I was curious about "Cujo" when I first heard about it. I think that Nature being Nature is often much scarier than anything the human mind can come up with (which is why the movie "Outbreak" did not need the Hollywood-esquire chase scenes later on -- the deadly virus was scary enough). Knowing that this movie had been made based on a story by legendary horror writer Stephen King about a rabid dog, I was intrigued. This dog wasn't possessed by evil or a mutant or of alien origin or anything like that. Just a friendly St. Bernard who got rabies and became a monster. How was King going to add his unique touch to this one? I was growing skeptical: how compelling a villain could a rabid St. Bernard be and how scary a movie could they make about him?
The answers are that Cujo is not a compelling villain and "Cujo" is not scary.
Cujo is the most interesting character in the film, with the bunny he's chasing in the opening scene coming in second. (The kid was going to get an honorable mention, but I'll get to him in a minute.) The human characters are so artificial that the natural acting of the dog won my sympathy. I did not, however, ever feel scared of Cujo. I felt sorry for him. He's not mean-spirited or evil or anything like that; the poor dog has rabies and is only doing what he's doing because a bunch of tiny viruses are turning his brain into mush. He's a tragic villain, which horror villains can never be. Horror villains have to be menacing and EEEVIL or else we'll never fear them. Cujo won my heart though. Believe it or not, this movie actually made me like St. Bernards more. (Maybe I'll get one.)
Now, about the characters and the story itself. First, this 95-minute film spends a solid 35 minutes setting up a bunch of stupid, clichéd subplots that serve no purpose whatsoever except to kind-of-sort-of provide a reason for a woman and her young kid to drive to the spot where Cujo happens to be. Once they get there, we're treated to an hour in which we see the same old scares over and over again. (Like I said, if you've seen the trailer, you've pretty much seen the movie. There's only so many times that a dog head-butting a window can be scary, although it didn't scare me once.) I think the film was trying to go for the "claustrophobic scare," where terror is generated from the thought that the woman and her kid can't leave the car for fear of Cujo. But, we never feel that terror, mainly because Cujo simply is not EEEEEVIL. Also, having the kid screaming his head off each time the dog shows up started to feel exploitative after a while. Horror movies usually have kids in traumatic situations, but if you're going to traumatize a kid for this long, the kid better either be possessed or he better have "the shining."
This movie could have worked with better direction and perhaps some innovative camera-work and editing, but it lacks all of that and so it doesn't work. Frankly, had the filmmakers cut out the first 35 minutes and trimmed the rest of the film down, they would have had a decent hour-long episode of "The Twilight Zone."
Cujo is a cool dog, but "Cujo" sucks.
The answers are that Cujo is not a compelling villain and "Cujo" is not scary.
Cujo is the most interesting character in the film, with the bunny he's chasing in the opening scene coming in second. (The kid was going to get an honorable mention, but I'll get to him in a minute.) The human characters are so artificial that the natural acting of the dog won my sympathy. I did not, however, ever feel scared of Cujo. I felt sorry for him. He's not mean-spirited or evil or anything like that; the poor dog has rabies and is only doing what he's doing because a bunch of tiny viruses are turning his brain into mush. He's a tragic villain, which horror villains can never be. Horror villains have to be menacing and EEEVIL or else we'll never fear them. Cujo won my heart though. Believe it or not, this movie actually made me like St. Bernards more. (Maybe I'll get one.)
Now, about the characters and the story itself. First, this 95-minute film spends a solid 35 minutes setting up a bunch of stupid, clichéd subplots that serve no purpose whatsoever except to kind-of-sort-of provide a reason for a woman and her young kid to drive to the spot where Cujo happens to be. Once they get there, we're treated to an hour in which we see the same old scares over and over again. (Like I said, if you've seen the trailer, you've pretty much seen the movie. There's only so many times that a dog head-butting a window can be scary, although it didn't scare me once.) I think the film was trying to go for the "claustrophobic scare," where terror is generated from the thought that the woman and her kid can't leave the car for fear of Cujo. But, we never feel that terror, mainly because Cujo simply is not EEEEEVIL. Also, having the kid screaming his head off each time the dog shows up started to feel exploitative after a while. Horror movies usually have kids in traumatic situations, but if you're going to traumatize a kid for this long, the kid better either be possessed or he better have "the shining."
This movie could have worked with better direction and perhaps some innovative camera-work and editing, but it lacks all of that and so it doesn't work. Frankly, had the filmmakers cut out the first 35 minutes and trimmed the rest of the film down, they would have had a decent hour-long episode of "The Twilight Zone."
Cujo is a cool dog, but "Cujo" sucks.