Smętarz dla zwierzaków

I love this movie and I think it's truly one of the best horrors that have been made based on King's work. The second half of the movie "Pet Sematary" won't let you catch your breath, and you only wait for the resolution and for the great song by Ramones that inevitably belongs to this film to be heard in the end credits. In fact, it was also recorded based on King's book. I usually don't revisit movies, but "Pet Sematary" is one of those that I have seen several times, and I always enjoy it and get goosebumps. (27.11.2014)

The film doesn’t deviate too much from the book, and no wonder since the screenplay also has the author's name on it. You can really tell it was filmed thirty years ago. The necessary shortening of the book also took its toll, and some parts of the story seem unfinished, half-baked or illogical, because of the lacking context. Despite all these shortcomings, I had fun watching the film again. Its atmosphere still works, and I also enjoyed the final Ramones song. Those who haven’t read the book won’t understand the significance of the band for the film, but I’m moderately excited about it. (30.07.2019)

I completely agree, Caligarim... the book is schematic and predictable, and the only thing that pushes it above average is King's decent style and work with atmosphere. From this perspective, Mary Lambert's work belongs to the better film adaptations of King's work – it sticks to the point and the original, it preserves a rather impressive paranoid atmosphere and it doesn't particularly stir up the viewer – in short, it’s a pleasant watch. I certainly don't think that Stephen King is the author of literary breakthrough books, and Pet Sematary perfectly captures both the master's literary standard and the standard of the film remakes of his work. (02.08.2004)

I put it on two hours after finishing the book. The film that I watched in my head while reading was a great piece of psychological horror with the atmosphere of Kubrick’s The Shining. Instead of that, the real adaptation is a nice B-movie that has one problem: the awfully badly performed main character of Louise, who has nothing to do with the character in the book. The book dedicates a lot of space to introducing the characters, which logically isn’t possible in a film (it’d be too long), and for that reason alone it can’t have the same effect. When that key event takes place in the book, I really sympathised with the characters, I felt so sorry for them, but in the movie I welcomed it as something that moves the plot forward, which reduces the overall impression. And another thing: the nature of the evil is completely different. Whereas in the film the resurrected are just evil semi-zombies, the book works with some sort of omniscient and almost omnipotent evil intelligence (like in the book “It”), which is a lot more effective. But if we ignore the better novel, Pet Semantary is still a very good horror film (especially in the climax). (09.02.2011)