Após a tragédia, um pai de luto descobre um antigo cemitério atrás de sua casa com o poder de ressuscitar os mortos.Após a tragédia, um pai de luto descobre um antigo cemitério atrás de sua casa com o poder de ressuscitar os mortos.Após a tragédia, um pai de luto descobre um antigo cemitério atrás de sua casa com o poder de ressuscitar os mortos.
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória e 6 indicações no total
Avaliações em destaque
The irony was, when I first watched 'Pet Sematery' I actually couldn't spell 'cemetery' therefore I didn't pick up the deliberate typo in the title! Anyway, it's another eighties Stephen King book-to-film adaptation and, as any horror fan knows, these can be hit and miss. Mainly miss. However, what we have here is a creepy little film which actually stands the test of time.
As with most 'King' films, it's set in (or around) Maine where an unusually-happy family moves into a new house... by a road! Yes, the road is a major player in 'Pet Sematery' as it's not long before a truck claims the life of the family's pet cat, Church. Luckily, their well-meaning neighbour, Judd, takes pity on the family and comes up with a novel way of sparing the children the grief of losing a treasured pet - it involves resurrecting it beyond the 'Pet Sematery.'
Now, 'Pet Sematery' is a great film. There's lots to enjoy here - it's creepy, well-acted and has plenty of memorable scenes - it's definitely worth a watch. However, it's also not without faults. I haven't read the book, so I can only assume it goes into far greater details as to all the characters' backstories. Here, everyone seems to have a deep backstory which could probably have its own film made about it. Yet all of these tales are only partially touched upon and it's like this story should have been almost a mini-series to really do them all justice.
I say the film is 'well-acted,' but whether you consider Fred Gwynne's portrayal of neighbour, 'Judd,' to be good, or just weird is entirely up to you. Personally, I love his performance and the way he seems to speak will certainly stay with you long after the credits have rolled. In fact, if you're a fan of 'South Park' then you'll start to get a lot of references in the cartoon as his character does tend to pop up here and there to explain various supernatural happenings.
So, if you can ignore the slightly 'unused' elements of the story which don't really go anywhere, you'll actually get quite a fun and novel (at the time - I still haven't bothered with the remake) horror film. There's quite a lot in it that actually borders on 'disturbing imagery' rather than horror, but when practical effects/make-up are used, they're nicely nasty - if you know what I mean.
If you can really watch this film and not enjoy Fred Gwynne's performance then I'll be surprised (and also try not to laugh at a - slightly out-of-place - 'pratfall' that comes about three quarters of the way through the film when someone seems to bang his head on some furniture out of nowhere - Frank Drebin would be proud of that one!
As with most 'King' films, it's set in (or around) Maine where an unusually-happy family moves into a new house... by a road! Yes, the road is a major player in 'Pet Sematery' as it's not long before a truck claims the life of the family's pet cat, Church. Luckily, their well-meaning neighbour, Judd, takes pity on the family and comes up with a novel way of sparing the children the grief of losing a treasured pet - it involves resurrecting it beyond the 'Pet Sematery.'
Now, 'Pet Sematery' is a great film. There's lots to enjoy here - it's creepy, well-acted and has plenty of memorable scenes - it's definitely worth a watch. However, it's also not without faults. I haven't read the book, so I can only assume it goes into far greater details as to all the characters' backstories. Here, everyone seems to have a deep backstory which could probably have its own film made about it. Yet all of these tales are only partially touched upon and it's like this story should have been almost a mini-series to really do them all justice.
I say the film is 'well-acted,' but whether you consider Fred Gwynne's portrayal of neighbour, 'Judd,' to be good, or just weird is entirely up to you. Personally, I love his performance and the way he seems to speak will certainly stay with you long after the credits have rolled. In fact, if you're a fan of 'South Park' then you'll start to get a lot of references in the cartoon as his character does tend to pop up here and there to explain various supernatural happenings.
