is so well-known I’m not going to spend much time on that. Louis and Rachel Creed escape the rat race and buy a rural house close to a very busy road, which has an ancient Pet Sematary lurking behind their property. The family befriend elderly neighbour Jud Crandall (John Lithgow) who introduces Louis to the secret burial ground behind the Pet Sematary after the much-loved family pet cat Church is killed on the deadly road. The next day the cat is back, but changed, and off we go.

I have to give a special mention to the cat Church, as he was a major disappointment in both films. Why? Because in the novel he is SCARY AS HELL! I first read Pet Sematary as a 13-year-old and reread it thirty years later and one night during the revisit I had a nightmare and jumped clean out of bed. I was sure that damned cat was in the bedroom. That’s the power a scary book that gets under your skin can have which a film can never recreate, especially if it relies on jump scares, which this does. In the novel the cat is described as having a jerky kind of movement absent in both films and the level of cruelty is downplayed significantly. All Church does in the new film is scratch a couple of people, hiss a lot, kill a bird and scare the little boy. Disappointing, as in the book it truly oozed both evil and menace.

Along the way there are some decent jump scares, however, the majority of these are connected to the back-story of Rachel Creed (Amy Seimetz) who has unresolved issues over the death of a sister many years previously rather than the Pet Sematary itself. This went unexplored in the original film but is given a decent amount of screen time this time out.

The trailer (and poster) is seriously misleading as it gives off a slight folk-horror vibe, with a parade of kids with freaky masks marching to the Pet Sematary with a dead dog in a wheel-barrow. Sadly, the scene from the trailer is not expanded upon in the film and none of these other children have any part in the film and only appear in this one scene. It was freaky and ripe for development in a film that had very few characters. Featuring some other kids could have broadened the story out somewhat and was a missed opportunity to do something different.

And why not? Ellie Creed has a bigger role in this version and most crucially in the corresponding scene from the original which tears the family apart. I had not read any other reviews and welcomed this major alteration, after all, this scene from the original is highly memorable and amongst the best in the film. It would have been pointless to simply recreate it shot by shot. 
  
The acting was solid, if unspectacular, John Lithgow plays Jud Crandall very similar to Fred Gwynne in the original, if not quite as bug-eyed. Both parents interacted well with the child actors, for instance, when they attempt to explain what happens after death, but ultimately none of the leads are stretched too far.

Its weakness is the incredible familiarity of the story. We all know where it’s heading, with very few surprises along the way as we head into very standard horror-by-numbers territory into an ending that seemed quite rushed. And for the record: in the book, to find the supernatural burial ground it was much further behind the Pet Sematary and was a true hike to reach. I read elsewhere that this film was attempting to bring Stephen King to a new younger audience, hence the poster states: “From the director of IT” and so I hope it succeeds in showcasing an amazing book (and cat nightmares) to a new generation. Finally, to be fair to the film, it may well detour from the book but it does not cop out with its ending.
​
3/5
Tony Jones

If you preferred the original film we published a review yesterday for it read it by clicking here