Is Cujo Worth Watching?
Answer: Yes, Cujo is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Horror movies.
It features a runtime of 93 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to mature audiences.

Verdict:Cujo is a confirmed FLOP based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 6.1/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Horror, Thriller genre.
Answer: Yes, Cujo is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Horror movies.
It features a runtime of 93 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to mature audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1983, Cujo emerges as a significant entry in the Horror, Thriller domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of A friendly St. Unlike standard genre fare, Cujo attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Horror is often anchored by its ensemble, and Cujo features a noteworthy lineup led by Dee Wallace . Supported by the likes of Danny Pintauro and Daniel Hugh Kelly , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of Cujo (1983) is mixed. With an audience rating of 6.1/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Cujo is a Horror, Thriller film that crafts an atmosphere of dread and suspense, using psychological terror and visual scares. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
The horror unfolds through carefully crafted atmosphere and escalating dread. A friendly St. Bernard named "Cujo" contracts rabies and conducts a reign of terror on a small American town. The film uses both psychological terror and visceral scares, building tension through what's unseen as much as what's shown. The pacing allows for breathing room between scares, making each frightening moment more effective.
Ending Breakdown: Cujo concludes its story with a mix of closure and open interpretation. The finale presents its approach to horror resolution.
The final reveal recontextualizes earlier scenes, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Cujo reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Worth Watching If You:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $5.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $21.2M |
| Trade Verdict | FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT |
The estimated production budget for Cujo is $5.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.










Amazon VideoAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 6.1/10, and global collection metrics, Cujo stands as a challenging project for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1983 cinematic year.
Cujo has received mixed reviews with a 6.1/10 rating, making it a moderate success with the audience.
Cujo is a mixed bag. It might be worth watching if you're a fan of Horror, Thriller movies, but read reviews first.
Cujo may be available for rent or purchase on digital platforms like Apple TV, Google Play, or Amazon Prime Video. Specific streaming availability can vary by country.
Barmy Bernard. Stephen King’s Cujo was brought to the screen and met with indifference back in 1983, yet it’s aged surprisingly well and comes out as one of the better “mad animal” movies that followed in the wake of Jaws. A big cuddly St. Bernard dog is bitten on the nose by a bat, cops a serious bout of Hydrophobia and then terrorises anyone in its path. Which spells bad news for Donna Trenton (Dee Wallace) and her young son Tad (Danny Pintauro), who have the misfortune to be stuck in a battered old Pinto that has broken down in Cujo’s territory. Lewis Teague directs with no little skill here, wringing out pot loads of tension and inserting genuine moments of terror as mother and son literally fight for their lives. There’s a school of thought that the film’s first half could have been trimmed, for this is the area that defines the Trenton’s as a family. Donna has been having an affair and her husband Vic (Daniel Hugh-Kelly) has found out, so for forty minutes we are investing in family strife and foundation building of the key characters. This is judged perfectly, because once Cujo is unleashed on Donna and Tad, it throws up a number of emotional connections to not only the humans, but also the dog as well. Wallace and Pintauro are excellent, providing the film with its beating heart as they prove to be a believable mother & son pairing. Teague meanwhile uses some invention with his camera work, though never to the detriment of claustrophobic terror. Elements of the source novel have been left out, while the ending – unfortunately in this viewer’s opinion – has been changed, but this is a tightly wound horror and it’s well due re-evaluation in this day and age of franchise sequels and remakes. Could have done with more of those bats though, they are awesome! 7/10
This was solid and unexpectedly fulfilling--perhaps because I'm a cat enthusiast and am neutral towards dogs to begin with. My 13-year-old son and I enjoyed it very much. I haven't read the book yet, so it's unnecessary for enjoyment of the movie IMHO. Worth both a purchase and rewatching for genre aficionados.
God I forgot how fuckin' annoying that kids screaming is... Mad props to the titular Cujo, but I think this particular King adaptation maybe doesn't hold up as well as I thought it might. _Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.