NateWatchesCoolMovies Pet Cemetery II never gets much love or accolades, and while the first isn't a bad effort, the sequel kind of blows it out of the water by being just bonkers crazy in general. Edward 'John Connor' Furlong plays an unfortunate youngster who stumbles into the same macabre Indian burial ground, causing all manner of havoc in his small town. The real asset the film has is actor Clancy Brown, a huge talent who has an utter ball as Sheriff Gus Gilbert, a nasty prick who gets much worse when some ghostly entity takes up residence inside him and stirs shit up. Imagine the farmer with the alien in him from the first Men In Black only more scarily rambunctious and you'll have some idea. Brown's performance is a deranged opus of physical comedy and hyped up lunacy. " Why did you dig up my mom's body?" asks his bewildered stepson (Jason McGuire) "Because I wanted to fuck her!!" growls Clancy in retort. Such is the demented level of dark comedy that gets served up alongside the gore, which in itself is plentiful as well. It's a sequel and as such isn't based on a Stephen King book like the first, but it still manages to finds a writing groove and gruesome set pieces, including a spectacularly ooey gooey third act. Cool stuff.

trista-902-431742 I've tried to watch this movie three times (1993, 2003, and 2015) and haven't been able to finish it. I WANT to like it. But it's just disgusting and inane. I love Clancy Brown, but not enough to sit through this dreck.Nothing makes sense. The over-the-top gore and cruelty just comes across as sheer mean bloody-mindedness and isn't scary at all. Characters I care about in this film=0, so there is no horror at their deaths. There's an attempt at campiness, but it's too lame to make this a "so terrible it's awesome" movie. The only positive is the soundtrack. Dramarama, L7, Jesus & Mary Chain, Ramones...I suggest you skip watching this flick and spend some time listening to the artists whose music is featured in the "film".

galaxychoco OK now i know that a lot of people hated this movie but i thought it was good i prefer to watch this one compared to the original one if i am honest. Anyway acting could have been better storyline was more or less kind of the same (people and animals die are buried then come back)the movie does flaw in places but then again no movie is perfect. I also found that this one was easier to follow than the first one was so with that being said i would rate this movie a 7 out of 10. And apparently i have to write 3 more lines ummm cant really think of anything to say but i think that its pretty stupid you should just be able to write what you want then post in instead of having to drag it out for 10 lines.

gavin6942 The ancient Indian cemetery with the power to raise the dead returns and influences the lives of new residents.I must say, good or bad, I am glad director Mary Lambert returned for the sequel. As the first was her creation, it seems only fitting to let her take the characters and concepts where she wants to go with them. Had another director handled it, the film could have lost any flavor of the original that might exist. (There is some similar tone and such, which I think keeps it a strong sequel.) I love the young Edward Furlong (during his career peak) and Anthony Edwards with a beard. Great casting that keeps this film relevant even if it carried over pretty much nobody from the original. (I say "pretty much" because I think it has no one, but a minor character might have made it past me.)The film as a whole has received negative reviews, but the fact is that the original really is not that great. Although a modern classic, and a pop culture gem, it is not actually a critically good film. So the sequel by horror standards is not bad -- it actually maintains the level of the original.