There are numerous movies that spring to mind when arguing the point that Stephen King’s work always ends up in cinematic mediocrity, or nearly always.

Brian De Palma worked wonders in themed 70’s with Carrie which remains arguably the strongest cinematic adaptation of King’s writing. The Shining directed by Stanley Kubrik is also a superior horror film but one has to search far and wide to come up with a 3rd Stephen King novel or short story that made the grade as a movie, though the Shawshank Redemption has its die hard fans.

Cujo is just one of the heap of titles that falls in the mediocre category. It’s a rather run of the mill thriller, naturally featuring a young child (when does Kings work not feature a kid?) and his mother who are imperilled by a large St. Bernard that’s turned very dangerously rabid. Lewis Teague tries stoically to create an element of tension and terror but all attempts are in vain as the basic premise of a cuddly St. Bernard turning into a bloodthirsty mad dog just doesn’t convince however ugly the make up technicians try to make poor Cujo look. They really ought to have used a mangy mongrel instead!

It’s a lightweight horror film that fails to scare and though there are some fairly entertaining attack sequences, the whole thing really is a little bit tame and the movie requires a certain amount of padding which only serves to slow it down further. Dee Wallace does as well as could be expected and the child squeals away with abandon. Poor Cujo meanwhile, despite the dubbed snarling sounds and the smeared gunk on his face – just can’t strike terror however hard he snarls! Though the film is considered by many to be one of the strongest film adaptation of a Stephen King work, we find it to be another lame duck effort – one of many alas.

Cujo just doesn’t cut it as a terror film and plays rather more like a made for TV effort with similarly cheap production values.