A Tale of Two Semataries
With two different film adaptations of Stephen King’s PET SEMATARY made, it’s time to see how they stack up…
As expected, Pet Sematary (2019) proved to be divisive. That’s no surprise, given the heavily restructured third act. Directors Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer took major creative liberties with the source material, upending expectations for those already familiar with the novel or the 1989 adaptation. Comparing the two films is an apples-to-oranges situation; both are well done in their own ways. That being said, let’s break down the similarities and differences between the two film adaptations…
Jud Crandall, the Neighbour
The role of Jud Crandall is pivotal in both versions of Pet Sematary. Jud is an elderly neighbour and a local of the small town of Ludlow. In the ‘89 version of the film, Jud (Fred Gwynne) is something of a father figure to Louis Creed (Dale Midkiff), the patriarch of the Creed family. In the new film, Jud’s (John Lithgow) role is retooled quite a bit. The focus of the new film is more on the Creed family and their relationships with each other, which leaves Jud sidelined to a degree.
That’s not to say that Jud isn’t important in the new film — far from it. Instead of being a father figure to Louis (Jason Clarke), Jud becomes more of a grandfather figure to the Creed’s nine-year-old daughter Ellie (Jeté Laurence). His relationship with Louis is more formal, almost like Louis is doing him a favour by spending time with him. This Jud is more of a gruff old hermit than the original’s warm, welcoming hillbilly.
The two Jud characters are excellent reflections of the films they are in. Gwynne’s portrayal of the character is perfect for the melodramatic and often cheesy ‘89 film. Likewise, Lithgow’s Jud is gruffer and a little more serious. All in all, Gwynne got more room to play with the character in the ‘89 version than Lithgow gets in the new version. There are some interesting things that Kölsch and Widmyer do with Jud in the new film. The problem is, they don’t expand on much of it.
Victor Pascow and Zelda
The 1989 versions of Victor Pascow and Zelda are iconic, having burned themselves into the collective minds of the VHS generation. The former is a darkly humourous whistleblower, doing his best to save the Creed family from devastation. The latter is the deceased sibling of Rachel Creed (Denise Crosby/Amy Seimetz), who’s left a haunting impression on her sister even years after her gruesome death. Both are visually creepy; the makeup work and performances come together to make two exceptionally memorable characters.
The 2019 film wisely decides that trying to outdo the original incarnations of these characters is a futile gesture, so it doesn’t attempt to replicate them in any way. In doing so, the characters lose a lot of their bite, however. The makeup effects are more realistic, but that doesn’t necessarily make the characters pop. One could argue that the slightly false-looking makeup work in the original (paired with the fact that Zelda is played by an adult male) gave the characters more, uh — character. It granted them unsettling appearances because they didn’t look real. The new film lends realism to these characters at the expense of memorability.
With that said, there are some truly great moments that revolve around Zelda in the new film. Directors Kölsch and Widmyer don’t change-up the character, but they do change the way she died. In the original, Zelda (Andrew Hubatsek) choked to death. In the new film, Rachel, tormented by her sister, opts to feed her through a dumbwaiter. Zelda (Alyssa Brooke Levine), weakened by her illness, falls into the dumbwaiter and breaks her neck. It’s a disturbing visual, and one that works well in the context of the film. The Zelda flashbacks also set up a severely effective body horror sequence in the third act.
Pascow (Obssa Ahmed), however, is not used in any new or creative ways. He warns Louis of the impending doom but is sidelined shortly afterwards. The makeup FX are fantastic, gruesome and oh-so-real, and the performance from Obssa Ahmed is suitably creepy. He just never pops off screen the way Brad Greenquist’s take on the character did. He’s there to warn Louis and be a spooky scene in the first act, and that’s all. It’s a far cry from the ‘89 version of the character, who was integral not only to the film but the marketing campaign as well.
Rachel, the Housewife
In the ‘89 film, the character of Rachel Creed takes a backseat to Louis’s story. She is a peripheral player in his descent into madness. Rachel is largely absent for the second act before she returns to the narrative in the third act and promptly gets killed by her re-animated son.
This is not the case in the ‘19 film. Rachel’s role is beefed up tremendously, giving her much more to do in the narrative. She does leave town after the death of her child, but her absence is lessened here. Rachel’s relationship with death is more fully-fleshed out here, giving her something of an arc throughout the film, something the ‘89 adaptation neglected to do.
In the new film, Rachel is haunted by the memory of her sister’s gruesome death. The flashback sequences serve their purposes, being eerie and rather horrible. I understood exactly why Rachel was so terrified of death. Amy Seimetz plays the role exceptionally well, managing to outshine her co-star Jason Clarke. An accomplishment, considering Clarke is one of the best actors working today. Rachel is the ’19 film’s biggest improvement.
