Listonixio
Fresh and Exciting
Odelecol
Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.
Glimmerubro
It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.
classicalsteve
There is a very short list of classic novels centering on the vampire mythos. Of course the most famous is "Dracula" by Bram Stoker (1897); probably the deepest and most philosophical is "Interview with the Vampire" by Anne Rice (1976); but the most disturbing may be in fact "Salem's Lot" by Stephen King. While Dracula was an ancient monster wreaking havoc on Londoners in late 19th-century Britain, King's tale involves the dark little secrets of a New England town whose residence become ripe fodder for a highly-intelligent demon. The point of King's story I believe is how the unspoken and unexamined behavior of a small town become easy prey to dark forces.The recent rendition of Salem's Lot into a made-for-cable film starring Rob Lowe, Samantha Mathis, Andre Braugher, Donald Sutherland, Rutger Hower and Dan Byrd is a bit closer adaption to King's original story than the television-movie of the 1970's which starred David Soul and James Mason. Looming above the town is an old "haunted mansion", the Marsten House. The House itself is a character like the others, which the more recent adaption exploits a bit further than its 1970's counterpart, although the house is menacing in that adaption as well. In many scenes in this recent adaption, the House looms in the distance, as if watching the events unfold from on-high, a spooky version of the Eyes of Dr. T.J. Eckleburg of Great Gatsby fame.Rob Lowe in a solid performance in the wake of his years on "The West Wing" plays Ben Mears, a native-born of the town Jerusalem's Lot who returns to his place of birth and, as we'll learn, his coming-of-age. Mears has been away from the town for over two decades, nurturing a successful writing career in New York. (Many aspects of Mears ring of Stephen King who was also brought up in a small New England town.) The writer has returned from his hustle and bustle life in the Big Apple to write about the town, and, as it turns out, about incidents which occurred when he was on the verge of adolescents.Aside from the story of the vampires is the parallel story of the corruption of the town, such as a father abusing his daughter, then threatening the local garbage service who employs a crippled man who he believes had been with this daughter. A lower-middle class couple residing in a trailer park are not caring adequately for their baby, and they use blackmail schemes to raise money. Charlie Rhodes is an abusive school bus driver. He enacts "justice" by forcing children he believes are either misbehaving and/or simply doesn't like, to get off his bus and walk home.When Mears returns to Salem at the beginning, he meets Susan Norton (Samantha Mathis), a college graduate who had been corresponding with Mears through emails about her choice of academic studies. (Which is a bit of an upgrade from the original book and original film adaption. Online selling is also discussed.) Mears learns the Marsten House has been bought by two mysterious gentlemen in the antiques trade, Richard Straker (Donald Sutherland), and the mysterious Mr. Barlow who, according to Straker, is constantly on buying trips in Europe. They open a shop in Salem's Lot.Brothers Ralphie and Danny Glick, and their friend Mark Petrie (Dan Byrd), decide to see pictures hidden in the glove compartment of their school bus driver who had been abusing them, possibly as a blackmail scheme. The plan fails and the boys end up running for the lives through the woods near the town. Ralphie Glick disappears and Danny Glick is found by Father Callahan on one of the nearby roads. Danny is in hospital and shortly thereafter is paid a visit by Ralphie, the former making the mistake of a letting his ghostly brother pay him a visit. Later, Danny Glick, floating outside the window of Mark, asks to be invited in.The creation of the vampires spreads like a virus, somewhat akin to Invasion of the Body Snatchers. A few characters realize what's happening, including Mears, Dr. Cody, the schoolteacher Matt Burke, and love interest Susan Norton. They realize the evil is emanating from the Marsten House but they must unravel what's happening before it's too late. There is something strange and sinister about their new resident, Richard Straker. A very well-done and satisfying adaption of Stephen King's classic of mortal good versus supernatural evil. This recent version is a bit more faithful to the original book, including the portrayal of Barlow which is closer to King's original vision than the Nosferatu-like character in the 1970's version.
lourdesmeinhold
Wow...What an atrocious movie! Doesn't hold a candle to the original made for TV movie directed by Tobe Hooper. This new version of Salem's Lot is poorly written, badly acted & terrible special f/x. What a waste of time but glad I was able to see it so that I could be subjective. Don't waste your time on that drivel; find a copy of the original Salem's Lot starring David Soul as Ben Mears. That version has some truly scary scenes that involve Danny Glick appearing at Mark's window and of course who can forget the great character actor Geoffrey Lewis rocking back & forth in Matt Burke's spare bedroom. Yikes! The best scene though is when Marjorie Glick come to life on the mortician's table. Unlike the 2004 film (which actually plays for campy comic relief) the original SL is waaaaaay scarier. That movie still frightens the hell out of me to this day.
SteveResin
Let me start off by saying this isn't terrible. If you're bored there are worse ways of spending 3 hours than watching this. The trouble is, it's not terribly good either. I applaud the producers for attempting to work as much of the book into the screenplay as they could, and the location is excellent, with a decent smattering of special effects to boot. However, the bad far outweighs the good. Let's start with the good points. The location is great, on a par with the 1979 masterpiece, giving a real feeling of small town isolation. And the Marsten house looks suitably creepy and foreboding. The music is good, and the special effects are above average for a TV mini series of it's era. A few of the cast do a great job, James Cromwell is excellent as Father Callahan, Dan Byrd does OK as a shell-shocked Mark, and Julia Blake is a wonderful Eva. That's about it for the good stuff. Onto the bad. The series' biggest failing for me was the decision to drag it into the present. By setting the story in modern times with the internet and mobile phones, the the idea that a small community like this could just collapse under the visit of vampires without any outside help being summoned is ludicrous. Some of the casting choices and changes to the characters are poor. I've enjoyed Rob Lowe in many movies but the role of Ben Mears didn't suit him at all. David Soul brought a lot of passion and intense emotion to his 1979 portrayal, whereas Lowe only has two emotions through the entire series, bored and scared. The use of a narration from Lowe throughout is another bad idea. The character changes are disastrous. Matt Burke is now a gay man for some reason, Doctor Jimmy is a sleazeball who beds one of his married patients, and worse of all Larry Crockett is a child abuser who is sleeping with his daughter, the town 'Goth' Ruthie Crockett. Worse still is the relationship between Ben and Susan. In the book and 79 mini series their gentle romance and meeting of minds made you ache for Ben when Susan is turned. In this series there is zero chemistry between the leads and there is absolutely no romance, save for a few small chats about literature and a possible vacation to New York. When Susan is turned Ben hardly seems bothered and neither do we. The only interesting side character is Dud Rogers, the local hunchback who lives on the town garbage dump, but he is used so fleetingly it's hardly worth it. Another waste is the use of heavyweight actor Donald Sutherland as Straker, who is completely lacking in any menace whatsoever. Rutger Hauer is also wasted as Barlow, taking up about 5 minutes of the total screen time. All in all this is watchable fair, but doesn't warrant repeat viewings. It's neither captivating or remotely scary, which is kind of missing the whole point.
Ric Scott
I read the book before seeing either movie. I was a little disappointed in the 1979 version because of differences between the original story and the screenplay. Overall, I thought it was pretty good for TV. The original cast was wonderful.This version is boring. Although it has SOME good acting talent on board, I think it is miscast. No one is scary...sleepy, perhaps, but nothing really frightening at all.The general impression is that this version was done on the cheap. "'Salem's Lot" is a great story by a great writer and deserves better than this. Personally, I'm sticking with the older version.
