READERS' CHOICE #33: PET SEMATARY (1989) - GUEST REVIEW BY ASHLEY

TW: Suicide, child death

THRILL SCALE 1-10

8

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, a few times

BEST SEQUENCE

My personal fave is Gage vs. Truck, but the Zelda scene is also very memorable

BEST LINE

"Sometimes dead is better" (the tagline)

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

55%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Pet Sematary is a bruising horror flick that wears its quirks on its sleeves, to the detriment of its scare factor."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"After tragedy strikes, a grieving father discovers an ancient burial ground behind his home with the power to raise the dead."

DIRECTOR

Mary Lambert

MAIN CAST

• Dale Midkiff, Fred Gwynne, Denise Crosby, Miko Hughes, Blaze Berdahl, Brad Greenquist

THOUGHTS

• Spoily alert, I'm going to tell you the whole movie
• The movie starts out with a delightfully creepy score as we're introduced to the "Pet Sematary". We see various pet graves/epitaphs. It's sad, eerie, but also sort of sweet. This opening credit sequence does a nice job of setting up a spooky atmosphere
• Enter the Creed family: Dr. Louis Creed, wife Rachel, daughter Ellie (played by twins), son Gage, and cat Church (short for Winston Churchill - a pretty great name for a cat). Louis is smokin' hot in this writer's opinion btw (apparently this part was almost played by Bruce Campbell). We meet the family as they arrive to their new home, which is located on a road where transport trucks whiz by in a very sinister, foreshadow-y way
• Next we meet the neighbour from across the street, Jud Crandall (Fred Gwynne). This character is played just as I always imagined him from reading the book, right down to his classic "A-yuh" responses. His accent is lots of fun to imitate and he smokes like a chimney. Jud takes the Creed family down to the Pet Sematary (here Rachel comments on the misspelling), which is conveniently accessed from a path on their property. He points out where he buried his childhood dog and recommends they get their cat fixed so he's less likely to wander  
• On Louis's first day at his new job, a jogger named Victor Pascow is brought in, having been hit by a truck. Here we see some great practical gore effects as the poor guy's head is basically half smashed. There's clearly no saving him. The dead man then wakes, talks some nonsense, and says he'll be back. Talk about a rough first day. I love this character and how he's played in this movie. He's scary, funny, helpful, and his jogging shorts are amazing. Later, Pascow comes to Louis in a dream, taking him to the Pet Sematary and warning him not to go beyond the barrier (a huge wall of trees/branches, ominously glowing blue). Louis wakes up with his feet covered in mud (DUN DUN DUN)!
• Fast forward to Thanksgiving. Rachel takes the kids to her parents' while Louis stays home (he doesn't get along with the in-laws). Shocker: poor Church the cat is hit by a truck. Jud takes Louis to the place beyond the Pet Sematary, has him bury the cat, and instructs him not to tell anyone. The journey to the ancient burial ground is arduous. The fact that Louis blindly follows his old-ass, chain-smoking neighbour, basically up a tree covered cliff for well over an hour, without any idea where they're going and why seems silly. The next day, Church comes home. He smells like death (ha!) and is now vicious. Jud confides that he buried his childhood dog there and that he came back different too. WHAT THE EFF, JUD!?
• Did I mention the Creeds have a housekeeper? Her name is Missy and she's miserable. We learn that she has stomach cancer and she ends up hanging herself to free herself from the pain. At her funeral, Stephen King plays the minister. I actually completely forgot about this mini plot-point, but as unnecessary as it seems, it gives us our sweet sweet cameo and inspires Rachel to tell Louis about her sister Zelda...
• Meet Zelda. Rachel's dead sister. She was kept locked away and suffered from spinal meningitis. For many viewers, this is the scene that causes nightmares. Zelda (played by a man) has a scary, raspy voice, gaunt face, and deformed spine. She basically looks like a monster. As Rachel tells the story of being left alone with her on the night she died, my face is always stuck in a grimace. It's both horrible and horrifying. On the plus side, it gives Rachel's character some substance. Up until now, she's pretty bland
