Pet Sematary (remake)

peteeeed

https://twitter.com/IMDb/status/1050011968072032256

spacecoyote

This looks like it could be good. King always said that, to him, this was his scariest book. Its a pretty dark concept

Chris_Heilong

The beats look similar to the older movie but wrapped up in a modern look.

weiland79

Read a lot of his books as a young teenager and like when the first trailer of IT was shown it made me want to read the book again. Which i did and which im going to do with this.

Unfortunately IT fell way short of a good adaptation for me and while it may be a decent horror film on its own, it really fails to capture the tone of the book, which if you haven't read it, is nothing short of a modern masterpiece.

I dont remember the pet cemetery book at all so i dont know if King created such a large and involved world as he did with IT.
A world that would be difficult to recreate and keep the fans happy i suppose but hopefully they wont make large and nonsensical changes to the story with this one.

Pet Semetary scared the ****e out of me as a teen when I read it. I’d agree with King on his ‘scariest book’ statement!

nc6000

We have six months to read the book. Thankfully it's not one of the really long ones.

seamusk84

Delighted to see this! Just re-read the book last year, forgot how creepy it is.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

Pet Semetary is one of my all-time favourite novels. Was about 13 or 14 when I first read it and it scared the absolute s**t out of me. I enjoyed the original movie for what it was, but lets be honest it was never intended to be a cinematic classic and its aged horribly, so pretty excited to see it given a big budget for this one, plus John Lithgow (I'm already heavily invested on that casting alone).

Sugarlumps

Totally disagree with its aged horribly. Jason Clarke is a horrific actor, wooden as it gets. Fred Gwynne was fantastic in the original. Cage Creed running around with the scalpel. Featured The Ramones.

p to the e

Looks interesting. The drum sounds give me a feel of "Hereditary" off it and that font is very "Stranger Things". Here's hoping it's as good as either.

Dial Hard

spacecoyote wrote: »

This looks like it could be good. King always said that, to him, this was his scariest book. Its a pretty dark concept

I'd be inclined to agree with him. I've re-read it several times over the years and it never gets less scary, imo.

Hitman3000

Read as much if Stephen King books S I could when I was younger. Pet Cemetery and Salem's Lots scared the crap out of me as a teenager. As scary as PC is I'd love to see a close to the book remake of Salem's lot as possible, David Souls Salem's Lot was ok but I think it could have been done better .
PC has resonated more with me the older I get as the loss of a child is the scariest thing I can imagine.

Tony EH

Um...don't know what to feel about this.


Sometimes dead is better.

Walter Bishop

Hope they do a good job on this, Pet Semetary is easily one of King's best books and has an actual ending unlike a lot of his stuff.

QuintusFabius

Wow, this looks good.
Great book too, might give it a re read.
And John Lithgow looks like a good casting choice for the old neighbour(can't remember his name)

Tony EH

QuintusFabius wrote: »

And John Lithgow looks like a good casting choice for the old neighbour(can't remember his name)

Jud Crandall.


And it's going to be hard to be Herman Munster in the part.

wezzopalooza

Looking forward to this, will sort out my King fix until IT Chapter 2 later next year
Though the trailer didn't focus on it, the Zelda character will be featured in this one too, still probably the most memorable aspect of the '89 version. Watched it again recently, along with the excellent documentary on it, "Unearthed & Untold: The Path to Pet Sematary".
The '89 film still holds up well enough, though the daughter's acting is awful to the point of distraction, it looks like that's been rectified this time around anyway.

Heckler

Was the first SK book I read as a teenager and it fairly rattled me. Such a dark dark premise and a harrowing look at grief. I've now read pretty much all his work (gave up on the Dark Tower about halfway through the last book). He was at his finest at Salems lot, Carrie, Christine etc. The Bachman books were terrific.

His private life was crazy, sitting at a typewriter with cotton buds stuffed up his nose to stop the blood from all the cocaine he was taking dripping on the keys. He doesn't remember writing a bunch of stuff.

Pet Sematary (2018) if done well could be very good.

ARNOLD J RIMMER

I remember seeing the movie as a kid which caused nightmares.

