Pet Sematary -- Stephen King re-adaptation April 2019

jenviea wrote: ↑
I saw a bit of the first adaptation on AMC a while back and I couldn't understand why Fred Gwynne showed the cemetery to the young father in the first place

If I remember correctly, the family cat died while his wife and kids where away visiting their grandparents, and Louis is wondering how he will break the news to his kids (he has an argument with his wife prior to this incident about death and she doesn't want her kids to talk about it or something because when she was young she's been traumatized due to her sister's death after being left alone with her). Judd the neighbor tries to help him and brings him to the indian burial ground where he claims some animals came back to life after being buried there. The reasoning being, you won't have to talk to your kids about their cat being dead if he comes back, and no one will be the wiser.

Yes that's all true but it still seemed Judd was aware of the possible temptations and consequences and it wasn't an easy stroll through the forest so later on I'm like, dude you should've never took him there in the first place!

Count that... 2, not 1, but 2 crappy directors remaking a film that IMO will not best the ambience/mood of the 80s version.
Plus will they be able to top young Gage's performance from the original, which still to this day haunts and terrifies audiences? (Hint: No).

This is one of the few movies that scared the hell outta me as a youngster, at points its disturbing, lets see if this re-make can deliver.

Seems like YT has a new camping feature



Filmmakers give their reasons on the big change from novel

https://ew.com/movies/2019/02/07/pet-sematary-change/

jenviea wrote: ↑ Filmmakers give their reasons on the big change from novel

https://ew.com/movies/2019/02/07/pet-sematary-change/

I'm not going to get into a long post about why the producer's excuse on changing it from Gage > older sister is a cop out/conforming to the PC-norms that are plaguing modern Hollywood films (not to mention changing the story from the original King classic) but let's just bring it down to one important question:

What would frighten the audience more in a horror film?

a) 8-10 year old girl killing people wearing a mask and relying heavily on CGI

or

b) 2-3 year old actor, who through the use of camera angles, lighting and clever techniques terrified the audiences in the 80s and still to this day, is one of THE most terrifying portraits of a child onscreen

They should stick to their own movie's tagline - Sometimes, when considering redoing a horror classic, keeping it dead is better.

newt_101 wrote: ↑The current 87% is surprising IMO

Small sample invites caution but specialist sites Bloody Disgusting and Dread Central are positive

newt_101 wrote: ↑ Count that... 2, not 1, but 2 crappy directors remaking a film that IMO will not best the ambience/mood of the 80s version.
Plus will they be able to top young Gage's performance from the original, which still to this day haunts and terrifies audiences? (Hint: No).

Liked the book...hated the 80's movie...hope this one is better.

I'm waiting for it really hard, will read the book also. The only thing is that the trailer opens up too much of the plot

The originator himself weighs in on the adaptation's major narrative shift (he's pleased with the adaptation)

https://ew.com/movies/2019/03/29/stephe ... ry-change/

If you see a bootlegged version watermarked with STEPHEN KING on the video, it was the author's screener

The final (enough already!) trailer

Sometimes remakes should remain dead. Now I haven't read the book or seen the original but to me this was just so meh.

You have the usual and overdone horror tropes with crescendoing sound effects which does its a job to give you the odd startle. But it ends in such a ridiculousl manner that I don't know why I bothered watching this

5/10

MusicBox wrote: ↑ This is one of the few movies that scared the hell outta me as a youngster, at points its disturbing, lets see if this re-make can deliver.

I recently saw the new version and was very underwhelmed. Now I wanna see the original film from 1989 which I never got around to seeing when it was released. Does anyone know where I can get a copy of it? The public library doesn't seem to have it. I don't download torrents anymore and gone are the days of Blockbuster Videos. LOL

Mr_Fanta wrote: ↑ I recently saw the new version and was very underwhelmed. Now I wanna see the original film from 1989 which I never got around to seeing when it was released. Does anyone know where I can get a copy of it? The public library doesn't seem to have it. I don't download torrents anymore and gone are the days of Blockbuster Videos. LOL

Stream online - use VPN if the 'copyright' issue bothers you?

newt_101 wrote: ↑ Stream online - use VPN if the 'copyright' issue bothers you?

Where do I stream it online? At this very moment I'm not a VPN subscriber.

May check out Queen Video's going out of business sale happening right now. Will see if I can find some DVD/blu-ray gems before they close their doors for good.

Mr_Fanta wrote: ↑ Where do I stream it online? At this very moment I'm not a VPN subscriber.

May check out Queen Video's going out of business sale happening right now. Will see if I can find some DVD/blu-ray gems before they close their doors for good.

PM'd

Mr_Fanta wrote: ↑ Where do I stream it online? At this very moment I'm not a VPN subscriber.

May check out Queen Video's going out of business sale happening right now. Will see if I can find some DVD/blu-ray gems before they close their doors for good.

You can rent/stream movies on Google Play. They've got the original for $3.99(SD) or $4.99(HD).

I saw the 2019 version last weekend. It was fine for a time waster. Not exceptionally scary, but nothing egregiously wrong. I liked the changes to the source material in the final act.