35
Metascore
11 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- 63Boston GlobeJay CarrBoston GlobeJay CarrIt's a much better bad movie than the first one. It isn't often in Hollywood that a director gets the chance to go back and essentially remake a failed film but Lambert, refusing to let sleeping cadavers lie, gets the job done this time. [28 Aug 1992, p.50]
- 50Los Angeles TimesKevin ThomasLos Angeles TimesKevin ThomasPet Sematary II, which is too gruesome for grammar school youngsters and too easily laughed off for most high schoolers, ought to be a big hit among the junior high crowd. Not nearly as scary as the 1989 original, it nonetheless expresses and attempts to resolve in bold mythological terms the anxieties of being 13.
- 50San Francisco ChronicleMick LaSalleSan Francisco ChronicleMick LaSallePet Sematary Two' follows the usual horror movie pattern: The first half is a pleasure, because you know what has to happen and you can't wait. And the second half is a bore, because you know what still has to happen and you can't wait for it to end. [01 Sept 1992, p.E3]
- 40EmpireKim NewmanEmpireKim NewmanLess pompous than Pet Sematary, this has moments of trashy vigour but is scuppered by a consistently wretched script, Mary Lambert's knee-jerk direction and the usual redundant sequel air of utter pointlessness.
- 40The New York TimesStephen HoldenThe New York TimesStephen HoldenMary Lambert, who directed the original Pet Sematary, has returned for the sequel, which, like its forerunner, is much better at special effects than at creating characters or telling a coherent story.
- 30Washington PostWashington PostPSTwo feels like an elongated Tales From the Crypt, though the annoying heavy-metal soundtrack sounds like seepage from Headbanger's Ball. The first time around, Lambert went for terror; this time, it's mostly hardy-har-horror.
- 30Austin ChronicleMarc SavlovAustin ChronicleMarc SavlovLike the dead dog that it is, though, Pet Sematary deserves to be buried very, very deep.
- 25TV Guide MagazineTV Guide MagazineFor all its many flaws, the original PET SEMATARY at least maintained a fidelity to its source novel; this one not only ignores the rules set up by the first movie but manages to contradict its own internal and dramatic logic as well.
- 25USA TodaySusan WloszczynaUSA TodaySusan WloszczynaPet Sematary Two is the cinematic equivalent of roadkill. Disgusting to look at and a bloody awful mess. [31 Aug 1992, p.4D]
- 25The Seattle TimesJohn HartlThe Seattle TimesJohn HartlLambert relies so much on gore and mean-spiritedness that the actors can't help looking glum; they're clearly being ignored by a director who seems to have lost touch with all the human elements in the story. The movie is ultimately as lifeless as most of its characters end up being. [28 Aug 1992, p.28]