• Next comes my favourite scene in the movie. It's a beautiful day and the Creeds and ole Jud are having a picnic and flying a kite. Despite the cheesy music, we know right away that something bad is coming as we're shown a transport truck driver barrelling down the road. As Gage is flying the kite, the family is distracted by a gust of wind. Gage drops the kite string and begins to chase it towards the road. The family finally notices what's happening, but it's too late. We see a single shoe land on the road. This image has always stood out to me and the sequence as a whole has always filled me with such dread. The entire scene is so effective and even though we know we can't stop what's going to happen, we're on the edge of our seats  
• Another great scene takes place at Gage's funeral. Rachel's father confronts Louis, blaming him for Gage's death. There's a scuffle and the two men end up knocking over the coffin. As it falls to the floor, the lid opens briefly and we see Gage's little hand for just a second before it closes again. Super creepy 
• Rachel brings Ellie to her parents' place and once again we see that men can not be left alone. Louis gets the bright idea to dig up his son's grave and bury him in the ancient burial ground (this is after Jud has told him of someone trying this in the past and it going very wrong..). By this point, Dr. Lou Lou has gone cray cray (we see this very obviously as he's digging up Gage). Zombie Gage comes back and gives us a seriously impressive performance for a 2 year old (this actor would go on to star in Kindergarten Cop and another fave of mine, Wes Craven's New Nightmare). As Louis sleeps, Gage takes one of his scalpels and goes to Jud's house. Here we have some very obvious foreshadowing as Jud shuffles around in his slippers looking for Gage, the camera focused on his ankles. Sure enough, Gage reaches out from under the bed and slices Jud's achilles, giving us another great gore shot. Gage finishes off Jud, somehow calls his dad on the phone (can't explain that one), and invites him over to "play" 
• Meanwhile, Rachel is rushing back home after Ellie has had a bad dream about her father. And lucky for Rachel (and us!), Pascow is back to save the day! He uses his ghostly powers to help her catch her flight and get the last rental car! Thanks Pascow! (Fun little easter egg - when Rachel gets out of the truck she got a ride in, we see that the truck number is "666". SpOoKy!) She gets home and goes straight to Jud's because she hears a voice. She's so happy when she sees Gage, but of course he's evil now and kills her. Also, we get some real "Chucky" vibes from lil Gage in these scenes. Very fun!
• Let's wrap this up: Louis makes it over to Jud's, discovers what has happened, puts Gage to "sleep" with some doctor drugs, lights the place on fire, and decides to BURY RACHEL IN THE BURIAL GROUND! Dr. Creed, you are hot, but damn you are dumb. Men, am I right!?
• Louis waits up for his dead wife to return. In she saunters, and girl is looking rough. Like, pus coming out of her eyeball rough. It's actually pretty awesome until they start making out. In the original cut, the scene was more ambiguous, ending when Rachel entered the kitchen. The studio thought it was too tame, so it was re-shot with much more gruesome effects. The audience sees Rachel reach for a knife during their embrace, Louis screams, cut to black
• To sum up, I love this movie. I love the gore, the characters, even the silly, unbelievable bits (like Louis wrestling what is clearly a dummy version of Gage). It's fun and it's memorable. And while the story has some minor deviations from the book, I think that SK writing the screenplay really helped to keep the same spirit of the original story. I have seen the sequel and very much enjoyed it (more great practical effects), but have yet to see the 2019 remake
• Looking back at my notes, I see that I wrote "Jud and his Buds". This was a reference to all the Budweisers he drinks. Just wanted you all to know. Other things I wrote : "Hot Doctor Daddy", "Men are idiots", "Church's eyes" (forgot to mention their cheesy glow)
• Kudos to my husband for writing these things. I need a drink now

