Pet Semetary (2019) review

    PET SEMETARY (2019) is te second adaptation of Stephen King's original novel. I should probably mention that Stephen King used to be my jam during the early 90s. I was like twelve when I discovered my love for him but wasn't quite mature enough to actually "get" him. A lot of his prose and ideas went over my head and it's on my list of things to do to re-read his stories as an adult when I've had a bit more life experience to understand his deeper themes.

    However, with this caveat out of the way, I'm going to say that I think Pet Semetary is the iconic Stephen King book. Not necessarily his best nor his most famous but it's the one that I think fully encapsulates the essence of why people like him so damned much (the other contender is It).

Getting some The Wicker Man flashbacks.

    In simple terms, Pet Semetary works because it is story that doesn't really need any of his larger (multi)verse to function. It's a deceptively simple story. There's a place where you can bring back the dead in a small town and after testing it on the fanily cat, tries it on his dead child. Grief is one of the shared universal experiences and more or less everyone whohas eve lost someone will probably admit they'd love the power of resurrection. It is the basis for most afterlife-including religions and has a huge place in our cultural mythology.

    Obviously, being a Stephen King novel, the act of resurrection is one that doesn't bring true life and the rest of the movie is dealing with the horrible consequences of subverting the natural order. The funny thing is that Stephen King is aware he's touching on larger themes in medicine. Rachel Creed had a sister named Zelda who suffered horribly before her death due to long illness. Issues of quality of life and struggling to hold onto life when it's an inevitable to end are themes that resonate much more as an adult than my adolescence.

Awww, such a cute little zombie kitty.

    But what about the movie? This is the second adaptation of the story with the original being something of a B+ movie classic. Denise Crosby and Dale Midkiss did a great job even if the movie has its flaws. Does this stand out as compared? Ehh, I'm going to say that this movie isn't great. It's not terrible but it's a considerable step down from It's first part that is now my gold-standard for Stephen King adaptations.

    Part of the issue is the movie is a little too try hard. The Native burial ground is depicted as a weird Mordor-esque environment and there's a few more scenes that work a little too much like special effects extravaganzas. The appeal of Stephen King books is that they bring the horrifying and surreal right into the living room of your average Suburbanite or small town reader. There's a few moments where there's some genuine horror at something unnatural entering into a "normal" life but these are surrounded by enough weirdness that you have to wonder why they're surprised.

Fog filled cemeteries are a bit try-hard.

    Jason Clarke does a decent job as Doctor Louis Creed but he actually is the one who gets the least amount of focus during the movie. Despite being the man who decides to use necromancy he doesn't believe in to bring back his daughter, he doesn't get to show the all-encompassing grief that motivates his character. You have to believe in the devastation of a man's soul and that he's at fault for not looking after his child (or at least believes he is). I don't think Jason Clarke or the movie pulls off.

    The real stars of the film are John Lithgow as Jud Crandall and Jete Laurence as Ellie Creed. The movie changes the victims of the car wreck from Gage to Ellie and I think this is a good decision since what works in book form (a infant terrorizing adults) doesn't necessarily translate to the screen. Jete Laurence does a very good job as a creepy undead young girl as well as a likeable living one. John Lithgow gives his all in the performance and seems like the only one who belongs in a Stephen King novel (not just movie).
  
    So, all in all, I think the original is probably a better adaptation despite the stand-out performances of Lithgow and Laurence. It's not a bad adaptation but lacks any real scares and I'm not a big fan of the ending being changed. There's some good decisions in the movie but I feel it's a little too dolled-up to work as a great King adaptation.

7/10