|
|
Post by Marv on Apr 19, 2020 19:59:39 GMT
I still think the trailers giving away the biggest change from the book and original film hurts this one in the long run...but its not bad. The stuff with the daughter was actually interesting once she was revived. I know the burial ground has a sense of control over the events (similar to the hotel in the shining) but I couldn't help but be annoyed at how dumb Louis is...and Judd for that matter.
The movie still never really acknowledges the Wendigo and cannibalism into the storyline...both of which are elements in the book. It also doesn't flesh out the idea that those who come back aren't always evil...which is also something from the book.
Overall kind of a needless remake who's twists were ruined by the trailers...but its still done well enough to make it an ok watch, especially if you're in the mood for something creepy.
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Apr 19, 2020 20:18:40 GMT
I still think the trailers giving away the biggest change from the book and original film hurts this one in the long run...but its not bad. The stuff with the daughter was actually interesting once she was revived. I know the burial ground has a sense of control over the events (similar to the hotel in the shining) but I couldn't help but be annoyed at how dumb Louis is...and Judd for that matter. The movie still never really acknowledges the Wendigo and cannibalism into the storyline...both of which are elements in the book. It also doesn't flesh out the idea that those who come back aren't always evil...which is also something from the book. Overall kind of a needless remake who's twists were ruined by the trailers...but its still done well enough to make it an ok watch, especially if you're in the mood for something creepy. Jason Clarke was great though although he needs better choices.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Apr 19, 2020 21:13:43 GMT
I saw it in the theater when that was still a thing you could do. I really was surprised how lame it was. The cast was generally better than the original, but I thought Jason Clarke brought nothing to his part.. but by default he was a lot better than the first guy.
But it really didn't do anything interesting. It's hard not to compare it to the original movie, but the original (while far from perfect) did a lot of things better. The Zelda stuff, the last act, the locations, using that montage to give the background on what happens when things come back, the whole subplot with the kid who dies and contacts the wife. And again, the last act.
I didn't mind changing it to the daughter as the one who died because she can converse and try to speak about the logistics of what's going on, but there's nothing worthy discussed in those scenes. It just didn't add anything, and those final scenes of the dad compounding everything and making it worse by continuing to bury his son then his wife in the burial ground is well handled and emotionally tough and even understandable while you know it's the wrong decision.
The remake doesn't get at any of that. It was really weak and disappointing. But if 8 had just caught it on TV now I'd probly be less harsh about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesbamesy on Apr 19, 2020 22:20:03 GMT
It was more or less the same movie even with the changes. It lacked life, and I know that’s the point of a horror movie, but it just felt kinda dull because of it. The original was also better because of Gage dying. It added more stakes overall.
I guess it’s passable for a movie on its own, but they really missed an opportunity with this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2020 9:11:01 GMT
It was more or less the same movie even with the changes. It lacked life, and I know that’s the point of a horror movie, but it just felt kinda dull because of it. The original was also better because of Gage dying. It added more stakes overall. I guess it’s passable for a movie on its own, but they really missed an opportunity with this. ITA. It felt really lazy to me. I think the only thing it did better was the ending. Overall I think it's worth a watch if its free because it's there, but I wouldn't pay for it. |
|
|
|
Post by Morgana on Apr 20, 2020 10:08:00 GMT
I had been thinking of watching it, was wasn't really that interested. Now after reading all the comments I glad I didn't go to see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Apr 20, 2020 19:14:52 GMT
PET SEMATARY 3/10 Because of the story elements that PET SEMATARY PART II focuses more on, it doesn't get the chance of being complex or moving. To be fair, PET SEMATARY PART I had that chance but didn't make the most out of it. Also, there are improvements in other areas. The actors are better, the characters have more personality, Russell Carpenter's cinematography is more interesting and the title sequence now has a real atmosphere that helps set up what's to come. That being said, overall it's once again an unscary film where the music score sometimes feels out of place and where the soundtrack always feels out of place. Tom Finan's editing is horrible. Both movies have a bunch of over-the-top moments but, this time around, it feels like the makers are purposefully going for a horror comedy vibe. In the 1st one, they came off as unintentionally funny stupidity. Stephen King adapted his own book into the script for the 1st installment, but one of his common tropes was missing: The bullies that are willing to go too far (and therefore don't feel like real people). They are present in this installment, even though King wasn't involved. How odd. 4/10 Whenever there's a 2nd film adaptation of a book, people debate on whether it counts as a remake or not. Since PET SEMATARY 2019 includes some elements created for PET SEMATARY 1989 (including the theme song), I'll judge it as a remake. It felt like it was going to be an improvement, with better production values, some additions (including a new antagonist) and the removal of certain characters and subplots that weren't really needed. Unfortunately, it's mostly a retread of the same story, only somehow less scary. While the original's final scene didn't completely work (the situation was tragic, but it took the focus away from the central conflict, thereby losing the opportunity to dig deep into the morality and ethics of the issues), this remake thinks that plot twists are the most important thing. They're not even that shocking. We're supposed to be scared about the toddler's potential death, even though we saw him die halfway through the other movie?! Jeté Laurence's performance is the best of the 3 installments. Jason Clarke's isn't the worst of the 3 installments, but it's pretty bad nonetheless. John Lithgow does an OK job playing his character (JUD CRANDALL) as a sympathetic man (which is what Fred Gwynne did too), but it doesn't make sense anymore. During the 1st half, he's treated as a red herring for a villain. Just pay attention to his physical appearance and some of his lines, as well as how the camera and the music score present him. When he's attacked by the true villain, the latter morphs into NORMA (his late wife) as a way to mess with his head, and then morphs back in order to kill him. However, since this sequence consists of close-ups, all I could think was "Is her head on a little girl's body? How would that look like?" 1/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog. |
|
|
|
Post by selfworth10 on Apr 22, 2020 20:43:08 GMT
Horrible movie. Such a massive departure from the book.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Apr 24, 2020 1:14:46 GMT
Not a horrible movie, but once was enough. Feels redundant with the novel and the '89 movie on tap.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Apr 24, 2020 13:18:16 GMT
Of the 3 PS films, I rate the second one as my favourite. It took King’s original premise, carried it forward and made itself its own movie which I found atmospheric, entertaining, darkly funny and ghoulish.
I didn’t care for this reboot at all. I hated the significant plot change, I didn’t like the actors or the routine feel of the film and Lithgow had nothing on Gwynne as Judd. The original is flawed, but overall it managed to be creepier and conveyed the depressing theme of grief in a more disturbing manner and still make it morbidly entertaining.
|
|
