So, I got back from PET SEMATARY...
Apr. 14th, 2019 08:28 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ladyofleithian...and it’s honestly a mixed bag.
I guess I should say that honestly, the movie itself is not a poorly made film. The suspense and tension is very well-done. The acting is solid, and definitely better than, say, Dale Midkiff as Louis in the original Pet Sematary (who, bless his fucking heart, came off as a little wooden at times). The girl who plays Ellie is probably the stand-out; in the original, she came off as a little bit bratty and not quite likeable, but here, she’s absolutely sweet and endearing and adorable, which makes her being hit by a truck in this version even more gutwrenching. I daresay it’s one of the most endearing child performances since Danielle Harris as Jamie Lloyd in Halloween 4 and 5. Even the cats who play Church are absolutely amazing — they’re good in terms of being at first endearing and adorable before turning mean and malicious. Indeed, the film does preserve some of the essence of the original with making the Creeds endearing, as that was a selling point in the original novel, just how loveable they were before all the really bad stuff happened to them.
The cinematography is also gorgeous. Like the 1989 version, it has genuinely beautiful cinematography, such as the opening shot, and plenty more. Overall, the film itself has a lot of obvious knowledge of how film works. It isn’t an incompetent mess. The dialogue flows smoother than the 1989 version.
And changes in adaptations can make sense. The problem? Ellie being killed instead of Gage makes no sense. Biffer being Jud’s dog instead of Spot is a more minor detail, but still makes no sense. How Ellie meets Jud (falling off the deadfall) makes no sense — especially when she somehow gets a beesting in the fall. Pascow visiting Gage instead of Ellie makes no sense — one, a ghost with most of his brain showing would scare the daylights out of a two year old let alone an eight year old, and two, two year olds can’t really vocalize what they’ve seen. Ellie deciding to randomly wander off and meet Jud makes no sense — there was really no reason that Jud couldn’t have met the Creeds like in the novel (though the relationship between Jud and Ellie was by and large well-done and endearing, and actually adds an additional layer as to the Sematary’s evil in terms of preying on Jud’s friendship with this young girl to get him to influence Louis to resurrect Church, therefore indirectly leading to Ellie’s death...so I guess well-played, filmmakers). Talking of Jud, he came off as a little creepy, while in the book he was a genuinely well-intentioned, likeable character (though honestly, no one could replace Jud from the 1989 version). I think Jud was the sole performance that didn’t work. And some of the stuff they cut also made no sense — there was no reason that they couldn’t have included Timmy Baterman, especially since Jud brings it up to Louis in the novel to try and persuade him not to bury Gage in the Sematary. Plus it sets up the novel’s major plot point of what happens to resurrected humans. So honestly, Ellie randomly taunting Jud with things she has no business knowing about really doesn’t fly unless you’re familiar with the source material. Not to mention her briefly turning into Norma. And the movie does a fantastic home run over the point when it has Ellie knock out Louis and bury Rachel in the Pet Sematary, which invalidates the fact that in the novel, the Pet Sematary was getting to Louis the same way it did Jud. The whole point of Pet Sematary was one man’s mental deterioration after the death of his son, and this movie version not only missed the point, but wasn’t even in the same dimension as the point.
And I’m usually forgiving when it comes to adaptations. I didn’t mind Faramir’s initial desire to take the Ring in the Two Towers movie, mostly because it amplified how powerful and sinister the Ring was. I thought that the 1992 Dracula was done beautifully, and that enacts a major change from the book. I was even willing to forgive the Dark Tower movie, especially since it was more a continuation than an adaptation. I’m not the sort who goes, “They got the character’s hair color wrong, boo, zero stars”, but it was less of an adaptation of Pet Sematary and more someone’s live action fanfic. (Seriously, I would not be shocked if this was found on AO3.)
Is it the worst Stephen King adaptation ever? No. It’s a very well-shot, well-acted movie. It’s not without redeeming value. But the changes made make no sense and ultimately hurt the story. If it was a movie without any ties to the original tale, I would say it’s wonderful. As an adaptation, it’s terrible. It could have been a lot more. It’s the equivalent of a brilliant student who won’t apply themselves and that?
That’s pretty tragic.
So overall? Rent this one. Seriously.
