Synopsis
In a small town, evil spreads quickly.
A dark terror has come to the picture-perfect town of Jerusalem's Lot, and it's up to a writer with a haunted past to uncover the horror that has taken over the town.
2004 Directed by Mikael Salomon
A dark terror has come to the picture-perfect town of Jerusalem's Lot, and it's up to a writer with a haunted past to uncover the horror that has taken over the town.
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!
"This movie is literally worse than that time Rob Lowe filmed himself fucking children" - Chris Traeger.
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.
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…
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…
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.
This TV-version of Stephen Kings "All American Bram Stokers Dracula" is kind of a mixed bag. The script is solid and the miniseries as a whole never boring, but some scenes look like a cheesy 90ies TV show and while almost everybody else looks and acts fitting to the characters, Rob Lowe is just hopelessly miscast as the lead Ben Mears (don't get me started on that terribly narrated voice over).
Could have been better, could have been worse.
A pretty mixed bag: great cast (Hauer is superb), some really excellent moments in isolation, better character work than the '79 version (don't @ me) -- but then there's Rob Lowe, generally poor direction, and some really botched scenes. I might like this better as an adaptation ('04 is just way more brutal, which I think is crucial), but '79 is probably a better work overall.
A TV movie remake of a fantastic TV movie based on Stephen King's best (in my opinion) novel - did it ever stand a chance against fans of either predecessor? I hope the answer is yes because, despite some major differences between this version and either previous source, it's a decent, traditional vampire tale that stands in it's own right as a solid piece of entertainment.
Let me repeat the main plot description from my review of the original Tobe Hooper TV movie: The tale is all about writer Ben Mears (played this time around by Rob Lowe) returning to his home town and finding that strange things are, in deed, afoot. The problem gets worse and worse and may…
For a story that balances so many characters, it’s pace is way too slow. Sometimes you don’t recognize a characters name because it’s been awhile since you’ve seen them. The characters were fine but the performances were bland. It was shot in an uninspiring, bland way and didn’t capture my attention in a great way. James Cromwell tho, that guy is awesome.
Wie schon die erste Verfilmung haben wir hier eine Miniserie aka einen 3-Stundenfilm und bekommt die wohl beste Verfilmung.
Sehr gut an die heutige Zeit angepasst und manche Figurenzeichnung ist sogar besser als in der Buchvorlage.
Leidet ein wenig unter der Länge und dem gelegentlich auffallendem Tv-Look, trotzdem kann man sehr mit zufrieden sein.
Donald mach mir den Ziegenfratze!!!
Do yourself a kind favor and watch the 1979 movie instead of this tripe. For those that have seen the 1979 movie, remember that creepy vampire boy well in this 2004 movie he's an awful CGI vampire boy - laughable, not scary at all.
Something about the way this 2004 movie is filmed looses all the dark foreboding dread that looms over the town; the town is way to bright and cheery looking to scare anyone.
90% of this cast is terrible. The characters are completely unappealing - unlike the original movie.
OK I'm going to quit my bashing of this film here - it's not worth it. Be kind to yourself and watch the original 1979 - it might be a bit dated but it's a heck of a lot better looking and scarier over all.
1/10
Luke Pauli 3,658 films
All the films mentioned by name in Kim Newman's definitive encyclopedia of horror films, Nightmare Movies. Well worth a read.…
Scott Weinberg 66 films
I'm only including films (and TV films and mini-series and etc.) that are actually based on Stephen King stories. So…
Herrguth 832 films
Movies in which a vampire appears.
Witches in Movies Unicorns in Movies Pegasus in Movies Mummies in Movies Werewolves in…