Up next: Oh hey, it's me, Mark again! Thanks to my wonderful wife Ashley for the review, she did an excellent job! Which is convenient because our next movie is also about a wonderful wife who does an excellent job: Gone Girl from 2014

READERS' CHOICE #34-C: IT CHAPTER TWO (2019)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

6.5

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, just like the first movie, I saw it in the theatre and I haven't seen it again since

BEST SEQUENCE

When Pennywise meets Vicky under the bleachers at a baseball game. It's a very effective echo of his scene with Georgie in the previous movie, and it's one of the best scenes to rely primarily on Bill Skarsgård's performance. And again, I do like Bev's scene with Mrs. Kersh, even when the CGI makes it a little ridiculous

BEST LINE

"Let's kill this fucking clown"

- Richie Tozier

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

62%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"IT: Chapter Two proves bigger doesn't always mean scarier for horror sequels, but a fine cast and faithful approach to the source material keep this follow-up afloat"

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"Twenty-seven years after their first encounter with the terrifying Pennywise, the Losers Club have grown up and moved away, until a devastating phone call brings them back"

DIRECTOR

Andy Muschietti

MAIN CAST

Bill Skarsgård, James McAvoy, Jessica Chastain, Bill Hader, Isaiah Mustafa, Jay Ryan, James Ransone, Andy Bean

THOUGHTS

• It's actually kind of fascinating that the previous movie was so successful in ways that this one whiffs so completely. They both had the same director, the screenwriter (Gary Dauberman) also co-wrote the original, and the plot is a continuation of the same story with the same main antagonist; it would seem that all the pieces would fall into place to make an equally effective second chapter and it honestly makes you wonder why this failed to happen. Was this movie just hamstrung by the fact that these events happening to kids is more interesting and novel than with adults? Was it an issue with needing to depict the somewhat ineffective climax from the book? Did they purposefully try to approach the filmmaking differently to make the two movies distinct from one another, or did they make the wrong conclusions about what made the original so good? The world may never know
• In my previous review I wondered what distinguishes good jump scares from bad ones, and conveniently enough I think this movie serves as a pretty good demonstration of when they're used poorly. Firstly, there are just too many - it's basically the only trick this movie has to play and we get numb to them pretty quickly. The rhythm and pacing are also off - jump scares are best used to punctuate tension, but they come so fast and furious in this movie that they don't have enough time to breathe and there's barely enough tension to even punctuate
• And speaking of tension, while I liked the comedic moments in the previous movie, in this one they largely fall flat and, more importantly, they pop up at the weirdest times when they actually work against this movie's attempts to scare us. A real clash of tones. Although I did like the jokes about Bill's inability to write a good ending to any of his books
• Which, of course, is a very thinly veiled jab at the climax of the book IT, which I've spoken about before, mostly about how underwhelming it was that the IT entity turned out to be just a big spider monster. So with this in mind, I was actually OK with the final monster keeping the appearance of Pennywise all the way up until its death, although this does kind of distract from the fact that Pennywise isn't actually IT, Pennywise is just an appearance that IT found effective in luring and killing kids. It was nice that we got some more of Skarsgård's performance, though, and I liked that the climactic battle had some more layers to it, including splitting the Losers up for their own individual scenes
• Way too much CGI, and used badly in a way that distracts instead of thrills. There was CGI used in the first movie too, of course, but I feel like in the first movie it was used to enhance what we were seeing; in this one it was basically all that we were getting at times
• If there's one thing this movie got right, though, it's the casting. The cast is almost all great and, very impressively, they pretty much nailed the important aspect of making it seem like these characters really are the grown-up versions of the kids from the previous movie, not just in looks but in behaviours too. Bill Hader as Richie and James Ransone as Eddie are standouts, and it's amazing how much Ransone looks like Jack Dylan Grazer, who played Eddie as a kid. The only dud is Jay Ryan as Ben - maybe he was underserved by the script, but he's a very forgettable part of the movie
• And so, that will wrap up our time in Derry. While IT Chapter One was the most successful adaptation of its sections of the book, and while it's always fun to see these things depicted on screen, the movies definitely did not surpass my appreciation for the book, and really this whole experience made me want to read it again

