IMDb user comments for
Pet Sematary II (1992) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 10:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

Index

92 comments in total

---

13 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
A ghoulish tale. Evil just has trouble staying dead., 25 March 2001

Author: Michael O'Keefe from Muskogee OK

This is a sequel that has no connection to Stephen King. The only thing carried over from the original is the same location. Parts of this film are gory while violence over shadows the horror. This movie has been struck with a mean streak.

A young widower(Anthony Edwards)moves with his young son (Edward Furlong)to an old town in Maine. After hearing the legend of the pet cemetery where sometimes the dead are revived; he wants to take his mother from her grave and place her in the special burial ground in hopes of her rejoining the family. The boy's best friend's stepfather is proof that the legend is true. Some of the strangest scenes are funnier than they are scary. But don't rest easy for there are times you will flinch.

Also in the cast are: Clancy Brown, Jason McGuire and Lisa Waltz.

---

13 out of 16 people found the following comment useful :-
Far more "over the top" than the original, may be a bit too much for many, 24 January 2006

Author: lemon_magic from Wavy Wheat, Nebraska

All right...I think that many commentators hate this film for what seems like good reasons, to them at least. And I agree that PS II is definitely not for everyone, maybe even not for fans of the original film - or even for fans of Stephen King.But there are things I enjoy about this film.

I enjoy watching Clancy Brown chew up the scenery in the 2nd half of the movie after his character 'comes back'. Brown has a real gift for physical comedy and black humor, and he does a great job portraying a shambling revenant...he just radiates savage, hateful glee, and very effectively comes across as a...THING masquerading as a man, an agent of chaos and misery just barely keeping it together long enough to extract his revenge. PS II is worth watching just for his performance.

I enjoy the way the plot spirals out of control after the opening events, as the two boys try to "fix" things early on by using the Pet Semetary to cover up their, um, "mistakes", only to find themselves completely over their heads.

There are individual moments of mean-spirited gallows humor that are a lot of fun, and even a few good one liners - "No brain, No Pain; Think About It, Won't You?" was a screamingly funny line in the context it was delivered in. And the bit where Anthony Edwards staggers back into the Gilbert house and you hear 3 more shots was perfectly timed, and worth a chuckle.

In fact, I feel that the entire movie seems to somehow embody the spirit and malice of whatever it is that brings the dead back from the Sematary. The director and screenwriter manage to make every scene, almost every shot, feel as if the "wrongness" of the Sematary has infected the very air and light of the town from the very opening shots.

And in this, they may have been too successful. The glumness, the sense of oppression and airlessness and dread, the rot and gore and malice from beyond the grave are simply too much for the average film goer; if the director had backed off a little, and allowed a little more light into the mood and not rubbed our noses in the gore and blood and maggots quite so much, I think the results would have been more accessible for a lot more people. There a moments where I wish that we didn't have to see quite so many spurting wounds and decaying flesh and that not quite so many characters had gotten killed in the last 20 minutes.

So...I think the movie was what the creators intended to make, but they may have misjudged the reaction most people would have to their creation. I can still watch this on occasion and admire the energy and effort put into bringing this "feeling" to, er, life.

---

7 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
The curse of Stephen King sequels continues, 12 January 2007

Author: camera_in_the_shadow from United States

After witnessing the onset death of his actress mother in a most implausible way (what movie crew would use a metal fence with their actors near electricity?), child of divorce, Jeff (Furlong), is off to live with his dad permanently and must accept the fact that his parents will never get back together. Or will they? Director Lambert makes the returned dead a bit more interesting this time by making them more intelligent and cunning. Unfortunately this was primarily used as a means to portray a lot of cheesy and cheap "shocks" and even unexplained motives for the Gus (Clancy Brown) character. Gone is the endearment and tragedy of the original; substituted with excessive gore f/x and spiteful characters. Furlong, who managed to impress in his early roles with characters who had similar family of origin problems (Terminator 2, American Heart, Brain Scan, A Home of Our Own), doesn't do much here outside of sullen glares, cuss and cry "Mom!" (literally) a number of times. Overall cheesy fun for horror fans but a flop in the character and scare departments. Hard to believe Mary Lambert, director of the first film, is responsible for this major disappointment of a sequel to the superior original. The ending suggests a setup for a sequel. I suppose we can all feel lucky this franchise remained buried after all.

