"Pet Sematary": the new adaptation of the famous novel different from the classics
Educational Program Cinema / / December 19, 2019
I saw the release of "Pet Sematary" - a new film adaptation of the famous book by Stephen King. 30 years ago, the story is already transferred to the big screen. Critics appreciated the classic film medium, but the audience at that time he loved. However, the changed shooting, special effects and the perception of cinema itself over the years.
Therefore it is necessary to understand, it is better to go to the cinema with a new film, and to whom - to review the old.
How accurately convey the story of the book
The plot of two paintings in general follows the original: Dr. Louis Creed, his wife Rachel and children Ellie and Gage moved to a small town and settle in the area adjacent to the forest. Strange but friendly elderly neighbor, Jud Crandall tells them about the cemetery, where the locals buried their dead pets.
Soon, under the wheels of the truck killed Church - favorite cat Ellie. Then Judd shows Luis secret place where you bury the body. And soon, the cat returns home, but now changed. And then events take a more and more ominous turn.
This novel is often called the most terrible book by Stephen King. But it is not only in terrible description of the death and subsequent resurrection in the form of monsters. King devotes a lot of time understanding the important topic: how to come to terms with the death of a loved one. Especially if it's death by natural causes.
Part of the fact is that the story is based on the Life events the author himself: his cat died in this way, and then a son, Owen almost got under the car wheels.
In both films, this depth is lost: here rather retelling of the action, not its in-depth analysis. Louis and Rachel argue, need to say to children about death, Judd tells the frightening truth about the cemetery. But to understand what drives the characters, it's hard.
Gone was the old man's wife, even - in the book, she died of a stroke. Jade wanted to thank Luis for help because she and showed the cemetery. In the first film adaptation of its replaced by Missy - Creed housekeeper, and in the new film, and removed all the line.
And it is equally important that both pictures does not disclose the effect of the cemetery on people: it draws against their will, forcing attributed to the body. In the film adaptation of 1989 several times mentioned that there will want to go again and again, but still did not develop the idea. Therefore, the characters' actions sometimes seem senseless: even knowing the danger, Luis still goes to the cemetery.
From the middle of the action new version is increasingly moving away from the original. Moreover, the authors are clearly trying to surprise those who are familiar with the book and the previous version. Some scenes shot very accurately, but at the last moment deceive expectations. However, one of such vivid turns some reason shown in the trailer of the film.
Finale paintings different from the book more unambiguous. King left the ending open. In the first film adaptation of the allusion to the dark end of the story made more explicit. The new final change even more, leaving even the most narrative logic.
In general, both of the film very superficially retell the book. While the first film adaptation yet skilful.
As disclosed heroes
More logical to compare the movies only with each other, putting the original. In the adaptation of the same set of characters, but reveal their characters and different actions.
In both cases, not very bright looks protagonist Louis. In the first version of his play Dale Midkiff, the new - Australian Jason Clarke. Both the actor's roles and cope with all their lines and act out the actions well. But heroes are still lacking in motivation.
In the new film, one of the first scenes, where Luis explains daughter's death - a natural part of life, looks very emotional, especially if you know about future events. But in the classic father give more emotion in the funeral scene, but in the final permit to reveal the image of a man on the brink of insanity.
The new version of deeper and more interesting shows Jad. It plays a famous actor John Lithgow. He gives the impression of a tired, battered human life. Jad sincerely wants to help Creed, but later regretted his actions.
In the film adaptation of 1989 Jada played by Fred Gwynne. He managed to convey the image of a friendly old man, and in the emotional moments he looked good. Yet he looked too good and positive. And from Lithgow at once breathes solitude and tragedy.
But the biggest difference is noticeable in the images of Rachel and the children. In the old version of the storyline wife showed brighter. When she begins to worry about her husband, she has to fly on multiple aircraft transfers, rent a car, sit in the truck for truckers: she rushes and panics.
To this was added more comedy and ghost image helper, and along with hints of universal evil, tries to prevent Rachel.
The authors of the film adaptation of 2019 it all cut. There is only a scene where Rachel's standing in traffic and trying to call Louis. This, of course, more modern, but less emotionally. All her feelings are more concerned with flashbacks of his late sister. Here will give the horrorFrom which in the classics it was only a couple of small scenes with mediocre makeup.
But much more screen time went to Ellie. If the old film, she flashed very little, only helping to disclose the nature of the adults, but now some changes in the plot allowed the girl to play an interesting role.
It is an independent and unusual character. Young zhete Laurence copes with a difficult task, but in the final film on it put a lot of important scenes.
As frightening than movies
And of course, one of the main criteria of horror - how much he dreaded. Those who know and love the old film classics certainly deem more frightening. But we must make allowances for the fact that many of his watched in childhood or adolescence, when a terrible cat toy or a child with a knife really caused consternation.
And reviewing the classics, you can remember the feeling of the past. But for the first time to watch these things in adulthood is more funny than scary.
The new film is closer to the modern trends of horror. Here everything looks darker and gloomy around the house at night spreading fog and black trees in a forest depicted the most ominous. However, in the budget picture is not very big, so the background is sometimes too unnatural.
special effects level rose an order of magnitude. Living dead do not look plastic, and make-up seems very realistic. The patient's sister Rachel in the flashbacks and the first patient Luis scare naturalistic.
And a special pleasure to look at the terrible cat. In the old version of the Church is very ominous hissing and sparkling eyes. The new added his matted tufts of wool, which makes it even worse.
Still, in today's film could not stand the atmosphere of gloom and doom. In the film adaptation of 1989 that sought long scenes. For example, the road Jada and Louis to the cemetery takes time and create tensions. Just look and doubts of his father, when he was sitting in the cemetery until dark. In the new version, all these moments cut.
Old film, despite a brighter image, scares your stress. New is more inclined to the dark scenery and Screamer.
Therefore, those who loves atmospheric classics, the new version may be too superficial. But fans of loud noises and creepy dead is better to go to the movies - in this respect, old film loses quality filming.
With the result that
Definitely say which movie is better, will not work: they are perceived very differently. Revise the old picture more pleasant because of the nostalgia for the horror 80-90. It is not very scary, but rather entertains its simplicity.
The new version makes sometimes jump in the chair and tense because of really creepy scenes. But this film is not too memorable, because in addition to these things, there is nothing interesting. Unfortunately, the success of the new version of "It"Unlikely to repeat: the authors are too afraid to seriously deviate from the simple structure of horror.
And if neither of them will not like the movie, you can always re-read once again the product of King. It really is not outdated and scary at all times.
see also👻😨🧟♀️
- 25 films based on the works of Stephen King, which is worth a look
- 60 best horror films of the XXI century
- As the film "Doctor Sleep" combines drama and the real horror of Stephen King
- 10 Stephen King books that everyone should read
- "It" or "Children of the Corn"? Check how well you know the universe of Stephen King