‎Salem's Lot (2004) directed by Mikael Salomon • Reviews, film + cast • Letterboxd

Salem's Lot

2004 Directed by Mikael Salomon

In a small town, evil spreads quickly.

Writer Ben Mears returns to his childhood home of Jerusalem's Lot and discovers that it is being terrorized by vampires.

Rob Lowe James Cromwell Donald Sutherland Andre Braugher Samantha Mathis Robert Mammone Dan Byrd Rutger Hauer Christopher Morris

181 mins More details at IMDb TMDb Report this film

Popular reviews

Review by Helen_S ★★★★½ 4

This takes a bit to get going but persevere and you will be treated to oodles of atmosphere, creepiness and tension galore, a great score and a stellar cast with Donald Sutherland providing some light relief. I do prefer the original but this is definitely one of the better remakes out there. Also the part when Floyd was squeezing through that teeny vent in the jail is just downright disturbing!
Review by Matt Curione ★

Absolutely dreadful. A three hour endurance test of terrible acting, bad effects, and none of the charm of the novel or the Tobe Hooper version to be found.

I rarely outright hate movies but this really pushed me to the brink. One star for a campy Donald Sutherland but nothing else.
Review by Greg ★★

Can we just talk about how someone literally thought they could sit & spit in the face of the ICONIC 1979 adaptation like this when its made-for-TV, bloodless, watered down, no pace-having ass is legit half-way responsible for the last good decade of violent, scary, vampire-related horror we all got while still being as faithful as it could be to the novel w/out half-assing everything????
Review by Isaac Thompson ★★★

Adaptations of Stephen King novels rarely possess the magic of his prose. With Salem's Lot, it's been attempted twice and, while they're both good, neither of them hit the mark entirely. This version, made for TV in 2004, doesn't quite match the creepy atmosphere of Tobe Hooper's 1979 TV version, but it does improve on it in some ways. Perhaps a great adaptation of the book lies somewhere between the two.

This one has a lot going for it, the cast is mostly great and, in some ways, it's closer to the novel. There are still arbitrary changes here and there, and the original does a better job matching the tone of the novel, but this one includes a lot…
Review by tinmask ★★ 1

Tonally much closer to kings novel than the 70's version but still a mess. If you could combine the two movies into one maybe all the pieces would be there?

My problem with Salem's Lot comes from the fact I am an avid fan of the book. King packed so many characters and moved so slow in his story it's hard to convey that even in 3 hours, this fucker deserved a tv series. So what you get here is an attempt to pack as much of the story as possible into 3 hours and thus everything feels rushed, despite how slow the movie moves. And I don't know if it was the fact this was a made for TV movie or what, but nothing in this is remotely frightening unlike the tobe hooper version.
Review by Hayden Gilbert ★★★

My first experience with Stephen King was seeing the UK Theatrical cut of Tobe Hooper's 'Salem's Lot adaptation on VHS. My dad wanted to show it to me and, more importantly my MOTHER wanted me to see it, and I knew that meant it was either not scary or very scary. Well when I saw the Glick boys floating outside of the window, my mother went outside and at that moment, ran her fingernails over our living room window and I screamed and had to sleep with a cross that night (I rolled over and crushed it in my sleep). I would make my dad tell me the story every single day on the drive to school (either that or…

Recent reviews

Review by Pube ★½

"This movie is literally worse than that time Rob Lowe filmed himself fucking children," - Chris Traeger.
Review by Matt Curione ★

Absolutely dreadful. A three hour endurance test of terrible acting, bad effects, and none of the charm of the novel or the Tobe Hooper version to be found.

I rarely outright hate movies but this really pushed me to the brink. One star for a campy Donald Sutherland but nothing else.
Review by Greg ★★

Can we just talk about how someone literally thought they could sit & spit in the face of the ICONIC 1979 adaptation like this when its made-for-TV, bloodless, watered down, no pace-having ass is legit half-way responsible for the last good decade of violent, scary, vampire-related horror we all got while still being as faithful as it could be to the novel w/out half-assing everything????
Review by Mochomito ★★★

Liked it, didn't love it. But, I was surprised at characterization, very well done, considering that it had to be cut down from Mr. Kings books.
Review by Hayden Gilbert ★★★

My first experience with Stephen King was seeing the UK Theatrical cut of Tobe Hooper's 'Salem's Lot adaptation on VHS. My dad wanted to show it to me and, more importantly my MOTHER wanted me to see it, and I knew that meant it was either not scary or very scary. Well when I saw the Glick boys floating outside of the window, my mother went outside and at that moment, ran her fingernails over our living room window and I screamed and had to sleep with a cross that night (I rolled over and crushed it in my sleep). I would make my dad tell me the story every single day on the drive to school (either that or…
Review by jack_nance ★★

A rewatch, mainly to refresh memory on what was good and what was bad about this second adaptation of Stephen King's vampire book.

Good: Tonally pretty interesting. Setting the story in winter adds an extra melancholy to things. Rob Lowe's performance edges towards the mark, but there's something just a little off about it. Andre Braugher is great as usual, and a neat bit of casting against expectations... but... mostly...

Bad: Most of the rest of the main cast is disappointing, but none moreso than Donald Sutherland as Straker. Sutherland seems to have turned into nothing but a talking beard for the last decade and a half, and here his performance is like someone gave him too much sugar and…
Review by Dmitry Skuratov ★★★

53/100 TV mini-series

Также как и первая, эта экранизация явно далека от идеала. Но, все-таки, получилась более мрачная и цельная чем фильм Хупера. Опять же многие моменты переданы чуть ли не дословно. А в других, фантазия сценаристов сработала на упрощение романа, что не пошло фильму на пользу.
Из плюсов - неплохие отрицательные герои, все-таки на Сазерленда и Хауэра всегда приятно смотреть. Хорошо прописаны мальчик и отец Каллахан.
Из минусов - невнятный Роб Лоу и начисто "убитая" любовная линия, которая в книге была важной составляющей частью. Ну и к придуманной сценаристами новой концовке есть вопросы.
В итоге неплохой, но одноразовый фильм, исключительно для фанатов Кинга.
Review by dshie24601 ★★★

Good film
Review by Marcus ★★

best movie (filmed in Creswick)