---

8 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
Can you make a worse sequel?, 18 July 1999

Author: jwb-5 from Ohio, USA

"Pet Sematary II" tried too hard. The makers of this film tried to be like Stephen King, and failed miserably. I sat through this movie with the worst feeling. It was so unrealistic in a bad way, and the violence was inappropriate. "Pet Sematary" was a work of art by the master, Stephen King. "Pet Sematary II" was a work of trash by some wannabe. The acting was fine, but they couldn't save the movie if their lives depended on it. The nudity was in all the wrong places. The doctor has a fantasy about his dead wife, and her head turns into that of a barking dog. It was sick, disgusting, and way too many people died. Did you notice how there weren't very many deaths in "Pet Sematary"? Well in "II", there were tons. Way too many. This movie was horrible. If you want to see a good sequel, see "Scream 2" or "Scream 3". I gave it a 1 out of 10.

---

9 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
I Have a Question---Is It All Right to Pet on a First Date?, 19 April 2003
Author: tfrizzell from United States

Exactly. You have to have fun when doing movie criticism sometimes, especially when it comes to sorry films like "Pet Sematary II". Believe it or not I like the film slightly more than most other people, but that is not saying much because this is a movie that has basically no following. It is early-1990s Maine, a few years after the original, and once again a new family has moved into the sleepy community. Anthony Edwards is a veterinarian that has no ideas about the titled place and son Edward Furlong (basically destroying the short celebrity status he had after "Terminator 2") is still reeling emotionally after his actress mother's death during a freak studio accident. Furlong meets the chubby Jason McGuire (an adolescent disenchanted with sadistic step-father Clancy Brown) and he soon learns of the town's history and the fact that some things in life (or death) can indeed be changed. "Pet Sematary II" is a studio project all the way. The first was a minor box office success and it naturally spawned this one. This is not from the mind of Stephen King and thus the short series falls even further down the cinematic ladder. Director Mary Lambert (who also directed the original) once again shows her short-comings as a film-maker with an uneven pace that is not helped out by a sophomoric screenplay and sub-par performances across the board. By far not the worst horror flick I have ever seen, but still a movie that ranks real low in the American cinematic machine. 2 stars out of 5.

---

5 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
My opinion, with a minor spoiler about the very ending., 31 May 2004

Author: lydiadarling from London, England.

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I have to say that Pet Sematary II was the biggest load of rubbish I have ever insulted my eyes with watching. I should have been forewarned with the bizarre spelling of "cemetery" -- why they didn't spell it correctly in the first place... I'll never know.

What the hell was up with the ending credits with all that sad music and pictures of the people who died? It's not a -documentary-, it's a pathetic excuse for a thriller/horror film. The acting was dodgy, the script was bemusing and the plot was utterly ridiculous.

The psycho zombie dog was mildly amusing, but I'm not sure it was supposed to be. What was the film trying to do? Was it a spoof of a horror film? It failed at an attempt to fit into any genre of film other than "trash". I found the entire movie to be contrived, boring and stupid, and I wouldn't watch it again even someone paid me!

---

3 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
a inferior sequel that is much too slick for its own good, 23 October 2006

Author: disdressed12 from Canada

Pet Semetary 2 is not as creepy as Pet Semetery.it is however,gorier and faster paced.there is also more character development in this one,so theoretically you should feel more emotionally for the characters,but i didn't.perhaps that may be because they are all shallow and unlikable.this movie was played more for camp value,than anything else.the acting is very hammy in some scenes,i hope intentionally.there is also an attempt at shock value,but it is more disgust i felt than shock in some scenes.this movie also has none of the atmosphere or mystique of the first.it is much too slick feeling.i felt the first had a sort of rough,raw quality,which works.the slickness of this movie is one of its failings,along with some others i mentioned.bottom line.this movie is inferior to the original. 5/10

---

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Don't bury this movie in Pet Sematery..., 2 April 2009

Author: Newsense from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

...it might come back as a sequel that is even worse than this one. For the record I actually liked the first Pet Sematary. While not being the best book-to-movie adaptation, it had its moments. This one has none.

