Summary

Pet Sematary: Bloodlines attempts to provide a more detailed explanation of the burial ground, but fails to fully reckon with the problematic cultural portrayal. The film unnecessarily focuses on an inconsequential character, Jud Crandall, instead of exploring the more intriguing backstory of the Mi’kmaq tribe and the town’s residents. While the cast delivers committed performances, the film lacks genuine suspense or intrigue, and the cinematography feels flat. It may appeal to Stephen King fans, but isn’t truly inspired.

In 2019, the Pet Sematary remake was released. Directed by Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer and written by Jeff Buhler, the remake revisited the Creed family with a few minor tweaks that ultimately did not stray too far away from the original plot of the 1989 film. The consensus was that while the film had an updated look, the resurrected story offered very little. Pet Sematary: Bloodlines, a direct prequel to the novel and the 2019 film, follows young Jud Crandall as he discovers the cemetery where the dead don’t stay dead 50 years before meeting the Creeds.

The one aspect that seems to indicate the underlying intentions of Pet Sematary: Bloodlines’ existence is the attempt to rectify the simplistic explanation of the burial ground that reanimates dead people and animals. There is an attempt to flesh out the history of the damned burial site, but the film doesn’t fully reckon with the reality that Stephen King and plenty of other horror writers rely on the audience’s willful ignorance to explain away any spooky thing as being a byproduct of Indigenous peoples’ history and culture.

There is a point where a case could be made for a Prey-esque prequel that solely revolves around the perspectives of the Mi’kmaq tribe, whose lands were invaded by the Europeans who would build Ludlow. There is a story to be told of how this burial ground came to be a source of terror for the town’s residents. Instead, the film splits its attention, giving focus to the story of Jud Crandall, a character who didn’t need to be explained or understood. At the same time, the general explanation of the “pet sematary” history is a protracted flashback.

Prequels are a reality we cannot overcome. Still, there is a sad expectation that we are somehow incapable of inferring a character’s past without being explicitly told in detail all that happened before the start of a story. Somehow, filmmakers (and audiences, as a result) can’t accept that a story may have many other beginnings. It is one thing to have a prequel that expands our knowledge of the dynamics and world that made the story we enjoyed so intriguing, but it’s an entirely different thing to focus on an inconsequential character. Jud Crandall was an interesting character with a history connected to the supernatural burial ground that predates Louis Creed and his family. But what exactly is there to learn or experience that makes Crandall’s story worth exploring in the first place? That question often goes unanswered with many unwarranted prequels, and Pet Sematary: Bloodlines fails to raise any compelling points.

Screenwriters Jeff Buhler and Lindsey Anderson Beer, who also directed, do their best with what they have, but Buhler’s previous writing efforts on Pet Sematary didn’t manage to elevate the source material impressively, and there is nothing much to speak of for Bloodlines, either. The scares are palpable; Beer does a good job crafting an unsettling horror that has the right amount of gore and creepy ambiance. The cast is effective in their respective roles, but Forrest Goodluck and Isabella Star LaBlanc are underserved as they could easily have carried the entire film. Pam Grier is always a delight to see, but her talents are not utilized as well as they could have been. The story never manages to be as lively as it needs to be to justify its existence, but the cast attempts to make up for that with committed performances. Sadly, the film is rather dull, lacking in genuine suspense or intrigue.

Despite some good instincts from Beer, the material is too constricting, denying the director the chance to expand her ideas or take turns that might alienate fans expecting a movie that answers questions no one was really asking. Mythology is certainly fascinating to explore when it comes to established horror that begins with an inexplicable idea, but there is hardly anything worth digging up here. In addition to the bland story, the film isn’t all too impressive to watch. There is a flatness to the cinematography, which is unfortunate considering Benjamin Kirk Nielsen has recently done great work. Tonally, the film is a tad bit gratifying for fans of King and his atmospheric horror. The darkness permeating over these characters and town is effectively realized, and the frights are effective.

Pet Sematary: Bloodlines is mercifully shorter than the 2019 film, but it still needed trimming. There have been worse straight-to-streaming horror films, and Pet Sematary: Bloodlines is hardly the worst among them. Memorable? Hardly. Entertaining? Somewhat. Ultimately, the film will resonate with the people eager to devour more Stephen King-inspired projects; sadly, there is nothing genuinely inspired to enjoy.

Pet Sematary: Bloodlines begins streaming on Paramount+ Friday, October 6. The film is 84 minutes long and rated R for horror violence, gore and language.