Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General' started by Mark Relford, May 10, 2004.
Just a reminder...
Part 1: Tonight 8 p.m. ET/PT
Part 2: Tomorrow 8 p.m. ET/PT
I'm all 'cited about the remake tonight...I hope it's as good as the original (which I also watched when it was originally on TV...GOD I'm OLD)
Shit, i missed it. Work intervened, you know how that is. But anywho, will there be an encore showing of it?
It was on again immediately following and it'll be on after that showing again...they are showing it three times in a row.
They're rebrodcasting it again at midnight.
So far I like it, but not as much as the original. The 70s one had fewer scary scenes, but what it did have was much more effective.
Anyone living in or near Toronto able to catch this tonight? I haven't been able to find it anywhere. If you did what channel?
The only channel it is on is TNT, if you can't get that channel then you will have to wait for a DVD release of it.
They'll be showing both parts on Friday and Saturday.
It's pretty good so far. I'm dying to see the conclusion tomorrow. Most of the vampire scenes were handled well except for Mike's return. It was more effective in the original, IMO.
I'm exicted about this new version of Salem's Lot because I couldn't stand the orginal t.v. version. The scene with the kid outside his brother's window was the only good one in my opinion.
The second part went by too fast! I really liked some of the vampire scenes in this one,
especially the attack on the school bus. The vampires at the dump was another highlight. The doctor's death by buzz saw was a brutal one. I was expecting a horde of hungry CGI rats.
Was this the definitive version that I was hoping for? Not really... But it was an improvement over Hooper's, IMO. I'll get the DVD when it comes out.
One question. How is Rutger Hauer as Barlow?
Brief...as he should be. He's barely in the movie as Barlow was barely in the novel. He did a fine job though for what screen time he did have.
I think it could have been improved greatly had it been a three parter rather than two. It seemed very rushed in the second half and the plot holes began to build up by the end. It's closer to the novel, but I still think Hooper's was more effective. It's a better adaptation, but not a better movie.
I remember watching the original as a kid and there was one scene, I believe in the basement, that scared me. This new adaption never scared me and for some reason it just never grabbed me. I found myself switching channels during the commercials and not really caring if I switched back in time.
Probably when Mark is watching Ben dispose of Barlow, and the rest of the vampires are slowly advancing towards him.
I love that scene, very tense and very thrilling.
That was it.
Well, after watching the new one. I would have to say I enjoyed the original more than the remake. I didn't enjoy either movie enough to go out and purchase it on DVD, but the original I found to be scarier than the remake. I was disappointed in the way Barlow character looked. I was hoping it would resemble the Barlow from the first film. Instead there was no difference in appearance of the Barlow (Head vampire) character and the other vampires. Just my two-cents.
I thought it was terrible. A true insult to King fans. :bs:
Speak for yourself, I've been a huge Stephen King fan since I was in high school *mumbles* years ago and I loved the new miniseries..wasn't insulted by it at all and I'm thinking King would probably like it as well, it's as close an adaptation as you can get nowadays on a novel that's over 20 years old.
I liked the miniseries and the second half wrapped up things in a matter of seconds. That was sorta funny, maybe it's going to continue? Was it that they ran out of money? I'd watch this as a a series, it was enjoyable and I don't really groove to stephen king. There needs to be a horror series on TV and this would do fine by me. ...TIVO HUNGRY!