'Pet Sematary'—Film Review

Stephen King’s cult classic novel, Pet Sematary, has been resurrected for the second time. Thirty years on from the first adaptation, the release of Kolsch and Widmyer’s chilling new spin on the gruesome tale has polarised opinions. Such a response is unsurprising, given the daring alterations to both the plot, and the characters. Did the alterations pay off, or is dead really better?

Questionable Changes

Without trying to sound too much like a the-book-was-better kind of fan, there were certain changes in the latest adaptation that failed to encapsulate the intended tone of the novel. The choice to have Ellie Creed killed by the Orinocotruck, instead of her younger brother, was a bold move that received ample criticism before the film had even been released. Despite such agitations, the decision to make such a change was a wise one, as it better suited the direction in which the writers were taking the narrative. The original sequence of events may have hindered creativity, and left little room to explore the tale from a new angle. Having said this, the transformed storyline was still not preferable to the original. In the book, and the 1989 adaptation, the premature death of Gage Creed was devastating. In this remake, it was hard to feel anything over Ellie’s passing, even though it was still a child perishing in tragic circumstances. Perhaps this is in part due to a slight lack of character development.

Style Over Substance?

Although the dark imagery used throughout the film was undoubtedly stylish, and appeasing for viewers, at times it felt as though things were included purely for this reason despite their lack of relevance to the story. To elaborate, certain elements, such as the animal masks donned by the children-led funeral procession at the start of the film, were unnecessary and felt as if they had been wedged in purely for aesthetic purposes that could be exploited in advertisements. Other than such quirky props and an overly generous use of darkness, the film did well to bring the town of Ludlow to life. It perfectly encapsulated the Maine autumn time—a highly satisfying aesthetic for the seasoned horror fanatic—and successfully replicated the pictures painted by King in the novel. Because of this, such faults can be forgiven.

Character Qualms

Expanding on an earlier point—despite impressive performances from the cast, at times the character development felt slightly limited. Jud Crandall—the loveable, well-meaning neighbour to the Creeds—received surprisingly little screen time for such a focal character, and was depicted in a way that left him feeling cold and distant, even towards Ellie who he was supposedly very fond of. Victor Pascow’s ghost, too, was painted in a light that better reflected contemporary expectations, rather than the character he was initially crafted to be. More menacing than benevolent, the character was reduced to tropes and jump scares in attempt to pander to new wave horror audiences, whereas the original adaptation was able to capture the creepy nature of a ghost, without tarnishing the character’s intent.

Final Thoughts

Critiques aside, Kolsch and Widmyer’s adaptation of King’s classic was overall highly enjoyable. It is undoubtedly something that can be returned to time and time again as a respectable installment in the King universe. Its quirky, yet dark, depiction of a morbid masterpiece will undoubtedly garner it a devoted cult following. Although the decision to rewrite the tale in today’s setting did not entirely suit the narrative, it has helped expose a classic to a whole new generation of blooming horror fanatics, and for that it should be praised.