2smiggy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Yrgaq2u3IM

second trailer , few more spoilers than the first. Could be good thou !

Heckler

As i mentioned earlier such a grim premise. The book was one of Kings finest in terms of scary. I read it as a young teen and was terrified. The joys of having a mother working in a bookshop at the time who had no idea what she was bring home.

spacecoyote

2smiggy wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Yrgaq2u3IM

second trailer , few more spoilers than the first. Could be good thou !

FYP

homerun_homer

I used to be in touch with the director online in the early noughties through a site he used to run. When I saw that he was directing this I was gobsmacked. I hope it turns out to be a really good movie and does well at the box office.

Franz Von Peppercorn

The shorter books of King make the best movies. IT is too long for a movie. Misery was a great book and a great movie. Pet Cemetery is another potential movie classic if done right.

homerun_homer

I saw this last night. It was rubbish, and it had the audience unintentionally in stitches at quite a few parts, particularly towards the end. I hadn't seen the original, and I didn't know the story so I was pretty much going in blind as to the plot. A remake or re-adaptation such as this should try clear the deck of the usual cliches and horror tropes that you would associate with this kind of film in the past, but it's full of them. There are no surprises to be had, the only jumps are from the usual loud noise, but really the only time this happened

was with a truck speeding by within the opening minutes.

And once something like that happens it's like a loud alarm, screaming at you

that a truck is going to knock someone down at some point.

Don't start me on how bad the CG was in it either.

I should have finally gone to see US instead of this.

branie2

I'm going to see it on Friday

correction

branie2 wrote: »

I'm going to see it on Friday

As am I. Reviews have been mostly very good tbf.

BigPoppaDump

correction wrote: »

As am I. Reviews have been mostly very good tbf.

In the overwhelming majority of other groups and forums I frequent, people have nothing good to say about it.

correction

I'm only going off critics. It's got an 88% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 70 Metacritic score. Very good for a horror tbf.

Mr E

Critics thought Us was fantastic, and I thought it was underwhelming and overrated.

Still looking forward to this though.

correction

Although I did like Us it was definitely a critic friendly movie with how it was directed. I wouldn't have thought a Pet Sematary remake would have fallen under that bracket but I haven't seen it yet so who knows.

El Duda

The critics seemed to go mad for the IT remake despite the fact that it was just another jump scare film.

I'm not holding my breath on this one. The trailer gives too much away.

Mrcaramelchoc

there is too much happening in the trailer.i dont think it will top the old one.having said that the original one wasnt brilliant either.ill go to it though.

branie2

I'm reading the novel at the moment, and it's very good so far.

El Duda

"Who makes Jason Clarke a star?"

The Enbalmer

branie2 wrote:

I'm reading the novel at the moment, and it's very good so far.

It's garbage..just like 99% of the rubbish Stephen King churns out.

El Duda

I read IT recently...

When it's good it's really good but there is so much crap in there. At its worst it is the ramblings of a coked up lunatic.

The Enbalmer

El Duda wrote: »

I read IT recently...

When it's good it's really good but there is so much crap in there. At its worst it is the ramblings of a coked up lunatic.

Let's have this right..IT concenrs the activities of a supernatural or extraterrestrial entity that has lived in the sewers(!) for thousands of years.


After 600 pages of complete bolloxology the said alien is destroyed with an asthma inhaler by a bunch of loser kids.


Salems Lot is memorable for one thing only: The ludicrous line about an "evil house attracting evil men".


King is a charlatan..he could'nt write Fcuck on a dusty blind.

Telecaster58

El Duda wrote: »

The critics seemed to go mad for the IT remake despite the fact that it was just another jump scare film.

I'm not holding my breath on this one. The trailer gives too much away.

I read that review in the IT. The only thing I agreed with was that the young girl in it was really good.
The film was a bit ponderous with a couple of jump scares and a narrative that was very contrived. The last 20 minutes wasn't bad but by that time I was past caring.

The Enbalmer

The Enbalmer wrote: »

Let's have this right..IT concenrs the activities of a supernatural or extraterrestrial entity that has lived in the sewers(!) for thousands of years.


After 600 pages of complete bolloxology the said alien is destroyed with an asthma inhaler by a bunch of loser kids.


