On the list of great film adaptations of Stephen King books-- Carrie, The Shining, even The Green Mile-- you're unlikely to find Pet Sematary, a 1989 film which New York Times critic Vincent Canby said at the time "fails mostly because it doesn't trust the audience to do any of the work."

So if the only film adaptation of the still-beloved book has been forgotten, why not reboot it? That's the logic over at Paramount, where producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura has hired screenwriter Matthew Greenberg to adapt the material. THR notes he was also responsible for 1408 , another King adaptation that hit the screens in 2007.

It's been a long time since a King adaptation made a real impact on wide audiences, but it doesn't seem like Sematary will be the one to do it-- it leans closer to the horror side of King's personality than the emotional one. I mean, the main villain is the resurrected corpse of a three-year-old. Sounds terrifying, but also something I would like to avoid at all costs. I also wonder if they'll have to ditch the Indian burial ground angle, given how un-PC it is. Can we come up with another mystical force that might have the power to create toddler zombies?
Stephen King's Lisey's Story: 7 Differences Between The Book And The Show After Episode 4 television 2d Stephen King's Lisey's Story: 7 Differences Between The Book And The Show After Episode 4 Eric Eisenberg
Adapting Stephen King's Christine: Is John Carpenter's 1983 Classic Still Revving Its Engine? news 3d Adapting Stephen King's Christine: Is John Carpenter's 1983 Classic Still Revving Its Engine? Eric Eisenberg
Stephen King's Lisey's Story: 7 Differences Between The Book And The Show After Episode 3 television 1w Stephen King's Lisey's Story: 7 Differences Between The Book And The Show After Episode 3 Eric Eisenberg