Pet Sematary: Bloodlines Review: Sometimes No Prequel Is Better
Sometimes dead is better, and that's a lesson that "Pet Sematary: Bloodlines" probably should've taken to heart. Maybe it's time to let this horror series stay in its grave. 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.
King's novel is a modern gothic affair, the story of an ancient indigenous burial ground that has the power to bring back the dead. But whatever goes into that sour ground — be it animal or human — often comes back changed; more often than not, the resurrected is a bloodthirsty ghoul with a mean streak and a preternatural knowledge of deep, dark secrets. King's novel was first adapted to the screen in 1989, then came a remake in 2019. Some folks balked at the 2019 film, which changed King's source material considerably for its third-act shocks. I was a fan; it wasn't as good as the novel, and it wasn't as scary as the '89 film, but it had its nasty charms. None of that is on display in "Bloodlines," which amps up the gore but fails to capture the gothic spirit and prevailing sense of dread that made King's novel so damn scary.
What if Jud Crandall was a hot guy?
It's 1969, and young, hot Jud Crandall (Jackson White) just wants to get the hell out of Ludlow, Maine, with his girlfriend Norma (Natalie Alyn Lind). The Vietnam War is ongoing, and Jud has yet to be drafted. Upset and wanting to serve his country in some way, Jud plans to head to Michigan and join the Peace Corps. Jud's father Dan (a sleepy-seeming Henry Thomas) is surprisingly happy to see his son leave home; it seems getting out of Ludlow is something that rarely happens, and escaping town is an achievement.
Unfortunately, Jud and Norma don't get very far before they end up in a car accident. Almost immediately after that, Norma is viciously bitten by Hendricks, a dog that belongs to the Baterman family. When Jud was younger, he was best friends with Timmy Baterman (Jack Mulhern). Jud, Timmy, and their other friend Manny (Forrest Goodluck) were thick as thieves — they would even hang out in a treehouse, as old-timey kids were wont to do — but they've since grown apart. Timmy went off to Vietnam, but he's suddenly home now ... and he's acting weird. Timmy stalks around town creeping everyone out, and his father Bill (David Duchovny) is acting mighty strange, too.
Anyone who has read King's novel, seen the 1989 film, or paid close attention to the prologue of "Bloodlines" knows what's up: Timmy was killed in Vietnam, and his father buried him in the Mi'kmaq burial ground, the cursed indigenous graveyard that lies in the woods beyond the "pet sematary" where local children bury their deceased pets. Timmy is back from the dead and behaving like a real jerk, and the film handles this in such a muddled, unconvincing way that it never lands. There's nothing scary or supernatural-seeming about Timmy; he's just kind of an a**hole.
Dead and buried
There's a lot of talk here about how Ludlow is cursed, and there's even a flashback to the 1600s when the town was founded. These are solid, sturdy ideas, but "Bloodlines" fails to follow through with them. Manny and his sister Donna (Isabella Star LaBlanc) are Native characters, and since much of "Pet Sematary" is built around the "ancient Indian burial ground" trope, this is a potentially smart move in terms of better representation. But even this falls by the wayside; it's surface-level stuff that doesn't amount to much, save for an unconvincing plotline that has Donna having vision-like dreams. This is a lazy idea that feels even lazier in its execution. Everything in this movie seemingly happens with a big shrug.
Again: I am absolutely convinced there's a longer cut of this film that fleshes these ideas out more fully. Whether or not that cut is better is something I can't tell you — I can only work with what we've been given, and what we've been given is an awkward hatchet job that fails to deliver. Characters are introduced, have little to no lines of dialogue, and then are quickly dispatched. Should we care? I guess, but it's hard to muster up much enthusiasm. Beer does manage to make great use of space, portraying Ludlow as an empty, lonely town isolated from the rest of the world. But the film also looks occasionally cheap and overlit; there's nothing here that feels authentic to the 1960s (ditto the 1600s flashback, which comes across as cosplay).
"Pet Sematary" is my favorite King novel, so I approached "Bloodlines" with optimism bordering on hopefulness. Alas, the final result is weak and ineffectual. There's some nice practical gore that might satisfy horror hounds, and there are germs of good ideas, like the concept that Jud is doomed to follow in his father's small-town footsteps and never get the hell out of Ludlow. But there's nothing here to really grab hold of. The film slips through our fingers like fresh grave dirt. It feels almost totally removed from King's world — hell, the "sematary" barely figures into the film at all; it's an afterthought. If you're looking for the gothic thrills and chills that make "Pet Sematary" so special, stick to the novel, or the '89 film, or even the 2019 remake, and leave "Bloodlines" dead and buried where it belongs.
/Film Rating: 4 out of 10