So, if you can ignore the slightly 'unused' elements of the story which don't really go anywhere, you'll actually get quite a fun and novel (at the time - I still haven't bothered with the remake) horror film. There's quite a lot in it that actually borders on 'disturbing imagery' rather than horror, but when practical effects/make-up are used, they're nicely nasty - if you know what I mean.
If you can really watch this film and not enjoy Fred Gwynne's performance then I'll be surprised (and also try not to laugh at a - slightly out-of-place - 'pratfall' that comes about three quarters of the way through the film when someone seems to bang his head on some furniture out of nowhere - Frank Drebin would be proud of that one!
I originally saw this in my mid teens, and made a mental note myself that it 'wasn't that good' - which in turn made me forget it.
I read the book for the 1st time 2 weeks back and LOVED IT!, so I thought I'd give the movie a try again to see how it fared.
I am 36 now and i thought It was actually pretty good!
Still quite spooky for its age, (especially on your own at night) stayed pretty close to the book too! I actually thought the scary characters in the film were more scary than they were in the book.
One of Kings better film adaptations (apart from stand by me & the green mile)
Definitely worth a watch for horror fans!
7.5 out of 10
I read the book for the 1st time 2 weeks back and LOVED IT!, so I thought I'd give the movie a try again to see how it fared.
I am 36 now and i thought It was actually pretty good!
Still quite spooky for its age, (especially on your own at night) stayed pretty close to the book too! I actually thought the scary characters in the film were more scary than they were in the book.
One of Kings better film adaptations (apart from stand by me & the green mile)
Definitely worth a watch for horror fans!
7.5 out of 10
Dale Midkiff and Denise Crosby move to Maine with their two small children and cat in a big house on a highway with lots of truck traffic. Close at hand...is a pet cemetery where all the dogs and cats killed on the road are buried. Neighbor Fred Gwynne shows another cemetery with incredible powers just beyond...the power to reanimate the dead. Trouble is the dead are nothing like they once were. Although I have not read the book by Stephen King, he did write the screenplay and must have remained relatively faithful to his own work. The film has many flaws but is also worthwhile. Coincidence and some muddled flashbacks from the past help make the script somewhat erratic and implausible. The acting in the leads is OK, but in the second half really deteriorates. Fred Gwynne is literally and figuratively a cut above the rest. He gives a heartfelt performance as a man run down with time and over-burdened with knowledge he should or would not have. Brad Greenquist is also good in his role as a ghost. His character also causes some believability factors. Director Mary Lambert does do some things rather nicely. There are some well-shot scenes of the cemeteries. The peril of the trucks is made very real, and she also relies heavily on human emotion that is universal. At its heart, Pet Semetary is about loss, coping with loss, and grief, and what are some of the effects of not coping with those things well. The film has many suspenseful moments, and although the ending became a bit tiresome - still manages to keeps its mood and message throughout. Author Stephen King has an interesting cameo as a preacher!
The acting is terrible in this movie. The dad and little girl are just painful to watch because they are so wooden. The story is great and has some great scares. The sets are wonderful. Maine is really exhibited well as a setting.
The beginning is really cheesy but gets better as the movie goes on. The little boy as a villain is ridiculous. I liked when Denise Crosby becomes a zombie. She is fairly effective.
I recommend this one.
The beginning is really cheesy but gets better as the movie goes on. The little boy as a villain is ridiculous. I liked when Denise Crosby becomes a zombie. She is fairly effective.
I recommend this one.
In the trivia section for Pet Sematary, it mentions that George Romero (director of two Stephen King stories, Creepshow and The Dark Half) was set to direct and then pulled out. One wonders what he would've brought to the film, as the director Mary Lambert, while not really a bad director, doesn't really bring that much imagination to this adaptation of King's novel, of which he wrote the screenplay. There are of course some very effective, grotesquely surreal scenes (mainly involving the sister Zelda, likely more of a creep-out for kids if they see the film), and the casting in some of the roles is dead-perfect. But something feels missing at times, some sort of style that could correspond with the unmistakably King-like atmosphere, which is in this case about as morbid as you're going to get without incestuous cannibals rising from the graves being thrown in (who knows if he'll save that for his final novel...)
