It’s easy to dismiss a Horror remake and just say it isn’t good or as good as the original. Hell, you can say that about any remake. And there are plenty of examples where that turns out to be the truth. But I think it’s important we keep in mind the quality of the original film as it was. There is a sense of dread and gloom in the film. But there were plenty of times in the original where it came at odds with some of the more campy elements/scenes of the movie. A number of them revolve around Victor Pascow, or rather his spirit because he dies in the first scene he’s in. But he occasionally pops up to offer a more comedic feel to certain scenes. And that can sometimes feel a bit jarring compared to the feel the movie is trying to go for. And there are moments where the acting from some of the main characters are kind of flat.

Keeping that in mind, the remake is actually a better made film in that respect. This version still has a sense of dread but we still have moments throughout the first part of the movie where we get to know the main characters and connect with them. Only this time it feels like the tone of the movie is more consistent. And the acting is also more consistent. Jason Clarke as Louis Creed stands out more compared to Dale Midkiff. The rest of the cast also does a great job with the roles they are in. While John Lithgow is certainly a different interpretation, he is still very likable and feels organic to the way the story is being told.

But now let’s get to the stuff really worth talking about – the differences in this version. In this scenario, there are two major differences in this remake that sets itself apart and is the focus of criticism. The first is the character Ellie Creed. She is the oldest daughter of the Creed family. Unlike her younger brother Gage, who’s still a young child. Ellie though goes to school and hold conversations with her parents. Even talking about some of her fears and anxieties that are more abstract. We get the chance to create an emotional connection that helps us understand and feel for her. She’s a bit more developed in this version than she is in the original film.

And then she dies. Which is a major change since in the original movie and book, Gage is the child who dies. When wandering in the street and a truck doesn’t stop in time. I understand why it was originally Gage who dies, since someone so young – basically still a toddler – is heartbreaking and unthinkable. But from a narrative perspective, it makes more sense for Ellie to die. We’ve spent more time with her and she’s an actual character in the movie. The impact feels heavier. Some may point out that it feels more planned since she sees her cat Church, resurrected from the burial ground and abandoned by Louis a couple of scenes ago,,and goes out to try and get him. I’m all right with that since the Pet Sematary is supposed to have an influence on the people near it and push them to use the soil. I’ll admit though that while we don’t get a close look at her body right after the accident, it doesn’t seem that bloody of a corpse. But I can forgive that since that’s a nit-picky criticism.

That’s what makes the next part of the story that more interesting – the first human resurrection. In the first film, it doesn’t take long for Louis to decide to kill Gage after his youngest child comes back from the dead. But it takes a while for him to realize what he’s done after Ellie comes back. He tries to clean her up when she comes back, she still treats him like the dad she loves. He even goes as far as to think showing his wife Rachel what he did thinking she would be happy about it. Having Ellie be the first one back from the dead makes the confrontation with Jud more interesting. Let’s face it, having Gage being able to take down Jud or any adult in the original film is kind of silly. But this works because not only is Ellie small enough to still sneak around, but she has the intelligence to emotionally manipulate. Her face transforms into Jud’s dead wife and taunts him, intimidating him and eventually getting the upper hand and victory. That same kind of emotional manipulation is also used against her dad when he finally comes back to his senses and tries to kill her. It works well enough to get him to hesitate, leaving room for the opening kill against him.

And now comes the other major difference in this version that’s a source of criticism – the ending. The novel has it where Jud and Gage are dead, Ellie is in Chicago with her grandparents, and Louis takes his wife to the burial ground thinking this time it will be different. It ends with him waiting at home, a hand then rests on his should as he hears her call him “Darling”. The original film is mainly the same. But it ends with the two of them making out – which the resurrected Rachel uses as a distraction as she grabs a weapon and starts bringing it down on him just before the credits roll. But it is very different in this version. Jud is still dead, that’s the same. But as mentioned earlier, Louis is killed in his fight against his resurrected daughter. But Ellie had killed Rachel and dragged her to the burial ground earlier, meaning it is the resurrected Rachel that kills Louis. Mother and daughter drag Louis to the burial ground. The next morning comes and all three approach the vehicle were the still living Gage is sitting in, and the undead cat lands on the hood looking at the young child through the window.

A lot of people view this as kind of silly. Some say that this change was only made just o lazily subvert expectations. I understand that mind-set, especially when several movies or TV shows seems to want to subvert expectations without thinking of a way to do it that makes sense. But let me point this out. Both the original movie and the novel is an exploration of how a tragedy affects a family. How that grief spreads and destroys everyone. In this movie…the grief doesn’t destroy. Instead, it consumes them. And yes, there is a difference. In the original version of the story, grief destroys the relationships between all family members. But this version keeps them united, while drastically changing their personalities and beliefs by extension. While the heads of the Creed family may have lost themselves following Gage’s death, Ellie is actually in the care of her grandparents. There is still hope that she can make something of her life and move on in the years to follow. But not in this story.

All of them have been drastically altered by the tragedy that befell them. Regardless of if they brought it on themselves or if it was unavoidable, they are not the same. The trajectory of their lives are forever altered. There are plenty of people in real life that expect their lives to unfold one way, but then something happens that forces them down a darker path. And sometimes they don’t recover. They just can’t move one and try to grow. They succumb to darker emotions and perspectives. That’s what has happened to this family. Whatever comes next for them, it is objectively far worse than what would have happened to them before the trauma. And seeing how often opportunities have been presented that would have stopped this from happening, you have to wonder if they even wanted to be saved.

And that’s why I think this movie is just as good as the original. In some cases, even better. I know I’m in the minority about this. But maybe you should give it another shot. After reading this, you might view the film a bit differently. Might even realize that it wasn’t a mistake to bring this story back to life.

The post Why the Pet Sematary Remake is Important appeared first on The Pop Culture Wastleland.