Linbeymusol
Wonderful character development!
Intcatinfo
A Masterpiece!
BallWubba
Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.
mirandazeegore
One of the all time finest horror films ever. Such cool vampires, from the kid a the window to the Nos Feratu-esque main guy. Something about all their eyes still gives me chills and the occasional nightmare. This is truly a classic - just don't watch before bed.
moonspinner55
Famous writer returns to his hometown in Maine to complete a new project: a book about the Marsten House, a creaky, rotting mansion on the hill with a dark past, one that has haunted the author since he was a young man. It turns out the house still casts a dark spell, one that may be responsible for the deaths or disappearances of several local boys. Horror-veteran Tobe Hooper directed this made-for-TV miniseries, adapted from the early Stephen King novel ('Salem's Lot short for Jerusalem's Lot). Hooper does good work here, particularly in the climax, though for the first hour he dawdles over the material. The 184-minute running-time may have convinced the filmmaker he could allow the story to unfold slowly; if so, the gambit doesn't quite pay off. With a main character who isn't very exciting (he fills us in on the house's history and introduces us to the rest of the cast), a midsection involving the Catholic Church (complete with a child's funeral and a priest staring down evil) and too many trips to the hospital and morgue, the narrative goes into a depressive rut. One of the most intense sequences, an unhinged man finding another man in bed with his wife, isn't topped by the supernatural happenings (a fatal flaw) and nothing imperative comes of this story thread. James Mason has a devilishly good time playing the mysterious new owner of the Marsten House, but mostly the performances are solid if unspectacular. Hooper's spooky visuals will give fans of the occult what they're hoping for, though the picture has cheesy tail-ends to most of its big scenes. Also, the interiors are too bright, the sets are disappointing, the art direction is dull and the prologue is unnecessary. Followed by "A Return to Salem's Lot" in 1987.
gavin6942
Vampires are invading a small New England town. It is up to a novelist and a young horror fan to save it.Producer Richard Koblitz said, "We went back to the old German Nosferatu concept where he is the essence of evil, and not anything romantic or smarmy, or, you know, the rouge-cheeked, widow-peaked Dracula. I wanted nothing suave or sexual, because I just didn't think it'd work." "Salem's Lot" had a significant impact on the vampire genre, as it inspired horror films such as "Fright Night" (1985) and the scenes of vampire boys floating outside windows would be referenced in "The Lost Boys" (1987). Not to mention the antler impalement which was in both "Lost Boys" and later in "Hannibal".Sadly ,the film seems to be hard to come by. Despite being a modern classic, my library system did not have it, so I had to purchase the DVD for $15. And, frankly, that is way too much for a DVD with no special features -- not even a menu! This movie is in desperate need of a blu-ray upgrade.
nlangella1
This was an excellent miniseries. I use to own the full length miniseries on VHS as a kid. Idk why so many fans had a problem with making Barlow look more like Nosferatu? Honestly, I preferred this version over the 2004 one and the novel written by Stephen King himself. It just makes more sense. Barlow's appearance in the novel and in the 2004 version wasn't scary. I don't find a vampire with a more human like appearance like Dracula to be frightening. David Soul portrayed a better Ben Mears than Rob Lowe. I also liked the actor who played Mark. I found this version satisfying. Sure, it's not exactly like the novel. But then again it's Hollywood.
