Simetierre 2

Some of the scathing reviews from those who preferred the original PET SEMATARY rather than this sequel, are misleading, no matter how well-intentioned these viewers were. This horror film, full of the kind of touches evident in any Stephen King story, is really much better than these reviews would have you believe.

The premise, of course, is a silly one--that burying dead animals or human beings in a specially cursed Indian sematary will bring them back to life, deadlier than ever in evil intent. But once you get beyond that, there's enough fright and scares invoked by the script and by the clever direction of Mary Lambert, particularly in sequences involving Clancy Brown. His return from the grave is marked by some really scary and howlingly funny moments that give the film a sense of life it otherwise would have lacked.

She has also directed her two youthful protagonists, Edward Furlong and Jason McGuire, in such a manner that she gets skillful performances from them. Furlong has a glowing presence that fits the material beautifully and McGuire has a naturalness that is refreshing and real.

And the story actually covers a lot of ground, everything from bad parenting to bullying from one's peers and lots of revenge motifs that lead to some truly harrowing moments. Alas, it's true that much of the action has a mean-spirited slant but all of it is somewhat softened by touches of real humor.

Worth a look if you enjoyed the first PET SEMATARY.

So i sat myself down today to watch the sequel to the famous movie "Pet sematary" and expected a half-assed thing made only to drain a little extra money from the Pet sematary fans. I was positively surprised though as the plot was interesting(A widower vet moves to the village from the first movie together with his son to start a new life) and so was the characters. The actors was also good and performed excellent especially the guy who played Gus(cant remember his name). He manages to actually behave like a gleeful psychotic man without going so far that his performance would evoke laughter instead of shivers. His performance is without doubt the best part of the movie. This movie is more gory than the original movie and has less of the psychological terror elements that were a big part of the first movie although this is rarely taken too far, a few moments of the movie features over-the-top goriness but not enough to make it ridiculous in any way. To sum it up: Pet sematary 2 is a good horror movie featuring both psychological terror as well as gore, the simple yet interesting plot as well as the performance of the actors makes this a movie well worth seeing.

I have indeed watched the 1992 "Pet Sematary II" movie before. Twice actually, I think, since 1992. And I sat down to watch it again here in 2023, as I had the opportunity to do so, and I only vaguely remembered parts of the movie.

Writer Richard Outten put together a fair enough script for the movie, though it wasn't all that different from the original 1989 "Pet Sematary" movie. Though it should be noted that "Pet Sematary II" most certainly outdid the abysmal 2019 remake of the 1989 original.

Edward Furlong was quite good in the lead here in "Pet Sematary II", adding his back-then-usual-charm to the movie for sure. The movie also have Anthony Edwards on the cast list, but it was a shame that he wasn't given more on-screen time. I have to call out Clancy Brown and Jared Rushton for doing great jobs in portraying two characters that you just can't help but loathe. They really put on spot on performances in bringing Gus Gilbert and Clyde Parker to life on the screen, no pun intended.

After watching the movie again here in 2023, I have to admit that I was sort of puzzled by the fact that dead Gus Gilbert could bury and bring back Clyde Parker. Isn't the lore of the Indian burial ground that you, and I quote, "bury your own". But Gus is never mentioned to have any relation to Clyde, which just seems to be strange as it breaks the lore.

Visually then "Pet Sematary II" is quite good. Sure, the movie is showing signs of aging, but for a movie from 1992, the practical special effects still hold up.

Not really as good as the 1989 movie, of course, but "Pet Sematary II" is actually not too bad for a sequel. It was just lacking somewhat of originality in the writing department.

My rating of "Pet Sematary II", from director Mary Lambert, lands on a six out of ten stars.

While shooting a horror film, the famous actress Renee Hallow (Darlanne Fluegel) dies in a weird accident. Her ex-husband, the veterinary Chase Matthews (Anthony Edwards) decides to leave Los Angeles and move with their teenage son Jeff Matthews (Edward Furlong) to Renee´s house in Ludlow to start a new life. Soon Jeff is bullied by his schoolmate Clyde Parker (Jared Rushton) and befriends the teenager Drew Gilbert (Jason McGuire). When Drew´s stepfather Sheriff Gus Gilbert (Clancy Brown) kills his dog Zowie, Drew buries his dog with Jeff in an ancient Indian cemetery that has the rumor of raising the dead. Zowie returns and kills Gus and they bury him in the cemetery. But soon the boys learn that sometimes death is better.

"Pet Sematary II" is a forgettable sequel of Stephen King´s "Pet Sematary (1989). Directed also by Mary Lambert, the plot is weaker and unoriginal. The one-dimension lead actor Edward Furlong keeps the same expression when is happy, sad, bullied or whatever. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Cemitério Maldito II" ("Damned Cemetery II")

The ancient Indian cemetery with the power to raise the dead returns and influences the lives of new residents.

I must say, good or bad, I am glad director Mary Lambert returned for the sequel. As the first was her creation, it seems only fitting to let her take the characters and concepts where she wants to go with them. Had another director handled it, the film could have lost any flavor of the original that might exist. (There is some similar tone and such, which I think keeps it a strong sequel.)

I love the young Edward Furlong (during his career peak) and Anthony Edwards with a beard. Great casting that keeps this film relevant even if it carried over pretty much nobody from the original. (I say "pretty much" because I think it has no one, but a minor character might have made it past me.)

The film as a whole has received negative reviews, but the fact is that the original really is not that great. Although a modern classic, and a pop culture gem, it is not actually a critically good film. So the sequel by horror standards is not bad -- it actually maintains the level of the original.