That is not the case, in any way, shape or form, for Paramount Pictures “Pet Sematary Two”. It’s a sequel to a decent and successful Stephen King adapted novel, and the start of a franchise, how could it be good? Needless to say it was bad.
This horror sequel stars Edward Furlong (“The Last Night”,”Stitch”), Anthony Edwards (“Planes”, “Zero Hour”), and Clancy Brown (“The Trip to Bountiful”, “Sleepy Hollow (TV series)”.
The film was directed by Mary Lambert (“Presumed Dead in Paradise”,”Mega Python vs. Gatoroid”), and written by Richard Outten (“Last Rites”,”Little Nemo: Adventures in Slumberland”).
It’s sad to think, that the only things that qualify this as having any relation to the original film are the title, annoying references to the family from the original, and the existing mythology established in the original film.
This film was spectacularly bad, but not as enjoyably bad as that of something shown on the SyFy channel. This film tried. Sadly it was chalked full of cliches. None of the characters were remotely different than any other seen in a horror movie. You had the school bully’s, picked on kids, stupid parents/adults and mean parent.
Then there was the ridiculousness of how Furlong discovered this cemetery. He was flat out told, after being teased, about it, and fully believed in its creepy powers. Yeah right. I get that he’s new in town, but can he truly be that stupid? Clearly he can be, as can his one and only friend.
This is where I’m momentarily confused. It may, in fact, be the only time I care about any aspect of this film. It’s pretty much common knowledge that this pet cemetery isn’t a good place, or one you should mess around with. The stories of the Creed family seem to be common knowledge. If they’re only residing with the former vet, than clearly something’s wrong with this town. So, presuming that everyone’s heard, why would you want to bury things in this place? The motivations behind burying anything there makes no sense. Why would you bury the mean sheriff there? You saw the dog come back, why bury the sheriff you don’t like? Just to hide the body quickly? Dumb!
This leads to another problem with the film, which is really the reason why this film wasn’t even remotely scary. When the things came back, they were fully functioning and almost ready to resume life, as if they’d only been napping for a short while. This flies in almost complete contrast to that of the reanimated characters from the original. The original managed to make them creepy and a little frightening. Seriously, the little boy. *shiver* Here, these characters were almost comical, but were definitely silly and unbelievable. I couldn’t possibly be scared by that and I wasn’t.
Furlong’s character didn’t help things. I get he’s supposed to be grieving, but he just seemed to be a little too stupid. He saw the dead dog, knew things weren’t right. Saw the sheriff dead and still didn’t seem to get it. When other horrible incidents started happening, nothing seemed to dawn on him. By films end, he was fully convinced, finally and somehow, that bringing his mother back was a good idea. Really? I couldn’t even feel sorry for him when he finally learns.
I found that the gruesome violence really seemed like overkill. Constantly lingering on butchered animals and dead bodies, for no reason, does not a horror movie make. This, it seems, is more the precursor to torture porn. I thought we’d moved on from that after the ’70s and Wes Craven? Guess not.
This films only saving grace is that another sequel was not, or has yet to be made. The only thought I had, prior to seeing this was that I hadn’t seen it. All I can say now is I’d rather watch Furlong run away from the T-1000. Or incredibly fake looking spiders in “Arachnoquake”.