The Death of a Child
The second trailer to Pet Sematary (2019) unfortunately gave away a huge surprise for fans of the original. In King’s novel and the ’89 film, Gage (Miko Hughes/Hugo Lavoie and Lucas Lavoie), the Creed’s three-year-old son, gets run down in the road by a semi-truck. It’s the heartbreaking turning point of a film unafraid to go to some dark and scary places. That being said, the idea of a toddler resurrected as a vicious killer works slightly better on the page than it does on screen.
The ’89 version is suitably creepy, but in order to shield young actor Miko Hughes, there is a doll used as a stand-in for some of the intense third act sequences. This can be painfully obvious in certain shots, and even with the advancements in digital effects, it is difficult to stage a scene in which a young child commits horrendous acts of violence. That’s where the new film takes liberties that ultimately works to its advantage.
Instead of Gage, it’s Ellie, the Creeds’ nine-year-old daughter that gets killed in the road. The way the scene plays out is heartbreaking and effective — though it would have been even more so had the trailers not spoiled it. The filmmakers clearly wanted to toy with audience expectations, putting both Ellie and Gage out in the road. At the last second, Louis pulls Gage out of the way, not realizing that Ellie in the path of the truck as well.
While Lambert’s film never showed the dead body of Gage, the new film doesn’t shy away from it. We see Louis run into the ditch across the road to cradle his Ellie’s body while Rachel sinks to her knees on the road. I would be lying if I said my eyes were dry during this scene. It’s the turning point of the whole film, leading straight into:
That Insane Third Act
Ellie’s death helps the film go to some truly unexpected places and explore different angles than the ’89 film did. The original focused mainly on Louis and his break from reality. Gage, a mere toddler, didn’t understand death and therefore didn’t pose any questions or ruminate on the afterlife. He just came back to life as an evil little killer. It was creepy, but the new adaptation has more on its mind — at least for a little while.
Ellie spends the first half of the film a curious, happy little girl. When she comes back, she is still questioning everything, but it appears her motives are more sinister. Her questions are less rooted in curiosity than they are in tormenting her father. The scene in which she comes home is skin-crawling, as she continues to question Louis about her state of being until he snaps at her. There is a moment in this scene in which Louis knows he made a mistake bringing her back. This is communicated wordlessly through Jason Clarke’s expressions. It’s one of the best moments in a film that could’ve used more like it.
Jud’s death scene is a well-done set piece, but like the second act change, it was spoiled in the trailers. The filmmakers toy with fans of the original once again, giving nods to the original before upending expectations. Something that wasn’t spoiled in the trailer, Ellie using Jud’s deceased wife’s face to terrorize him before brutally killing him, is heartbreaking. This scene also implies that Jud buried his own wife in the burial ground, planting a seed for a potential prequel.
When Rachel returns from her short-lived sabbatical at her parents’ house, there is a major deviation. In the original, when Rachel returns to Ludlow, she leaves Ellie back at her parents’ home. In the ’19 film, Rachel brings Gage back with her. If you think that sounds insignificant, you would be wrong.
Rachel’s adverse reaction to her daughter’s reanimation kicks off the carnage. Before she is killed, Rachel manages to get Gage to Louis, who promptly locks Gage in the car and runs back into the house to save his wife. He doesn’t succeed, and his wife dies in front of him. This is the moment that Rachel’s arc comes full circle, as she pleads with him to not bring her back to life.
Ellie has other plans, however, and knocks her father unconscious before burying her mother in the burial ground. Louis wakes up and confronts Ellie in the pet cemetery, where he is about to kill her. He fails when Rachel impales him with a grave marker. Then, they bury him in the burial ground beyond the deadfall together.
The film ends with Gage, still locked in the car, as his undead family (including Church the Cat) emerges from the fog. Louis approaches the car door and stares in at his son. The sound of the door unlocking signals the credits to roll. It’s a wonderfully grim ending, the kind you rarely see from studio horror films. It’s certainly a deviation from the original, which had Louis bury his wife in the cemetery after putting Gage and Church down.
Final Thoughts
Having nearly the entire Creed family undead and still “living” by the end of the film is a bold choice by the filmmakers. It’s a decision that’s been proven controversial by the polar responses from audiences. Directors Kölsch and Widmyer have taken a classic story and made it their own.
The overall themes of the story remain the same in both films. Grief and loss permeate the spooky proceedings. The biggest difference is in the focus of those themes. The original film focused on Louis and his response to death. The remake brings all of the Creeds into the mix, and succeeds in commenting on the desire to uphold the “perfect family.” By the end of the new film, Louis gets the family time he moved to Ludlow to enjoy. It just might not be exactly how he imagined it.