Up next: But we're not done with Stephen King quite yet! It's Pet Sematary, and more specifically the original movie adaptation from 1989. And even more exciting, it will be our first guest review! So if you're getting sick of hearing me prattle on about Stephen King, you're in luck - my wife, Ashley, will prattle on in my place!

READERS' CHOICE #34-B: IT CHAPTER ONE (2017)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

9

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, in the theatre when it came out, and I don't believe I've seen it again since

BEST SEQUENCE

It may have been surprising when I didn't even mention the scene where Georgie meets Pennywise in my previous review, and I probably should have - it's an iconic scene and it was totally fine when Tim Curry performed it. I'll give it the edge in this movie, though. Bill Skarsgård is terrifying and it's a perfect introduction to his take on the character - immediately more off-putting, and more animalistic with the way he's constantly drooling and hungrily eyeing Georgie. The kid who plays Georgie is also a pretty good actor. It's just a great introductory scene, an excellent first scare, and it gives us an idea of things to come 

BEST LINE

"I'll take him! I'll take all of you! I'll feast on your flesh as I feed on your fear"

- That's some nice alliteration, there, Pennywise!

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

86%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Well-acted and fiendishly frightening with an emotionally affecting story at its core, IT amplifies the horror in Stephen King's classic story without losing touch with its heart."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"In the summer of 1989, a group of bullied kids band together to destroy a shape-shifting monster, which disguises itself as a clown and preys on the children of Derry, their small Maine town."

DIRECTOR

Andy Muschietti

MAIN CAST

Bill Skarsgård, Jaeden Lieberher, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer

THOUGHTS

• This is a great adaptation of IT in so many ways. The actors are great and the characters feel real, and some of the best scenes from the book are brought to life (scenes like Eddie meeting the leper or the blood geysering from Bev's sink). Beyond that, there are also some effective updates to old scenes and some cool additions whole cloth - for my favourite scene I almost picked the slideshow projector scene, which was a nifty update to the kids flipping through a photo album, and brand new sequences include most of what happens in the house on Neibolt Street, like Richie in the room full of clowns
• And speaking of Richie, again he's my favourite character, this time played by Finn Wolfhard. All of the child actors are consistently great, though, believable and genuine. It's also always fun to hear the kids swear like sailors
• And, as Pennywise, Bill Skarsgård is chilling. The voice is creepy as hell, as are the unnatural way he moves, and the ways he can contort his face (that bizarre smile is just a way Skarsgård can position his mouth, and he can naturally point his eyes in opposite directions). This Pennywise is way scarier than Tim Curry's, and yet, Skarsgård is also so immediately, unmistakably evil that we do lose some of the playfulness in Curry's performance, the joyfully malicious way that Pennywise likes to toy with his victims
• Also terrifying, the way that this movie uses Henry Bowers, who I've always considered one of the scariest parts of the book. He's not supernatural, he's just a violent, sadistic kid - a real danger as opposed to an otherworldly one
• I would never call this a horror comedy, it's way more focused on the horror side of the equation, but what jokes we get are pretty funny and character based so they don't distract from the scares
• Quite a few jump scares, which I've discussed a few times now - I have no problem with jump scares as long as they're done well. Although, while thinking of this review it also occurred to me, what even is a bad jump scare? What factors are there between effective horror filmmaking and hacky, uncreative button pushing? If anyone has examples of movies that use jump scares poorly I'd love to hear them, and hey, at least according to a few reviews, this very movie might be thrown out as one example

Up next: Wrapping up our time with Pennywise and the Losers Club, IT Chapter Two