As mentioned though, some of the casting is terrific, notably Miko Hughes as Gage Creed, the little boy who goes from being one of the cutest little kids this side of an 80's horror movie, to being a little monster (I say that as a compliment, of course, especially in scenes brandishing a certain scalpel). And there is also a juicy supporting role for Fred Gwynne of the Munsters, who plays this old, secretive man with the right notes of under-playing and doom in tone. And applause goes to whomever did the make-up on Andrew Hubatsek. But there are some other flaws though in the other casting; Dale Midkiff is good, not great, as the conflicted, disturbed father figure Creed, and his daughter Ellie is played by an actress that just didn't work for me at all.
In terms of setting up some chilling set-pieces, only a couple really stand-out: a certain plot-thickening moment (not to spoil, it does involve a cool Ramones song), and the first visit to the pet sematary (the bigger one), including the sort of mystical overtones King had in the Shining. For the most part it's a very polished directing job, though it could've been made even darker to correspond with the script. If thought out in logical terms (albeit in King terms) it is really one of his more effective works of the period. But it doesn't add up like it could, or should. Still, it makes for a nifty little midnight movie.
As mentioned though, some of the casting is terrific, notably Miko Hughes as Gage Creed, the little boy who goes from being one of the cutest little kids this side of an 80's horror movie, to being a little monster (I say that as a compliment, of course, especially in scenes brandishing a certain scalpel). And there is also a juicy supporting role for Fred Gwynne of the Munsters, who plays this old, secretive man with the right notes of under-playing and doom in tone. And applause goes to whomever did the make-up on Andrew Hubatsek. But there are some other flaws though in the other casting; Dale Midkiff is good, not great, as the conflicted, disturbed father figure Creed, and his daughter Ellie is played by an actress that just didn't work for me at all.
In terms of setting up some chilling set-pieces, only a couple really stand-out: a certain plot-thickening moment (not to spoil, it does involve a cool Ramones song), and the first visit to the pet sematary (the bigger one), including the sort of mystical overtones King had in the Shining. For the most part it's a very polished directing job, though it could've been made even darker to correspond with the script. If thought out in logical terms (albeit in King terms) it is really one of his more effective works of the period. But it doesn't add up like it could, or should. Still, it makes for a nifty little midnight movie.
Stephen King Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
Stephen King Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
See how IMDb users rank the feature films based on the work of Stephen King.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe role of Zelda, Rachel's terminally ill sister, was played by a man. Director Mary Lambert wanted Zelda and her scenes to frighten the audience but did not believe that a 13-year old girl was scary so she cast Andrew Hubatsek in the role to make something be "off about Zelda."
- Erros de gravação(at around 5 mins) When Louis is checking on Ellie after she fell off the tire swing he is wearing a tee shirt without a collar and sleeves that are rolled up midway past his elbow. When Rachel gets up to rush after Gage his tee shirt is now an open shirt with stripes and a collar. In the next shot when he gets up to follow Rachel his shirt is once again back to a tee shirt.
- Citações
Jud Crandall: Sometimes, dead is better.
- Versões alternativasTelevision censors of some of the film's gorier moments included alternate shots from different angles that hide the more graphic images. This especially came into play with the Timmy Baterman scenes and the film's finale in the Creeds' kitchen.
- ConexõesFeatured in The Ramones: Pet Sematary (1989)
- Trilhas sonorasPet Sematary
By Dee Dee Ramone & Daniel Rey
Performed by Ramones
Produced by Jean Beauvoir & Daniel Rey
Courtesy of Sire Records Company
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Pet Sematary?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 11.500.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 57.469.467
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 12.046.179
- 23 de abr. de 1989
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 57.470.138
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 43 min(103 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente