When it comes to Stephen King novels, there are few more iconic than “Pet Sematary”. Famously the only story of his that actually frightened him, the 1989 film adaptation has been something of a cult classic for years. So it was no surprise that when a remake was announced, there was a great divide among fans. Some were thrilled at the idea of an adaption without the late 80’s camp of the original, while others felt that it was entirely unnecessary. So let’s take a closer look at 2019’s Pet Sematary…

Let’s Go Down That Road

When it comes to remakes and reboots, there’s an unspoken rule that the newer iteration deserves a fair chance to be judged on its own merits. Too often, diehard fans of the original source material cry foul that there’s a remake or adaptation at all. However, it’s impossible to discuss this film without mentioning the original, and it’s the film’s own fault. Initially, it’s very tempting to judge it with a completely clean slate, but too often throughout its runtime, the film seems to tease the audience with references to the original. There’s certainly nothing wrong with an homage or Easter Egg here and there.

But in the case of Pet Sematary, it frequently sets up an iconic scene fans of the original will know, just to subvert it completely. Again, there’s nothing wrong with references, and there’s certainly nothing wrong with trying new things (something more remakes should strive towards). But it just seems annoying and downright tacky when the film seems like it’s not so subtly telling its audience, “Hey, remember this scene from the original? That’s not what we’re doing this time!” It would have been infinitely more effective to just do those things differently without the heavy-handed references.

Justifying Its Own Existence

To its credit, perhaps the only strong component of this remake is that it legitimately tries new things and makes the story its own. Rather than attempt a shot-for-shot imitation, as so many remakes attempt, this one takes risks. Most unfortunately however, these risks never really pay off. They make changes to the story and make it feel unique, but not enough time or effort is devoted to making those changes feel really complete. For example, the film has Jud and Ellie form a bond with each other, rather than Jud and Louis. But the new character dynamic is barely developed, and the film just assumes we know that Jud and Louis are close friends. Again, it’s as if the film expects we’re all just familiar with the original, and therefore doesn’t need to explain its choices, since apparently we can fill in the blanks in our heads.

This Time, Dead Would Have Been Better

The greatest problem with this film is that so much of it makes no sense within its own internal logic. Without giving away too much in spoilers, the events and decisions that lead to the tragic events of the third act don’t seem to transgress organically. For example, the friendship between Louis and Jud is barely developed, yet Jud shows him the ancient burial ground on a whim. But if it was a last minute decision, there was no need for the two of them to bury the cat in secret at night. There’s just far too many instances where it seemed like the film simply wanted to make changes to the original, but then didn’t follow through with those changes so that they made sense with the rest of the film.

In a strange way, this doesn’t feel like an adaptation of Stephen King’s book, rather it seems like an adaptation of the original film that just assumes the audience knows the whole story, so it never feels the need to explain anything. Ultimately, Pet Sematary doesn’t fail as a remake because it tries out new ideas, rather it fails as a film because those ideas are never fully realized.