Salem's Lot '04

Discussion in 'General' started by Mark Relford, May 10, 2004.

  1. Mark Relford

    Mark Relford Chairman of the Bored

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Indy
    I've never been a big fan of King's TV adaptations. They range from being mediocre to vomit inducing. Salem's Lot is my favorite King book of all time. It's right up there with Stoker's Dracula and I Am Legend. The premise of a small town being taken over by a vampire was a stroke of genius on King's part. I have high hopes for this remake. They're being more faithful to the book which is a major plus. Hooper's movie had some memorable moments, but it doesn't hold up well. Anyone looking forward to this remake?
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2004
  2. Damed

    Damed Guest

    I think a "true to the book" version of this would be fantastic.

    I don't think something they make for TV could be *REALLY* "true to the book", however.
     
  3. Cujo108

    Cujo108 Guest

    As far as King's TV adaptations go, I think The Stand is an amazing adaptation, and its one of my favorite King films, period. The rest all have major ups and downs though. As for Salem's Lot, while not my favorite King novel, it is one of my absolute favorites, and while I like Hooper's adaptation, it could be done so much better. I'm doubting the upcoming remake will do it justice too, but I hope I'm wrong.
     
  4. Grim

    Grim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2002
    Messages:
    7,740
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    It's got Rutger Hauer. I'm already hooked.
     
  5. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,291
    Likes Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    I love the original novel as well as Hooper's adaptation. "True to the book" remakes aren't always a good thing, as the new Shining proves. I have my doubts that this one will be any good. They just don't make t.v. movies like they used to. There's just too much overrelience on bad CGI nowadays. There hasn't been a decent King adaptation since IT. I didn't mind STORM OF THE CENTURY, but again, bad CGI.
     
  6. Mark Relford

    Mark Relford Chairman of the Bored

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Indy
    The latest Fango has an article on Salem's Lot and it looks promising. I just hope the CGI is more subtle with the vampires. At least they're combining CGI with old fashioned effects. I prefer an actual movie version to a TV two-parter. But look at Needful Things... they crammed the book into a 2 hour plus movie and it was still a pile of poo.
     
  7. moogong

    moogong Arte Suave

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2001
    Messages:
    5,434
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    When does it come on?
     
  8. Mark Relford

    Mark Relford Chairman of the Bored

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Indy
    June 20 & 21 on TNT.
     
  9. moogong

    moogong Arte Suave

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2001
    Messages:
    5,434
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Thank you. :)
     
  10. chrishicks

    chrishicks classic is back!!!

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2000
    Messages:
    7,149
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    MI
    I'll have to remember to set my DTIVO to record it.
     
  11. John Gargo

    John Gargo Guest

    Ugh... While Stephen King adaptations have been rather scattershot, Tobe Hooper's version of 'SALEM'S LOT has always been one of my favorite ones. It's a shame, then, that they'll be trying to have another go at it... Didn't they learn anything from THE SHINING?!?
     
  12. Alien Redrum

    Alien Redrum New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Derry
    Learn what? The TV version of the Shining was a pretty good adaptation from the book.

    Sure, Kubrick's version was good, but as far as a book adaptation it sucked.

    Oh, and I'm agree with you 100%, Relford. While the original version of Lot was good, it does not hold up terribly well.
     
  13. Mark Relford

    Mark Relford Chairman of the Bored

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Indy
  14. Alien Redrum

    Alien Redrum New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Derry
    Thanks!

    This month's Fangoria has an article on it and some shots from the movie as well.

    Gonna tear into that article today. :D
     
  15. X-human

    X-human I ate my keys

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    8,835
    Likes Received:
    1,306
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Illinois
    Ugh. Hooper's version is really good, has the UK theatrical cut ever been released? I believe it has more violence. But anyways I don't expect anything good on TV these days. It's not just the CGI but whole approach taken towards making a TV show, it's very limiting and is starting the story off on the wrong foot.

    In the end I don't really care if they're not "true to the book" because it's an adaptation, certain elements lend themselves better to books as oppose to elements that work better in film.
     
  16. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,291
    Likes Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    The WB DVD of Salem's Lot is a combo edit of the TV movie and the european release print. As far as I know, all the extra gore is included. The downside of this is it's a bad video transfer. Compared to the print Sci-fi Channel runs it's really washed out. You can't even see the skull superimposed in the moon at the end of the movie.

    edited to add: I totally agree with you, X-Human, about the approach being wrong in regards to modern TV movies. For one thing, they're overlit, which always ruins the atmosphere of horror movies.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2004
  17. John Gargo

    John Gargo Guest

    Funnily enough, I got my hands on a promotional-use-only screener DVD today and I'll give it a watch this weekend and let you all know how it is...
     
  18. John Gargo

    John Gargo Guest

    Well, I finally saw it... much better than I expected, to tell you the truth, and certainly much more effective than that awful remake of THE SHINING. It clocked in at about 3 hours total, over two episodes... The movie starts off rather poorly, I think, with too much voice-over narration from the lead actor. What works in a book doesn't necessarily work on the screen. Thankfully, this narration disappears from the movie about fifteen minutes in. The actors were pretty good, and the production is your standard "TV movie" variation... slick at times, but overall nothing to get excited over. The only real problem with the movie was that the scares were very uneven. Some of them were quite effective and well done, but others were too "CGI heavy" and took the effectiveness right out of them. What I DID like were the eye effects on the vampires... take a look at Warner's new cover of their upcoming CHILDREN OF THE DAMNED DVD and you'll get an idea what I'm talking about...

    The movie's pace was, like the scares, also a bit uneven. For the most part, it moves along quite quickly, but occasionally it focuses on a few minor characters who we could care little about. Again, it may have worked in the book, but in the movie it just seems scattershot. Some of the scares were also a bit rushed... the famous "tapping at the windows" scene went too quickly for my taste... Anyway, it certainly wasn't all bad. It just could have used a little room in the editing room to tighten things up a bit. Overall, I'm glad that I saw it, but when I want to see the definitive version of this story, I'm going to go see Tobe Hooper's version.
     
  19. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,291
    Likes Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    I didn't realize you meant a promo of the upcoming remake. I just assumed you picked up a promo of the old WB SL disc. That's pretty cool! Where'd you find that? Off some guy in a dark alley?
     
  20. John Gargo

    John Gargo Guest

    Can't say... :evil:

    Anyway, I was rethinking some of the scares in my head and I realized what was wrong with a lot of them... the movie often tries to attempt various things that the budget wouldn't allow. The biggest example of this is the scene in the jail cell (you'll know it when you see it), which is a potentially frightening idea but just reeks of "computer effects" when it should be more like "holy shit!!!" Also, the deaths of the vampires were much too reliant on the CGI effects... Give me syrup and red food coloring any day of the week! :)
     

Share This Page