I guess I should say that honestly, the movie itself is not a poorly made film. The suspense and tension is very well-done. The acting is solid, and definitely better than, say, Dale Midkiff as Louis in the original Pet Sematary (who, bless his fucking heart, came off as a little wooden at times). The girl who plays Ellie is probably the stand-out; in the original, she came off as a little bit bratty and not quite likeable, but here, she’s absolutely sweet and endearing and adorable, which makes her being hit by a truck in this version even more gutwrenching. I daresay it’s one of the most endearing child performances since Danielle Harris as Jamie Lloyd in Halloween 4 and 5. Even the cats who play Church are absolutely amazing — they’re good in terms of being at first endearing and adorable before turning mean and malicious. Indeed, the film does preserve some of the essence of the original with making the Creeds endearing, as that was a selling point in the original novel, just how loveable they were before all the really bad stuff happened to them.
The cinematography is also gorgeous. Like the 1989 version, it has genuinely beautiful cinematography, such as the opening shot, and plenty more. Overall, the film itself has a lot of obvious knowledge of how film works. It isn’t an incompetent mess. The dialogue flows smoother than the 1989 version.
And changes in adaptations can make sense. The problem? Ellie being killed instead of Gage makes no sense. Biffer being Jud’s dog instead of Spot is a more minor detail, but still makes no sense. How Ellie meets Jud (falling off the deadfall) makes no sense — especially when she somehow gets a beesting in the fall. Pascow visiting Gage instead of Ellie makes no sense — one, a ghost with most of his brain showing would scare the daylights out of a two year old let alone an eight year old, and two, two year olds can’t really vocalize what they’ve seen. Ellie deciding to randomly wander off and meet Jud makes no sense — there was really no reason that Jud couldn’t have met the Creeds like in the novel (though the relationship between Jud and Ellie was by and large well-done and endearing, and actually adds an additional layer as to the Sematary’s evil in terms of preying on Jud’s friendship with this young girl to get him to influence Louis to resurrect Church, therefore indirectly leading to Ellie’s death...so I guess well-played, filmmakers). Talking of Jud, he came off as a little creepy, while in the book he was a genuinely well-intentioned, likeable character (though honestly, no one could replace Jud from the 1989 version). I think Jud was the sole performance that didn’t work. And some of the stuff they cut also made no sense — there was no reason that they couldn’t have included Timmy Baterman, especially since Jud brings it up to Louis in the novel to try and persuade him not to bury Gage in the Sematary. Plus it sets up the novel’s major plot point of what happens to resurrected humans. So honestly, Ellie randomly taunting Jud with things she has no business knowing about really doesn’t fly unless you’re familiar with the source material. Not to mention her briefly turning into Norma. And the movie does a fantastic home run over the point when it has Ellie knock out Louis and bury Rachel in the Pet Sematary, which invalidates the fact that in the novel, the Pet Sematary was getting to Louis the same way it did Jud. The whole point of Pet Sematary was one man’s mental deterioration after the death of his son, and this movie version not only missed the point, but wasn’t even in the same dimension as the point.
And I’m usually forgiving when it comes to adaptations. I didn’t mind Faramir’s initial desire to take the Ring in the Two Towers movie, mostly because it amplified how powerful and sinister the Ring was. I thought that the 1992 Dracula was done beautifully, and that enacts a major change from the book. I was even willing to forgive the Dark Tower movie, especially since it was more a continuation than an adaptation. I’m not the sort who goes, “They got the character’s hair color wrong, boo, zero stars”, but it was less of an adaptation of Pet Sematary and more someone’s live action fanfic. (Seriously, I would not be shocked if this was found on AO3.)
Is it the worst Stephen King adaptation ever? No. It’s a very well-shot, well-acted movie. It’s not without redeeming value. But the changes made make no sense and ultimately hurt the story. If it was a movie without any ties to the original tale, I would say it’s wonderful. As an adaptation, it’s terrible. It could have been a lot more. It’s the equivalent of a brilliant student who won’t apply themselves and that?
That’s pretty tragic.
So overall? Rent this one. Seriously.
no subject
Date: 2019-04-15 05:08 am (UTC)forgiving when it comes to adaptations Yes, me, too. When Scarlett's other two children got pruned from Gone With The Wind, that made sense and made room for more angst for Scarlett, in that Bonnie was her only child and thus when Bonnie died it was more tragic.
no subject
Date: 2019-04-15 08:00 am (UTC)And I didn’t think of Gone With The Wind. Good call!