Movies TV

‘Sometimes dead is better’ — critics debate ‘Pet Sematary’ remake

Shirley McMarlin
By Shirley McMarlin
3 Min Read April 4, 2019 | 7 years Ago
Go Ad-Free today

“Sometimes dead is better.”

What better tagline for “Pet Sematary,” Paramount Pictures’ new take on Stephen King’s 1983 horror novel — also the subject of a 1989 Paramount movie?

A review from Rolling Stone sets the scene this way:

“What if your favorite pet died and you buried it in a place where it could come back to life? It’d maybe be a little different — and definitely a lot scarier — but hey, it’s still your beloved pooch, kitty or tweety bird, right? Bonus question: What if the same applied to humans?”

The movie opens with the Creed family, doctor Louis (Jason Clarke), his wife Rachel (Amy Seimetz), 8-year-old Ellie (Jeté Laurence), toddler Gage (twins Hugo and Lucas Lavoie) and Church the cat moving from Boston to rural Maine.

Soon Church falls prey to traffic on a nearby highway.

Enter the burial ground of the title, described thus by neighbor Jud Crandall (John Lithgow): “It brings things back … but they don’t come back the same.”

Refer back to the set-up for what’s to follow.

Rolling Stone writer Peter Travers calls the 2019 R-rated movie an improvement over the ’80s version, saying it “adds new twists to King’s novel yet stays incredibly faithful to its dark spirit.”

“The setting is bathed in darkness and dread from the opening frame. They stoke uneasiness, slowly building tension, then strike unexpectedly. They nail a few jump out of your seat moments. The cumulative effect makes the obvious scares more unnerving,” says Julian Roman, writing for movieweb.com.

Tribune News Service film writer Katie Walsh finds less to like in the remake, awarding two of four stars.

“It’s pretty ironic for a remake of an ’80s horror classic to choose the tagline ‘sometimes dead is better,’ especially when ‘Pet Sematary’ itself is a cautionary tale about the dangers of reviving the things you love,” Walsh says. “The story, and the tagline, practically beg one to apply the meta logic to the film itself. And just like the reanimated kitties, this remake of Mary Lambert’s truly chilling 1989 adaptation of Steven King’s novel just isn’t the same after being dragged out of the grave.”

This version “overpromises and underdelivers” by relying too much on standard horror tropes and archetypes, she says.

Maybe that’s because the original “was a squirrelly, wild-eyed movie. This version is more Hollywood smooth,” according to New York Times writer Glenn Kenny.

Thumbs up or down? Maybe you’ll have to see for yourself. Just mind this warning from King himself, who says he took his dog Molly — affectionately known as the Thing of Evil — to an advance screening:

Share

Categories:

Tags:

About the Writers

Shirley McMarlin is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Shirley by email at smcmarlin@triblive.com or via Twitter .

Push Notifications

Get news alerts first, right in your browser.

Enable Notifications

Content you may have missed

Enjoy TribLIVE, Uninterrupted.

Support our journalism and get an ad-free experience on all your devices.

  • TribLIVE AdFree Monthly

    • Unlimited ad-free articles
    • Pay just $4.99 for your first month
  • TribLIVE AdFree Annually BEST VALUE

    • Unlimited ad-free articles
    • Billed annually, $49.99 for the first year
    • Save 50% on your first year
Get Ad-Free Access Now View other subscription options