Stephen King Hyped Up Pet Sematary: Bloodlines, But What Do The Critics Think?

September has been a big month for Stephen King fans, partially thanks to the release of his latest weighty novel, Holly, and partially thanks to the premiere of Pet Sematary: Bloodlines, the prequel to the 2019 novel adaptation. Granted, Bloodlines is an offshoot that doesn’t have any substantial source material, with screenwriters Jeff Buhler and Lindsey Anderson Beer (who also directed) heavily expanding an anecdote shared in the 1983 novel. But that doesn’t mean King himself is ignoring it, as the bestselling author previously shared praise for the film on social media. But as it sometimes goes with adaptations, the horror master’s take stands counter to how critics are feeling about the new prequel.

What Stephen King Has Said About Pet Sematary: Bloodlines

With a cast bolstered by Mrs. Fletcher’s Jackson White, Jackie Brown’s Pam Grier, and King adaptation vets Henry Thomas and Samantha Mathis, Pet Sematary: Bloodlines earned some kind words from King for the acting and the character work, with the storyline also getting a nod of approval, if not the most enthusiastic one. Here’s how he put it:

Obviously the screenplay wasn’t able to stick completely to the original text in this case, since that would probably make the movie shorter than the average theatrical preview. But it doesn’t sound like Stephen King minded the alterations too much, or else he might not have mentioned the plot at all. But anyone eager to watch will likely want to hang their hopes onto David Duchovny in his role as Bill, among other characters.

What Critics Are Saying About Pet Sematary: Bloodlines

With Stephen King essentially the only person offering a take on the new movie that has actual skin the game in some capacity, it’s maybe not so surprising that his opinion is kinder to the finished product than others’ thoughts. Variety’s review (among several others) addressed the question of why this movie even exists if it isn’t adding necessary details and context to the story that fans have been freaked out by for decades.

• The best adaptations of King’s work get under the skin as they force you to reckon with such ideas, staying with you in much the same way his books do. Pet Sematary: Bloodlines is not one of those adaptations. On a scale from Thinner to The Shining, it falls in the bottom half alongside the likes of last year’s Firestarter remake. (That the original even spawned a sequel, remake and now a prequel is a bit puzzling in and of itself, as it hardly ranks among the better movies based on King’s work.) “Who asked for this?” is the question such projects invoke, and Lindsey Anderson Beer’s film never comes up with a satisfying answer.

Yikes to all that, particularly the shots taken at both Thinner and the Firestarter remake. (Not saying those shots are totally unwarranted or anything, but still.) And that’s a pretty good representation of the consensus, with SlashFilm also sharing the notion that the film is the opposite of Stephen King’s novel when it comes to being an effective scare.

• A prequel to Pet Sematary, arguably Stephen King’s scariest novel, is a great idea … in theory. But Lindsey Anderson Beer’s gnarly new movie leaves a lot to be desired; it’s a rushed, clumsy, unscary affair that wastes a good premise. It feels edited to hell, as if there was something better, and longer, that got hacked and slashed down to the bloody mess now headed to Paramount+ in time for Halloween season. While there are occasional flashes of gory fun to be had, Bloodlines ultimately fails to crawl out of its moldy grave, leaving us with an undead film. 

The review from Showbiz Junkies is slightly less harsh, saying it’s fine enough for viewers who are already educated and amped up about this fictional world. But that, in the end, it’s not exactly the most vital piece of horror entertainment.

• Pet Sematary: Bloodlines has a decent number of jump scares, and undead Timmy is satisfyingly gruesome. But while the setup’s intriguing, the execution doesn’t quite live up to expectations. It’s impossible to match Stephen King’s writing, and this prequel proves it’s time to let King’s Pet Sematary‘s Ludlow rest in peace.

Currently sitting with a 33% rotten score on Rotten Tomatoes, Pet Sematary: Bloodlines did pull a few positive scores from critics, even if those reviews were largely in agreement with some of the points made in the negative takes. Let’s cap things off the way they started, with some kind words going to the prequel, with Black Girl Nerds’ review shining a light on the film’s setting and sound design. 

• Bloodlines owes a lot of its eeriness to the setting, the kind of rural atmosphere that makes you feel like you need a shower. It’s not Texas Chainsaw Massacre level, but characters are almost always sweating. Rarely do the bees and flies stop buzzing, so to say the crystal-clear sound design was effective would be an understatement. Nothing is more unsettling than the sound of Timmy’s bones cracking with every movement. Thankfully, the scares aren’t as obnoxious and Blumhouse-y as the trailer depicts. 

For what it’s worth, Lindsey Anderson Beer generally received a lot of balanced criticisms that pointed to her clearly being a fan of King’s work, and that she did what she could with what was available. But what was available apparently wasn’t worthy of digging up from its grave.

But no need to listen to anyone else’s opinions when Pet Semetary: Bloodlines is available to stream right now with a Paramount+ subscription. And head to our upcoming horror movies schedule to see what other frights and thrills are on the way.