Salems Lot is memorable for one thing only: The ludicrous line about an "evil house attracting evil men".


King is a charlatan..he could'nt write Fcuck on a dusty blind.

He has churned out a lot of crap and is highly overrated. But amongst the crap there are a few gems like The Shining and Needful Things, both brilliant stories

branie2

The film was very good; very different from the novel, but I enjoyed it all the same.

cena

I have never seen the original movie or read the book. It was a good movie. Acting was great

s7ryf3925pivug

I was jealous of the guy that walked out.

Acting was good alright. Otherwise it’s just a bad film. For about the first half, I was entertained by it, in a laugh at the stupid film kinda way. Then it got gross and was no fun. Cheap shots that disgusted rather than thrilled or frightened.

My wife said she was glad we went to the cinema to watch it, because that way there was no sense of our home being violated from having it on here.

Fr Tod Umptious

Heckler wrote: »

As i mentioned earlier such a grim premise. The book was one of Kings finest in terms of scary. I read it as a young teen and was terrified. The joys of having a mother working in a bookshop at the time who had no idea what she was bring home.

I saw the original movie many times in my late teens/early twenties.

About a decade later I read the book.

Even though I knew the polt and the whole thing, the book scared the living daylights out of me.

gmisk

Konnor Lemon Mink wrote: »

I was jealous of the guy that walked out.

Acting was good alright. Otherwise it’s just a bad film. For about the first half, I was entertained by it, in a laugh at the stupid film kinda way. Then it got gross and was no fun. Cheap shots that disgusted rather than thrilled or frightened.

My wife said she was glad we went to the cinema to watch it, because that way there was no sense of our home being violated from having it on here.

Saw it tonight....such a crushing disappointment, the book is excellent from what I remember but not a slave to it by any means.
I thought the acting was poor bar the wife and John Lithgow. I also thought the cgi was distractingly bad, I didn't find it scary at all and to be honest by the end I was just bored.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

One of my all-time favourite novels and while I've never been overwhelmed by the '80s adaptation, at the very least it was entertaining and felt like they put in a decent effort.

Needless to say I had high hopes for this newest adaptation, with the recent take on another Stephen King classic, It, being exceptionally good and considering how cinematography has come along in comparison to when the '80s one was made.

Sadly, the first half of the film was just boring, with terrible dialogue and Jason Clarke felt like he was phoning in his performance, while John Lithgow was criminally underutilized when they could have beefed up Judd's character a bit rather than just use him as an exposition mouthpiece.

The second half of the film felt a bit more polished and I liked some of the changes it made, but ultimately it just didn't add anything special, which is a shame because I do think the novel is one of King's best works and this film just doesn't do it any justice.

p to the e

I felt it was weak acting, bad direction and, in parts, pretty damn corny. And why didn't anybody give the cat a good bath and a brush?

I haven't read the novel or seen the original adaptation. Did the young boy have "the shin" as he could see dead black lad?

Also the part where Jason Clarke is telling the toddler to not open the car door for anybody got a great laugh in my screen.

Fysh

For how simple the plot was (and how shallow the characters were) it sure sh*ted on long enough. It's a pity too, because the sound design was good and there were some nice visuals at times, but all of it was let down by shallow characters and a fixation on crap jumpscares.

I thought it was a real pity that

the conversations with the resurrected daughter (where she realises she's dead and has been brought back) didn't lead anywhere more interesting than "so now I must eat you because demonic whatnot". Yes, I know that's also in the book but if they changed which kid got killed they could've at least explored something new with it...

TerrorFirmer

Really disappointed in this. Despite having a healthy budget for a film of this type, good cast, and the benefits of modern film-making, manages to be completely inferior to the original film, which in itself was only ever a sort of respectably watchable affair.

It's such an incredibly simple premise and so promising, but this film just somehow gets it all wrong. It just plods along with no real earned suspence or emotional connections, pretty wooden dialogue that's plain dreadful in spots, and limps towards a predictable and unsatisfying conclusion.

DareGod

I put this on last night. Jesus, I had to turn it off after 45 minutes. It was atrocious. And I'm not usually difficult to please when it comes to horrors.