Review for Cujo


(Originally posted on fight-evil.com)

I've seen this once or twice before, and it always fell a bit flat for me for various reasons. That said, upon rewatching it, I can appreciate it just a tad more. The biggest problem for me is how sentimental and sappy the film can come across as. Sure, it might have been hard to keep the original ending from the book in a time when happy endings were all the rage, but I think the end product would have made the film more menacing and less sappy.

Speaking of which, while I love the suspenseful music the movie has to offer, the 80's love/drama music can get a bit on the cheesy side. But that's the 1980's for you, I suppose. There's also the fact the film drags a bit. Sure, it's normal length-wise, but it's mostly a drama for the first fifty minutes (and I don't know how interesting I found the whole affair issue, to be honest), and while the horror element is good when it gets there, the payoff doesn't erase the set-up.

The actors and actresses are solid, though. Standouts include Dee Wallace, Daniel Hugh Kelly, Ed Lauter, and Jerry Hardin (not so much due to his role or screen time, which was minimal, but due to the fact he plays Deep Throat 15 years later in The X-Files). Oh, and the makeup for Cujo was excellent. Though I know that Wallace had no choice but to fight Cujo off, I can't help but feel bad for the dog.

In the gore department, there's a few offerings, though not that many compared to other films of the time. Cujo can be a bit heavy in the drama department, which I think is why I underrated it before. For all it is, it's great portions and flaws, I think the film's just slightly below average. Decently fun, still. 6.5/10.

reply

[deleted]

Indeed. A good majority of King's works (I admit, I've only read at most 20% of his output) deal with something supernatural based, and this is unique in that none of that is presence. Makes it feel more based in reality, but at times, in a way, it makes it a bit more dull.

Animal attack movies were never my favorite as far as horror is concerned. Some of them are certainly good (such as Orca from 1977 or Island Claws from 1980), but rarely are they a highlight to me.

reply

[deleted]

Off the top of my head, insofar as novels go, there's his Richard Bachman works (Rage, The Long Walk, Roadwork, and The Running Man) which were all set in reality. As you say, his stories from Different Seasons, being "The Body," "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption," and "Apt Pupil" were without supernatural elements. Misery, perhaps The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, The Colorado Kid, Blaze, Blockade Billy, and a few other novellas ("A Good Marriage" and "Big Driver") were without supernatural elements, but the vast majority of his works did indeed focus on the supernatural (be it aliens, vampires, Satan, extra-dimensions, what-have-you).

reply

[deleted]

I've in fact not read most of what I listed - I have access to most of them, but I've recently not been in much a King reading mood (aside from It, which I read annually). Certainly his non-supernatural works can be good, but some of his best (It and Needful Things, for instance) are deeply rooted in the supernatural, in my opinion.

reply

[deleted]

Dazed...why'd you delete your post about "8 rules?"

reply

[deleted]

:(

I really hate to see you go, Dazed. I thought you'd deleted your posts, including your OP, in that thread because it'd gone so terribly pear-shaped (as, thus far, *any* attempt to discuss rules has), and you wanted to distance yourself from it. I thought that was probably a wise choice.

But I didn't realise you've become so fed up you actually want to leave MC. That makes two excellent, articulate and well reasoned contributors who've done the same, so far. I hate that this is happening, all as a result of one, possibly two, posters who, as you said, are unable to behave like adults.

I wish you'd reconsider. Please don't let the few win by chasing you off. Not that I don't understand. I came close to that point myself. But please do reconsider.

reply

I understand Dazed, but every time someone leaves, that means trolls win. Jim wasn't quick enough to get rid of them. Btw, where is he? His last post is 10 days old.

reply

Apis is 100% dead on about trolls

reply

Oh no. Please don't leave!
(Although I fear you're already gone...)

I haven't known you very long, but I have enjoyed our brief conversations on here. I'll miss you Dazed. 😔

reply

C'mon, man. Don't give up that easily. Don't give in to the moronic trolls. Stupid people eventually go away because it doesn't take much to distract them

reply

Aww, come on now. It's not so bad here now. I know the ignore button isn't perfect, but it's something. And you can always just ignore manually (meaning don't read or reply to negative posts). Works for me lol!!

reply

I think Dee Wallace's performance was Oscar worthy. She did an amazing job!!

reply