Premise: A son loses his mother in a fatal accident on a movie set. The boy's father moves to the same town that the Creed family died in. things start to happen when a boy loses his dog "Zowie" to a gunshot would by his abusive step dad who is also a sheriff. The boy buries his dog in the same Indian burial set and things get worse from there.

Opinion: This was one pointless sequel. At least the characters in the first movie had a method to their madness. The characters in this movie are just plain stupid. The acting is bland and the story is backwards. The characters who die and come back to life have more personality as a reincarnated corpse than they did when they were alive. How insane is that? Plus this movie leaves questions unanswered? Why would Gus bury Clyde in the sacred burial ground after he killed him? It makes no sense as is the son who buries his abusive stepfather in the same burial site. If you saw that you dead dog came back to life more deranged wouldn't you think your spiteful step dad would come back more psychotic than he originally was? I didn't feel an ounce of sympathy for that pudgy idiot when Gus killed him and his mother. Stupid! If you want a better horror movie from Stephen King check out Misery. That was a classic. Pet Sematary Two is just a rotting, flea-infested dog of a sequel that should have never made it to the cutting room floor.

---

3 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Good, but it is very different from the first one..., 4 October 2002

Author: Lando_Hass from The Thuderdome, b**ch!!

Pet Sematary II is an overall good movie except for two things: one: it doesn't explain what happened after the events of the first film. Two: Its too different from the first one. Pet Sematary II does actually deliver some good chills, even though it is mostly just facial expressions. The acting was very good, considering the fact that most of the stars in Pet Sematary II were kids. The plot is a little bit different from the first one, but it still manages to impress, and the gore effects are spectacular. Here's the story: Geoff has just witnessed his mother die right in front of him on the set of her new film (she is electrocuted), and him and his dad move. Out of all the places in the world, they decide to move to a neighborhood near the infamous Pet Sematary. Geoff meets Drew Gilbert, an overweight teen who is coping with an abusive stepfather. Drew's stepfather "Gus" shoots Drew's beloved dog "Zowie", and that's when it all begins. Drew and Geoff bury Zowie up in the sacred burial ground that bring the dead back to life. Drew isnt sure about the fact that the sacred burial ground will bring Zowie back, but he tries it, not knowing that he will come back evil. When Zowie comes back, hell breaks loose. Zowie kills Gus, and then Drew buries him in the burial ground. Gus comes back, and finds more victims to bury. Meanwhile, Geoff's dad has opened up a Vet. Geoff sees that the burial ground works, so he decides to bring his dead mother back. The plot is one of the main reasons why this movie is so much different than the first. Pet Sematary II is more engaged into the basic horror genre, while Pet Sematary I is from the "original" horror genre. The first film had some killings in it, but Pet Sematary II has more basic killings. The gore effects come up more often in Pet Sematary II than in Pet Sematary I. I really didn't like the fact that they didn't explain what happened after the events in the first film, because they don't explain what happened to Louis Creed's daughter, and they don't explain how Rachel Creed was killed for a second time. Overall, Pet Sematary II is a tad underrated, but it still delivers some good chills, a mediocre plot, good acting, and very good atmosphere. This movie is pretty good, but the first one was better. 9 out of 10.

---

5 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Damn it, is this movie mediocre!, 15 July 2001

Author: David Balparda de Carvalho from Belo Horizonte

This is the most idiot and meaningless zombie movie I've ever seen. Pet Sematary I is a horror classic, but this is an A-bomb.

The characters' depth is non-existent, the movie is boring, the kid is boring, the bully is ridiculous and the sheriff was a zombie before he was dead. You begin to hope for some postal worker to assault and destroy that town. But no, probably even the postal workers of that town are boring.

The violence is gratuitous, not funny, and the final credits sequence with the faces of the people who died almost made me puke. That was the final blow: I lied catatonic over the couch, in true disbelief -- DUHHH...

---

---

Page 1 of 10:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Parents Guide	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history