Alright, I just finished Pet Sematary by Stephen King, and I heard that it was made into a movie (in 1989). My friend says she seen it, but the SFX suck, what do you think? Should I even watse my money in renting it?
2006-12-12 09:39:21 · 14 answers · asked by Cort 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
The book by far is definitely better than the movie. If you want to see the difference in how the book and the movie are, then I would rent it. It's not about wasting money, it's about whether you want to see it or not. Make up your own mind no matter what anybody says about whether to rent or not to rent it because everybody's opinion is going to be different.
2006-12-12 09:50:54 · answer #1 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, that depends. I happen to think the effects are secondary to the story and the characters. If the story grabs you, then the effects can lget away with lookng pretty cheesy.
The two main reasons to rent this movie: 1- Fred (Herman Munster) Gwynne's EXCELLENT portrayal of a Mainer, second only to Geoffrey Lewis' vampire in the original, made for TV "Salems Lot", 2- The kid who comes back. He's evil, and the little kid gets that across pretty convincingly.
Be warned, there are MAJOR differences between the book and the movie, but overall, it is one of the more fair treatments King got in earlier movies renditions of his novels.
2006-12-12 09:46:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I never read the book but I thought the movie was good. None of his films are completely true to the books. Back then, the SFX were obviously not as advanced as they would be if it were made today. So it makes sense that someone would feel letdown by the antiquated "use your imagination" compared to today.
2006-12-12 11:01:25 · answer #3 · answered by Cinnamon 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't remember reading this particular King novel, but I've seen the movie several times and always get entranced by it.
Great scene:
"Has anyone ever buried a PERSON up there?"
"Christ on His throne NO!" (nervously knocks over glass on table)
Another is when they get in a fight at the boy's funeral and knock over the casket, which comes partly open. Creepy.
Of course there are many more!
2006-12-12 09:54:33 · answer #4 · answered by fresh2 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, they should remake it. Based on the book, it has the potential to be a terrifying and emotional film, but the movie didn't do the book justice. If they're willing to handle it tastefully, then it deserves another chance.
2016-05-23 15:49:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Watch it! It is one of my all time favorite movies... I mean, it is older so it isn't the most high tech graphics ever, but it is well worth it.
Some of the scenes are awesome, especially if you have read the book. (Look for the trash bag in Church's whiskers.)
Rent it, seriously, you won''t be disappointed.
2006-12-12 09:46:42 · answer #6 · answered by Fluffy Rover 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I thought for the time the FX were good, especially the guy that haunts him with the blank white eye. Its a decent movie. No movie has really lived up to the books but I think its pretty decent, pretty gross and the little kid is creepy
2006-12-12 09:44:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
There weren't many special effects in the film. I liked it when I first saw it, and I own the DVD. The movie you want to stay away from is "Graveyard Shift." That was absolutely terrible.
2006-12-12 19:14:17 · answer #8 · answered by Ryan R 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Have you ever seen any other Steven King movie? Carrie, Christine, Tommyknockers, The Stand, It, Salems Lot, etc?? None of them are ever as good as the book but I would say they are pretty entertaining....
2006-12-12 10:24:04 · answer #9 · answered by Jess 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I collect all of king's books and movies. It was a good movie. Rent it. I don't listen to other people's reviews. I watch a movie becuz of my own reasons.
2006-12-12 09:43:30 · answer #10 · answered by vanillabeancheesecake37 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