Pet Sematary II

Paramount Pictures | Release Date: August 28, 1992

2.8	USER SCORE Generally unfavorable reviews based on 37 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

FilipeNetoJan 17, 2021

This is the sequel to the 1989 film "Pet Sematary" and is another one of those sequels that I would gain from having never been made. Unlike the original film, which was able to prove satisfactory even without being good, this film is soThis is the sequel to the 1989 film "Pet Sematary" and is another one of those sequels that I would gain from having never been made. Unlike the original film, which was able to prove satisfactory even without being good, this film is so strange, so absurd and so surreal that it never works well.

Everything happens a few years after the tragedy that shook the Creed family. After burying his mother, an actress who died in a strange accident while filming, young Jeff moves to the rural town of the first film, where he goes to live with his father. It's through an incident of school violence that he discovers the Pet Cemetery, which is later taken to the cursed indigenous cemetery behind. From here on, everything becomes as obvious, as predictable and as idiotic as possible, as they give life to the dead and suffer the predictable consequences of their actions.

The film was directed again by Mary Lambert, and it couldn't be worse. It is an absurd film, in which our notion of logic is challenged by the development of the script, increasingly dissociated from reality, to the point that some characters, like Jeff, seem to be living a dream or an illusion caused by narcotics. To make things even more unbearable, the film is slow and spends a lot of time on scenes that are perfectly expendable or that could have been shortened without major difficulties.

The cast has well-known names from the cinema of the nineties and I believe that the actors did the best they could under the circumstances. But the fact is that they received so bad material that they couldn't shine. This was the case with Edward Furlong, who was still at the time collecting the fruits of an excellent job in "Terminator 2". He's a decent actor and does the best he can, but the material that was given to him in this film is so bad that I think it's just luck that his career didn't end up buried here. With him, Anthony Edwards also did his best, but Clancy Brown did a much more interesting, lively and energetic job, bringing to life a policeman truly worthy of our hatred. Darlanne Fluegel and Lisa Waltz are not so interesting and truly seem to appear just for the sake of the script.

Technically, the film is as bad as it could be. Boring, slow, he has a faded and uninteresting cinematography, to which are added uninteresting sets and costumes. The most interesting and notable is, probably, the set used in the climatic scenes, with all the clothes, props and objects of the protagonist's deceased mother scattered everywhere. The visual and sound effects are also not brilliant.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

humunguschungusApr 16, 2019

Pet Semetary II manages to be both one of the worst sequels of all time and one of the most unnecessary. It's great fodder for late night marathons of horrible films, but has little entertainment value on it's own.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews