Honestly, I feel that Salem's Lot should be made into series to flesh out all of the characters in the book and also make it a period piece in the 70s. At least 15 -23 episodes like Supernatural season one to get to know the town and the characters and back stories of the characters. Then afterwards do a spinoff to see things for the vampires point of view. Also a limited mini series about Hubbie Marsten and how the legend began.
@@ShawnLucas-bi2js yeah, who knows where they will go from here. It does make sense to do a miniseries over a feature because of the amount of characters. That is something that the new film does suffer from. You don’t have a lot of time to get to know the characters before the horror starts going down
@@BoogeyManBen without seeing the movie yet, totally agree with ben. and Shawn. it would have made a great long episodical mini series then maybe follow along with Ben Mears and Mark as they flee from the Lot , battling vampires , a la "Supernatural"...it must have been very difficult to make this new thing under the ridiculous time restraints the suits and money people put on the showrunners, and directors and producers of this new effort . Still hopeful as I wait for Oct. 3!!!!
@@BoogeyManBen Thanks for the feedback and I can't wait for the 3rd of October but I may have to delay it because me and my fiance are suppose to watch it together and did you get a preview of the upcoming vampire movie Sinners with Micheal B. Jordan?
The original two part series was I believe, 4hrs running time. That was cut down to 3hrs for the UK tv broadcast we all watched as kids. That was then cut down to 2hrs for the home video release.. which was a sham. Luckily the 3hr version is easily attainable now, my point though is that a 2hr movie can't contend with the character drama of the TV version. The pacing of course has to be different so I'm sure they did the best they could with the running time they had. The only way you could ever rival the 79 version would be to produce another two part tv show same running time, which of course will never happen. I think we have to be grateful for the fact that someone tried to do something decent for us with a new movie
As Ben and myself are in the same frequency and love for the 79 original I take this review the most serious so Im off to see it in the cinema when it arrives in here in the UK in a few weeks.
@@loulou7963 UK here too! And yes, my local cinema knows nothing of a release yet... Maybe they're keeping it for larger cinemas in cities? I'm down in south west Cornwall - our cinema is part of the Merlin chain. I really do want a cinema experience for this. Hope our wishes come true!
@@muthamucka9009I’m starting to fear it’s not going to be released in all cinemas which is mad ! So far I can only see it in the major cities like London and central Birmingham. I’m in Kingswinford near a fair few odeon and showcase cinemas but nothing !
Saw it last night. Did enjoy it for it's own adaptation. The town and period recreation was amazing. This paid nice homage to both of the original miniseries. 🍿👍
So, I saw the cinema screening in the UK last night with my two brothers, also Salem's Lot fans and we all agreed it was pretty good. Some of the negative comments on here are absolute rubbish, just people looking for faults. If you're hoping this one will eclipse the 79 version, you will be disappointed but if you embrace this as a decent updated version, it's very enjoyable and a valuable addition. I think it's pretty cool that we have three versions now to rotate between. I have a theory that some people are comparing the effect of watching this one, to the impact the original one had on us all as kids, even if that is subliminal. Nothing will ever come close to the chills of being a kid watching the original, and growing up watching it thereafter. We are cynical battle weary adults now. We will never re-discover that feeling. Don't take it out on the new film though
Thanks for the great honest review Ben. I’m in the UK and torn. Stream or cinema a week or so after. Think I’ll hold out to see it in the cinema. I think Mr King would approve of that. Take care.
Thanks for the update Ben as always appreciate your time and work sharing your opinion on Salem's Lot. Looking forward to see it on the big screen in UK on Fri 11th 👌
@@BoogeyManBen Hey Ben, just watched it. Loved it, but looking forward to seeing a longer cut. It was quite obvious in some places where scenes had been cut. Otherwise, totally worth the wait, I thought. It had some great cinematography, and the mood throughout was suitably creepy.
@@MrPipt66 so glad to hear you liked it. I agree it was trimmed and I really hope we get to see the longer cut of it eventually. Warners really did a disservice to Dauberman who I think had a solid vision
Thanks, Ben, really looking forward now to see it myself in the Belgian movie theaters (if I get any chance). Your review is the only one that counts for me although I already regret having read some of the reactions here (which do not seem to take into account your "spoiler free" title). Anyway, I'll stay away from any other review although I see plenty coming up in the suggestions made by TH-cam to me. Delighted you keep on confirming that we are exactly on the same page regarding the vampire movie genre! If not for the Atlantic Ocean I would have already made trips to meet with kindred kind horror loving souls like you and other Salem's Lot fans in "the West" that are also dear to you! Enjoy the weekend and please keep the excellent Salem's Lot vibe and vids coming!
@@GuyCL430 yeah sorry, some of it is my fault too. Some people Have asked me questions and I answered them. Trying to keep My responses vague / clear at the same time.
Thanks for the heads up Ben, It sounds like it's a half decent film after all. Like you I wish the run time was a little longer just for character development alone. Maybe there will be a directors cut in the near future.
@nathanhill2723 Hello mate, I'm based in Sheffield and I just typed in Cineworld. Says its on October 11th but I'm unsure whether it's a one off or a run. Hope that helps, Nathan. All the best, Pal.
I've been waiting for this. I trust your take on this. I'm 55 years old have known this story since the age of 9. The fact you seemed to have really enjoyed this gives me real hope. Yeah, I guess they didn't have time to really flesh out everything the book or longer mini series did but I can get that back story from the book. I want atmosphere and spooky, creepy vamps. Seems like even the negative reviews underline that aspect. Cool.
@@BoogeyManBen I thought the Rob Lowe one did the storyline well, but seemed to rush and trivialise the vampire aspect. They did the vampire kids on the bus scene(a personal favourite) but even that fell flat. Utterly lacked the truly disturbing Tobe Hooper vamps. The scene I would love to see from the book is the moment Straker sacrifices Ralphie to Barlow's master in the graveyard as a ticket for Barlow's admission. I've always seen Mark Strong playing a book authentic Straker.
I managed to get hold of a copy yesterday. I was profoundly disappointed and I'm amazed you rate it so highly. The acting is extremely wooden especially Pullmans performance and the lack of scepticism among the townsfolk is pretty laughable. Having read reviews based on the original cut you can tell that huge chunks of the story were cut to satisfy the studio execs. Originally Ben wakes from a nightmare he had about his experience at the Marsten House. Here we see him staring at the house but offers no explanation not even to his love interest Susan. Jordan isn't very effective or believable as horror fan Mark Petrie despite Daubermans best efforts. I'm not sure an extended cut would make any difference even Barlow isn't scary and some of those iconic scenes from the original are handled extremely badly with this iteration.
I totally agree with you. Acting is terrible and you tell it was hastily put together just to put it out and appease the Hollywood executives and fans.
King said it feels like an old Hollywood movie when stories were given time to breathe, funny because there's no let up as soon as Barlow arrives then it turns in to 30 Days of Night.
Thanks for the review. I trust a fellow rabid Salem’s Lot fan more than just a run of the mill movie critic. From what you’re saying, I think we have more pros than cons here.
Salem's Lot: The Movie, the condensed version of the 1979 miniseries was the same length as this new movie. Obviously the full three hour version is superior, but the shorter version wasn't bad either. I look forward to watching this new one next weekend!
It's actually long enough to tell the story. 20 more minutes and subbing out the newly written scenes for missing, classic scenes would have helped the film greatly.
I cannot wait to see this! I've seen other reviews which are mixed. A lot of people praise the style, look and atmosphere of this new version, but more critical in other areas. But it's all subjective. I am super excited to finally get to see it. Great review!!!
I was wondering whatever became of the 2O22 cinemacon trailer that thrilled viewers at a screening? That trailer was set to the song ' Devil Town ' by the late-great Daniel Johnson.. whatever became of this trailer? It apparently featured a clip of father Callahan (John Benjamin Hickey) facing down Kurt Barlow (Alexander Ward), holding up a cross literally ' glowing in the presence of evil ' . I wonder if they'll include this trailer on the dvd and blueray? 🤔
@@johnbleakley4125 I literally said the same thing to myself. Everyone was over the moon about the original trailer. I have a feeling we will never get to see it.
Your review is the one I was waiting for . thank you sir I can't wait to see it . This is my favorite horror movie of all time I have waited my life to see a remake that finally can live up to the original.
Appreciate your thoughts Ben. I know it was tough not to compare. I am looking forward to seeing it just for the fact alone that Salem’s Lot is still getting some love in 2024.
I'm glad you liked the new Salem's lot, I'm looking forward to October 3rd. Thank you for this great journey and follow-up during these years! 💪💪greetings from Argentina.
Positive review Ben. So glad you enjoyed the retelling of the story. Looking forward to watching it when released in the U.K. and hopeful for a 4K physical release soon after. 👍🏻👍🏻
Fantastic I am so glad you loved it . when I finally watch it I am sure it will take me back and trigger everything that scares me of this movie......Staying scared as always thanks Ben!
Also I thing a regular series with 3 seasons to tell the story would be fine to see both points of views of the town before and after some of the people were turned into vampires. Keep it in the 70s and include One for the Road to introduce a potential spin off to see how the other vampires live and what type of community they have built and how do they function without a leader?
So happy you got a chance to see it Ben! Hope you can arrange Sam and Danny to see too maybe? Dunno how these screener things work.. don’t cause yourself problems by answering this! ;)
I watched Salems Lot. Very dissapointed to be honest, Stephen King saying it was a slow burner proved that he never watched it! Too many characters were cut. Crockett was no where to be seen apart from 1, 20 second scene. The light up cross thing was terrible, Susan was cringey and the way all the characters knew instantly about vampires and were not afraid of being haunted by evil was hilarious. I'd give it a 2/10. A typical new age Comedy/horror. Dauberman is not a good choice for horror! I think someone like Robert Eggers should take on Salems Lot. This definitely shouldn't of been released.
There's a good interview with Gary Dauberman on the Den Of Geek website, where he reveals that his initial cut of the film was around 3 hours. Saying there's a lot left out.
I woke up at 3 a.m. just to watch it, and I really enjoyed it! After nearly two years of anticipation, it did not disappoint. Some of the ideas were a fantastic surprise-scary, sad, familiar, and yet different all at once. Love the original miniseries, and I love this one too. It was everything I hoped for and more. I would watch a TV show based on this 😄
First full review I have watched. I was excited after seeing the trailer, then downhearted after seeing some of the negative responses to the movie. The original means a LOT to me (sorry) so having heard this from a fellow '79 fan boy, I am back on track and can't wait :)
@alexperry4691 it's much better than 2004 just by virtue of the fact that it's a more entertaining movie to watch, better visuals etc. Better acting too. Rob Lowe was as wooden as a plank in 2004
Now maybe these naysayers will shut the f------up about this movie. I grew up in the 70s the 79 version scared the hell out of me it was a excellent movie. But people kill me talking about these actors its terrible its know good, I knew it would be good. Old people and I am talking about me and anybody else saying this is just terrible it will never live up to the original. Look old people give it a break its for the next generation not you and I can't wait to watch it and hopefully they just might make part 2. Shut up critics and old people. 😏
Ben - I've been watching a lot of the so called reviews on Facebook and it's been copping and absolute bagging by 'movie reviewers in the industry (who have no qualifications whatsoever)' .... yours is the first honest one. I so want to see this even more now. I was scared sh*tless with the original 79 version (I'm of the same vintage as Lance Kerwin) and remember taking my first girlfriend to the movie release of it (Salem's Lot 79 was a theatrical release in Australia). I'm one of those fans of the story that the 2004 version is ok as well (most filmed here in Australia).... but your honest review here has pushed this film over the line and I'm so please I will be able to see it - albeit via streaming - in less than a week ..... Cheers from Australia and long live the BoogeyMan Ben !!!!!
Fantastic! Thanks for your thoughts Ben, I can't believe its here as well. We are both big fans of this franchise. We have a family "Salems Lot 2024" viewing party set for 10/4. My wife is 50 and never saw the original, so we are watching The Shining, Dr. Sleep, then the original Salem's Lot as a build up.
I finally had the chance to see it. I'm... not fond of it. I'm glad we've seen it, but in my opinion it focuses on the set-pieces and loses the soul of the story. One of the problems, I feel, is the de-powering of the vampires. This idea that vampires perish in sunlight is not part of Polidori's or Stoker's accounts. Perhaps enchanted by the careful way photographic film had to be handled, Murnau killed his "Count Orlok" by sunlight, and the idea's hung around since then. Stoker allows Dracula to walk around normally in sunlight, just stripped of his evil powers. Lugosi's Dracula could transform into a bat. In King's novel, vampires lose consciousness in sunlight, and crawl away from it to rest in the deep shadows, but it doesn't kill them. Mike Flanagan's Midnight Mass vampires self-immolate in sunlight, but entirely defy the traditional aversion to holy symbols and consecrated ground. The vampires of this most recent adaptation have both weaknesses, making them perhaps the feeblest vampires to date; they're much less of a threat than the zombies of the various zombie apocalypse films. King mourned the decline and fall of small-town life. He was correct that the 1950s vision of suburbia captured and preserved in The Andy Griffith Show and Leave it to Beaver would not survive the Vietnam War and Watergate. His 1975 novel has the time-lost, hoary old Dracula symbolize the decay and squalor that small town life descended into. The '79 adaptation captured this well, I think, with its soap-opera-with-a-budget authentic '70s feel. The '04 awkwardly tried to transplant the idea into the era of cell phones, and managed only to make 'Salem's Lot look like a place not worth saving. This new incarnation doesn't care about any of that, and just wants to show us vampires in an action movie. I felt embarrassed by the movie when say, Ben judo-throws one vampire onto another he's just staked, killing both. Or when we see Ben's face through the hole he just poked in Barlow. Ironically but not surprisingly, Mike Flanagan's Midnight Mass is perhaps the best 'Salem's Lot adaptation to date, being both thoughtful and elegiac in tone. The contrast between the two could not be more stark, and illustrates why Mr. Flanagan's become my favorite living director.
I get that feeling, I had 40 years ago I will not be watching it on my own my kids want to see it too. And the fact you mention the studios biggest blunder in film history means it’s that good.
Great review Ben, so glad you liked it. I'll take your opinion over those so called critics anytime. They all want perfection, which is never going to happen. It looked fine to me when I saw the trailers etc, so roll on the 11th. Also looking forward to a blu ray release sooner rather than later. It would sit nicely on the shelf next to the 1979 version 👍.
I thought the Screenrant headline was good "This Vampire Movie Could’ve Been Great, But Horror Fans Will Love It Anyway" Obviously I haven't seen it yet but given all the reviews the two main Achilles heels for this version is the structural problems and over reliance on CGI which preventing it from ever hitting that 'great' status like 1979 but still a good watch for many(and certainly better than stuff like The Crow reboot which they released in the theater).
@@83442handle the cgi is actually done well in this. I personally didn’t feel there was an over reliance on it. I think they should have made it longer. The condescend runtime is a hindrance because it does not allow for a lot of the characters to be fleshed out before the 💩 hits the fan. That Being said, I still really loved what was done and feel that everyone involved paid tremendous respect to source and original adaptation
Great video as always Ben and so pleased you’ve passed 6k subs! I live in Scotland so hopefully will see it in the cinema, it certainly looks better than the 2004 adaptation. Now all we need is the Salems lot minority to lead the campaign for WB to release the wonderful original in cinemas for the 50th anniversary! I don’t think I’ve ever heard your thoughts on the BBC radio play so would love to hear your opinion on that one day 🧛🏼
Thanks Ben, for the review! I feel about the original as you do. It's part of my DNA at this point, so it's great to know that if you like the new film, that says a lot. I'm sure it's going to be a blast, and I'm planning on watching it on Friday. Maybe a BBQ and some cold drinks:) Can't wait to see it:)
I’d trust your opinion on this movie more than anyone else on the Internet because I know how much the material means to you & how big a fan you are of 79’ Salems Lot is not only my favorite King story ever, it’s my favorite vampire story ever & probably my favorite horror story I’m happy you enjoyed this so much bc I have a feeling I will also…Thank Boogeyman Ben
@@eddigiovanni1079 I hope you enjoy the new film. The way that I watched it was to just take it in for a what it was and not compare it to the 1979 miniseries as best I could. That worked for me. The film does have some shortcomings, it should have been 2.5 hours minimum, but I still enjoyed it immensely.
@@BoogeyManBen I figured as much. Simply on the basis of the fact that now so much of the effects in movies are CGI, I was expecting to watch it as its standalone film. While it languished in development hell…the people who reported about the test screenings made it sound like it was literally the worst movie ever made… Thanks again Boogeyman
I actually kinda like the Rob Lowe 2004 Salem's Lot. It has a scene in the jail that is terrifying where the Lowe character, Ben, and a guy just bitten get into a fight and arrested. They're in separate cells and the guy finishes turning in jail. Ben hears a scraping sound coming from the air vent and looks and sees the vampire has forced himself into the too small vent and is slowly snaking his way to him saying he can smell him.
So cool you got a screener, Ben! Well deserved! Glad you liked it. Cannot wait for the "minority's" experiences from Ferndale! PS Europeans will also get it on the 3rd, but only where MAX is available.
Does Larry Crockett appear? Or Dud Rogers? Or what about charlie Rhodes? Three characters direct from the source material and what about Bonnie Sawyer? Or Reggie Sawyer? (Called Cullie Sawyer in the Hooper version, for some strange reason). Do any of these characters appear in the new movie, i wonder? And what about Weasel Craig? It seems this new version of Salem's Lot has left out some realy great characters. Someone told me Larry Crockett does appear in the new movie and i was given the name Michael Costello but, upon looking the actor up, found nothing to connect him to the character or Salem's Lot. Larrys daughter does appear in the new movie, im told, played by the gorgeous Avery Beaderman. I wish Dauberman would have included more of kings characters from the source material. But i understand the movie is under two hours long. However, im still very much looking forward to seeing this highly anticipated movie!! 🙂✌️
@@BoogeyManBenis he really? Actors name? Michael Costello I was told months ago, but looked the actor up and could find nothing to connect him to the character or Salem's Lot. I have heard Larry's daughter, Ruthie, appears in the new one. And isn't Susan Norton (the lovley Makenzie Leigh) working in real estate in the new one? So I'm thinking she sells Straker and Barlow the Marsten House? Or am I way off, Ben? 🤔
Ok if someone who’s a fan of the story, and of the 79 miniseries gives it their approval, then I’ll most definitely watch. I mean I was gonna watch either way, but now I’m super excited 😁😁
Nice to see a positive review of this movie from a true fan of the original, the knives have been out for this from the get go but I'll go on your take of it 👍
Same. I've seen other reviews that say it's mediocre but if Ben says it's really good then that works for me. He's the biggest Salem's Lot aficionado there is, and a huge fan of the original. If he approves of this remake then I know it's awesome.
I really enjoyed it. I genuinely wish these actors and directors got a mini series kind of run time. I would have loved to seen this expanded and given more time to breathe more akin to Midnight Mass. It felt a little rushed but the mood and atmosphere was excellent. Definitely had a 30 days of night vibe. The Tobe Hooper version still reigns supreme as the best to date with this one coming a very commendable second.
@@BoogeyManBen I hope we see a directors cut. Early on wasn't there supposed to be scenes of young Ben in the Marston House? You can really sense that there was some real creative push and pull from different people involved in the production. I'm a creative myself and it's so rare that you're allowed to show your own vision without others chiming in. It rarely results in a better product. However, irrespective of studio interference it's still an impressive take. I particularly liked the Ralphie Glick abduction and subsequent sacrifice. It combined the book and mini series version quite effectively and very nasty indeed. Wished it had more of that sense of dread personally.
Sorry that some toxic individuals on here can't discuss a piece of media without getting personal to yourself. That attitude sucks as do they. Yeah, vampires exist. They live on the internet and feed on positivity rather than blood. A good block stake should sort them out. Keep on keeping on. I enjoy your takes. To those particular vampires, I know the book and mini series inside out. This film had it's issues but I could see from some of the well crafted scenes that they really tried to do the story well within the constraints they had.
"Whew" - Thanks Ben, for this review. It's been getting some mixed reviews but I certainly trust your judgment here. It looks great. I'm gonna see it either way, but after watching this I can't wait.
@@darkbloodrevisited again, I am being honest how I feel and I sure hope people enjoy it. If I was not a fan I would have been honest and said I wasn’t
@@BoogeyManBen Cool. For me, there's a high bar to pass with the original movie. There will be little things that won't be perfect - the cast looks young, it should have been an 8 hour miniseries, etc. But I can be forgiving. You have to be these days.
Thanks for the review Ben! I trust your opinion on this movie more than any other! Sounds like they did it justice as far as the production, sounds like Warner Brothers really screwed up!
Thanks for the review mate! 👍 So glad you enjoyed it. I was unsure because of all the rubbish talk about the film, so like you, loved the original, but definitely going to see it when it releases in the UK. Thanks. Take care 👊
Just found it online so gave it a watch and I have a simple question to the writers..... *_If an 11yr old boy isn't afraid of the vampires then why would you expect the audience to be afraid?_* Sorry Ben but Jordon Preston Carter was by far the worst part of the film for me, not because he's a bad actor, but his portrayal of Mark simply wasn't believable due to the truly awful writing. There are many reasonable excuses as to why this was never going be a great film, but bad writing is not one of them. Even if a directors' cut does emerge it still won't solve that fundamental issue. It was a very poorly written film. It had some positives, the cinematography was very good and it at least looked atmospheric and I loved the look of the town overall. I really enjoyed Makenzie Leigh as Susan, she was the standout performance for me and Bill Camp did a very good job as Matt Burke too. The only vampire scene I enjoyed was Danny breaking out of the coffin, reasonably creepy and quite a good jump scare, the rest were just...meh. A pretty bad film overall, I certainly won't bother watching it again, but it had some redeeming qualities and I was expecting a lot worse.
I'm a big fan of the original, but honestly this new version was not good! So many flaws this new film has, from bad special effects to character development. It's really a shame, man.
I watched the original when it debuted in British tv when it first came out. I love the original… the more I see from sources I usually agree with, the more trepidation I have for it. It’s being absolutely panned at the moment. Let’s see if the script is as terrible as most are saying it is. Dauberman has a pretty shocking record overall.
@@tonyyoung_wry well, I really liked it. I was 100% honest in my opinion of it but I am not saying that everyone needs to feel The way I do. I don’t let critics make decisions for me and I don’t expect people to think that I am telling them how to think either. I hope people will give it a chance. I do think it would have benefited greatly from being longer film or a two parter.
@@BoogeyManBen oh yeah I always make my own mind up and watch stuff regardless. Just a little taken aback by some of the stuff being said by others I usually agree with. Will most likely watch online though as opposed to waiting for the cinema on the 11th.
@@tonyyoung_wry well, it’s an easy target. It was held back for years. The studio is just dumping it out. People are going into it thinking there is something wrong with it so they are already creating a failure in their mind. I find if you go into something thinking negatively then most likely you will end up not liking what you are watching
Wow!! What a fuckin excellent review!!! And you actually really liked the movie and even compared it to seeing your beloved Tobe Hooper original as a small kid! Brilliant!! Can't wait to fuckin see this now!! Feel bit sad you saying you did not think much of Bill Sadler as constable Parkins Gillespie. I thought a part like that would be right up his street. Fabulous actor. And another performance I was really looking forward to seeing is John Benjamin Hickey as Father Donald Callahan. He's another great actor. But really glad you really liked the movie, Ben. And fabulous review and thank you!! 🙂✌️
Ooh I loved your take on it. It’s going to be hard but I’m going to hold off and watch it late Friday night (I’m a preschool SPED teacher so I have to be on my A game Friday morning hence not watching Thursday night). I remember thinking the original was “delicious” (something a friend and I coined things we REALLY REALLY liked - we were 11) 😂 and I hope the 2024 adaptation is delicious too!!!
In June 2023, Warner Bros. announced that it was selling about half of its film and TV music publishing assets. I think the work up to this sale is why the movie was delayed. I read somewhere that there was a radio version on Salem's lot in England back in the 90's. Can one of our Brit friends veryify this and is this available to be listened to?
Hey Ben! You’re the best! Thanks for the review and the excitement you share and spread! How can we get a screener? Are they easy to get? Did it have a watermark, or any annoying icons as you watched?
The Original miniseries, and King's book ranks as my favorite horror movie and book.. I thought the new adaptation was excellent. First the short comings . We had a sort of a Readers digest version of the novel. I think , in fairness they incorporated the scary scenes of the miniseries, and weaved them all in beautifully into a cohesive storyline; which is not an easy task.. The new Barlow, in my opinion ; matched the Nalder character. Basically the same , but with a longer rat like nose, more similar to the Count Orlock of the Nosferatu 1922 movie. The big standout for me was the atmosphere, almost like an early Universal Horror film, but in color.. Excellent. The abduction scene of Ralph Glick was brilliant. Danny Glick at the window. I believe outdid the 79 version. They fell short with the Ryerson scene ; which was superior in the original. Mark Petrie character was also very good. For myself, the movie checked just about all the boxes. The ending was better than the original. It kept the flavor of a small town in the 70's. The vampires on the roofs, was eerie. If this movie had another 45 minutes to add a few more vampire scenes, and more exposition to flesh out the character's a bit more, it would , in my opinion, surpass the original. The way Barlow was kept in the shadows most of the movie, helped; especially our first glimpse of him through Ralphs eyes in the sack. I am sure, that many will still think the original, was way superior, but as a huge fan of the miniseries, I believe this may turn out to be a classic cult film, and I believe the studio really shot their self in the foot, by not releasing it in theaters. I honestly think, that may still come down the pike, if only in limited release.
Love all of your points here. Glad to hear you enjoyed it. I do hope we get the full three hour version released at some point. I really want to see Dauberman’s full vision. The studio completely screwed over this film with its treatment. I think the brass at warners are full on idiots and I love seeing a lot of their projects that they put all their eggs in like the new joker sequel get destroyed critically and financially. Nothing can surpass the original for me but this is my second favorite out of everything that has come before. I hated the 2004 miniseries and the less said about return to Salems lot the better.
@@BoogeyManBen Thanks Ben.. I really did enjoy it; as did my son and brother. I feel some of the negative reviews just missed the mark. This is only my opinion. Salem's lot Miniseries is my favorite horror movie of all time. But like the Exorcist , so much has come after these movies, that many fans are jaded. Many of the scenes are made eerie by the atmosphere. I also think the Marge Glick scene is superior to the original, that included from the book, the shoe dropping. I hope your right about the full version being released on Dvd. This was the main drawback; the pace. To be fair, how could you condense any book with as broad a landscape of characters in 2 hours. They did any excellent job. The abduction of Ralph was almost perfect in my opinion. I thought the actor who played Barlow, had a similar face to Nalder. The long rat-like nose, was a great nod to Nosferatu, If I'm not mistaken, I think some of the original footage contained a scene of Ben as a young boy entering the Marsten House. Every horror fan will remember that Halloween 1 was panned , when it first came out. Carpenter after a couple of previews had actually written it off, until a glowing review of the Village Voice turned it into a hit. Like you I was very disappointed in the 04 version. I just thought the casting was terrible. Rob Lowe was just not right for Mears. David Soul was the best for me. He was not a physical representation of KIng's Mears, but he nailed his personality. Return to Salem's Lot was a joke, and actually was released as horror comedy.. If that's what they were shooting for I guess they achieved their objective.. Really enjoy your channel
I thought that the most recent trailer was excellent. But it was all action scenes with Vamps. I'm curious to see how the acting is. The one thing the the 1979 version had that they can't seem to recreate was the story and the acting that made the 1979 version so great.
At 55 years old and watching the very night it first aired so long ago it's refreshing to at least see a anything Salem's lot people will always find a reason to dislike in short looking forward to next week be safe brother
I'm 55 too and like you I also watched the original on TV in 1979. I was ten. I watched it with my babysitter and we popped Jiffy-Pop popcorn. Her name was Lisa and I'll never forget that experience. Absolutely terrifying TV movie especially for a ten year old kid. Loved every minute of it!! Peace.
Ben, first - loved your spoiler-free review - thank you! Here's a question for you...any thoughts about how, if this movie is watched by many/rave reviews, etc. - any thoughts about how this movie could potentially stoke interest in a mini series down the line?
I think Warner Bros was responding to what was happening at the time with a lot of films facing backlash for changing the race of characters. The audience felt it was an anti-white statement and the threatened to boycott it. They had boycotted other films for the same reason. The Lost Boys TV remake was cancelled after the pilot changed the race and gender of characters. The Frog Brothers became The Frog Sisters. I noticed Warner Bros of all the studios seems to be the one backing away from what they call Go Woke, Go Broke.
I saw the trailer it looks as terrifying as the original and the Rob Lowe Andre Baugher version. The source material is so perfect you could probably make any version of it and it'd be scary. Muppets Take Salem's Lot. Salem's Lot with Dolls. etc.
It's unfortunate that U.S. audiences are robbed of having a theatrical experience for this film. If poorly executed films such as The Trap can appear on thousands of screens, I'm sure Warner Brothers could have secured a theatrical distribution run.
Honestly, I feel that Salem's Lot should be made into series to flesh out all of the characters in the book and also make it a period piece in the 70s. At least 15 -23 episodes like Supernatural season one to get to know the town and the characters and back stories of the characters. Then afterwards do a spinoff to see things for the vampires point of view. Also a limited mini series about Hubbie Marsten and how the legend began.
@@ShawnLucas-bi2js yeah, who knows where they will go from here. It does make sense to do a miniseries over a feature because of the amount of characters. That is something that the new film does suffer from. You don’t have a lot of time to get to know the characters before the horror starts going down
@@BoogeyManBen without seeing the movie yet, totally agree with ben. and Shawn. it would have made a great long episodical mini series then maybe follow along with Ben Mears and Mark as they flee from the Lot , battling vampires , a la "Supernatural"...it must have been very difficult to make this new thing under the ridiculous time restraints the suits and money people put on the showrunners, and directors and producers of this new effort . Still hopeful as I wait for Oct. 3!!!!
@@BoogeyManBen Thanks for the feedback and I can't wait for the 3rd of October but I may have to delay it because me and my fiance are suppose to watch it together and did you get a preview of the upcoming vampire movie Sinners with Micheal B. Jordan?
15-23 episodes? No. This would make a good 2 1/2 hour movie or a 2-3 episode series.
The original two part series was I believe, 4hrs running time. That was cut down to 3hrs for the UK tv broadcast we all watched as kids. That was then cut down to 2hrs for the home video release.. which was a sham. Luckily the 3hr version is easily attainable now, my point though is that a 2hr movie can't contend with the character drama of the TV version. The pacing of course has to be different so I'm sure they did the best they could with the running time they had. The only way you could ever rival the 79 version would be to produce another two part tv show same running time, which of course will never happen. I think we have to be grateful for the fact that someone tried to do something decent for us with a new movie
As Ben and myself are in the same frequency and love for the 79 original I take this review the most serious so Im off to see it in the cinema when it arrives in here in the UK in a few weeks.
Me too ! Here in the U.K. I’ve been constantly checking for tickets but nothing as yet at any of them !
@@loulou7963 I can see it advertised on the Odeon and Cineworld sites but no access to book the tickets yet.
@@mystikrebel1089 very kind of you. My opinion is 100% honest
@@loulou7963 UK here too! And yes, my local cinema knows nothing of a release yet... Maybe they're keeping it for larger cinemas in cities? I'm down in south west Cornwall - our cinema is part of the Merlin chain. I really do want a cinema experience for this. Hope our wishes come true!
@@muthamucka9009I’m starting to fear it’s not going to be released in all cinemas which is mad ! So far I can only see it in the major cities like London and central Birmingham. I’m in Kingswinford near a fair few odeon and showcase cinemas but nothing !
Saw it last night. Did enjoy it for it's own adaptation. The town and period recreation was amazing. This paid nice homage to both of the original miniseries. 🍿👍
Buzzing for you!! So glad you liked this film! Roll on October 11th!! 🤙🏼
Thanks for the review Ben , hopefully I'll get to see it on the big screen here in Ireland , I'll review it on my channel when I finally see it.
So, I saw the cinema screening in the UK last night with my two brothers, also Salem's Lot fans and we all agreed it was pretty good. Some of the negative comments on here are absolute rubbish, just people looking for faults. If you're hoping this one will eclipse the 79 version, you will be disappointed but if you embrace this as a decent updated version, it's very enjoyable and a valuable addition. I think it's pretty cool that we have three versions now to rotate between. I have a theory that some people are comparing the effect of watching this one, to the impact the original one had on us all as kids, even if that is subliminal. Nothing will ever come close to the chills of being a kid watching the original, and growing up watching it thereafter. We are cynical battle weary adults now. We will never re-discover that feeling. Don't take it out on the new film though
Thanks for the great honest review Ben. I’m in the UK and torn. Stream or cinema a week or so after. Think I’ll hold out to see it in the cinema. I think Mr King would approve of that. Take care.
Thank you for the update and for not spoiling the review
I can’t wait for October 3
Big fan of Salem lot
The original 1979
@@robertorta4660 my pleasure
Thanks for the update Ben as always appreciate your time and work sharing your opinion on Salem's Lot. Looking forward to see it on the big screen in UK on Fri 11th 👌
Thanks Ben. I trust your opinion 100%, now I'm REALLY excited.
@@MrPipt66 thank you 🙏
@@BoogeyManBen Hey Ben, just watched it. Loved it, but looking forward to seeing a longer cut. It was quite obvious in some places where scenes had been cut. Otherwise, totally worth the wait, I thought. It had some great cinematography, and the mood throughout was suitably creepy.
@@MrPipt66 so glad to hear you liked it. I agree it was trimmed and I really hope we get to see the longer cut of it eventually. Warners really did a disservice to Dauberman who I think had a solid vision
Thanks, Ben, really looking forward now to see it myself in the Belgian movie theaters (if I get any chance). Your review is the only one that counts for me although I already regret having read some of the reactions here (which do not seem to take into account your "spoiler free" title). Anyway, I'll stay away from any other review although I see plenty coming up in the suggestions made by TH-cam to me. Delighted you keep on confirming that we are exactly on the same page regarding the vampire movie genre! If not for the Atlantic Ocean I would have already made trips to meet with kindred kind horror loving souls like you and other Salem's Lot fans in "the West" that are also dear to you! Enjoy the weekend and please keep the excellent Salem's Lot vibe and vids coming!
@@GuyCL430 yeah sorry, some of it is my fault too. Some people
Have asked me questions and I answered them.
Trying to keep
My responses vague / clear at the same time.
Thanks for the heads up Ben, It sounds like it's a half decent film after all. Like you I wish the run time was a little longer just for character development alone. Maybe there will be a directors cut in the near future.
Thanks Ben always appreciated and now I'm even more excited to see this.
I literally cannot wait to see this. Thanks for the spoiler-free pep talk about it.
Cheers Ben! Your review has just made me book my ticket here in the UK!
@@BloodyOffDoors where can tickets be booked? I can’t locate any
@@BloodyOffDoors excellent
@nathanhill2723 Hello mate, I'm based in Sheffield and I just typed in Cineworld. Says its on October 11th but I'm unsure whether it's a one off or a run. Hope that helps, Nathan. All the best, Pal.
I trust your review over all others. I can't wait to see it!!
I’m so happy you liked this, now I can’t wait!
Huge thanks for this upload. Watched the original on tv in Ireland on original release and it's never left me. So excited to see this in the cinema
I've been waiting for this. I trust your take on this. I'm 55 years old have known this story since the age of 9. The fact you seemed to have really enjoyed this gives me real hope. Yeah, I guess they didn't have time to really flesh out everything the book or longer mini series did but I can get that back story from the book. I want atmosphere and spooky, creepy vamps. Seems like even the negative reviews underline that aspect. Cool.
@@rustierbaby yeah, vampires are done exceptionally well here and there are some very creepy / scary moments
@@BoogeyManBen I thought the Rob Lowe one did the storyline well, but seemed to rush and trivialise the vampire aspect. They did the vampire kids on the bus scene(a personal favourite) but even that fell flat. Utterly lacked the truly disturbing Tobe Hooper vamps. The scene I would love to see from the book is the moment Straker sacrifices Ralphie to Barlow's master in the graveyard as a ticket for Barlow's admission. I've always seen Mark Strong playing a book authentic Straker.
I'm glad you liked it. I now have hope I'll like it as well.
I liked it, they never seem to do enough with Fr. Callahan. That show down is huge.. in the novel. I look forward to that.
I managed to get hold of a copy yesterday. I was profoundly disappointed and I'm amazed you rate it so highly. The acting is extremely wooden especially Pullmans performance and the lack of scepticism among the townsfolk is pretty laughable. Having read reviews based on the original cut you can tell that huge chunks of the story were cut to satisfy the studio execs. Originally Ben wakes from a nightmare he had about his experience at the Marsten House. Here we see him staring at the house but offers no explanation not even to his love interest Susan. Jordan isn't very effective or believable as horror fan Mark Petrie despite Daubermans best efforts. I'm not sure an extended cut would make any difference even Barlow isn't scary and some of those iconic scenes from the original are handled extremely badly with this iteration.
I totally agree with you.
Acting is terrible and you tell it was hastily put together just to put it out and appease the Hollywood executives and fans.
King said it feels like an old Hollywood movie when stories were given time to breathe, funny because there's no let up as soon as Barlow arrives then it turns in to 30 Days of Night.
@@prestomattwine it was cut down from 3 hours. Hopefully we see that cut one day
@@outpost31737 well, we all have our opinions my friend. Thank you for sharing. I loved Jordan as mark and I look forward to a longer cut of the film
@@outpost31737 I personally thought Barlow was effective but the last half of the film does feel rushed. Maybe king saw the longer cut
This story strongly deserves a TV series adaptation.
Thanks for the review. I trust a fellow rabid Salem’s Lot fan more than just a run of the mill movie critic. From what you’re saying, I think we have more pros than cons here.
@@monkeycop72 appreciate your support
Ben thanks for the review. Yours is the only one I am watching. Looking forward to seeing this film. Thanks!
Thank you. Happy to know it's not a disappointment. I live in ireland and I'm counting down the days to see the film. Can't wait😊
It's only disappointing in that it came SO CLOSE to being something brilliant but didn't quite hit the mark. It's fun.
Salem's Lot: The Movie, the condensed version of the 1979 miniseries was the same length as this new movie. Obviously the full three hour version is superior, but the shorter version wasn't bad either. I look forward to watching this new one next weekend!
It's actually long enough to tell the story. 20 more minutes and subbing out the newly written scenes for missing, classic scenes would have helped the film greatly.
I cannot wait to see this! I've seen other reviews which are mixed. A lot of people praise the style, look and atmosphere of this new version, but more critical in other areas. But it's all subjective. I am super excited to finally get to see it. Great review!!!
Barlow speaks in this adaptation, I suspect his dialogue is confined to his confrontation with Callahan.
I was wondering whatever became of the 2O22 cinemacon trailer that thrilled viewers at a screening? That trailer was set to the song ' Devil Town ' by the late-great Daniel Johnson.. whatever became of this trailer? It apparently featured a clip of father Callahan (John Benjamin Hickey) facing down Kurt Barlow (Alexander Ward), holding up a cross literally ' glowing in the presence of evil ' . I wonder if they'll include this trailer on the dvd and blueray? 🤔
He actually spoke in the book
@@Rugz-smoke No really? I must read the book again. FFS🤣🤣🤣
In the book Callahan drinks Barlow's blood and Barlow allows him to live. Hope that is what happens in the new adaptation.
@@johnbleakley4125 I literally said the same thing to myself. Everyone was over the moon about the original trailer. I have a feeling we will never get to see it.
Your review is the one I was waiting for . thank you sir I can't wait to see it . This is my favorite horror movie of all time I have waited my life to see a remake that finally can live up to the original.
Appreciate your thoughts Ben. I know it was tough not to compare. I am looking forward to seeing it just for the fact alone that Salem’s Lot is still getting some love in 2024.
Finally someone who sounds like they know what they are talking about
@@georgescharles3417 that’s nice of you. Try to have all my facts before I roll. Sure appreciate the support
I'm glad you liked the new Salem's lot, I'm looking forward to October 3rd. Thank you for this great journey and follow-up during these years! 💪💪greetings from Argentina.
Great to hear that you enjoyed it. I’m taking off work next Friday so I can stay up late Thursday. 🎥🎬
Awesome review. Good to hear this positive take from the ultimate Salem's lot fan. so looking forward to Oct 3
That’s good enough for me. Roll on 11th October. 👍🏻
I'm really glad for you that it was good and that you enjoyed it. I'm looking forward to when I get to see it.
honest as always my brother, thankyou.
Positive review Ben. So glad you enjoyed the retelling of the story. Looking forward to watching it when released in the U.K. and hopeful for a 4K physical release soon after. 👍🏻👍🏻
Glad you enjoyed it. As a big fan of the Tobe Hooper version, your review gives me a bit more hope...
Fantastic I am so glad you loved it . when I finally watch it I am sure it will take me back and trigger everything that scares me of this movie......Staying scared as always thanks Ben!
Also I thing a regular series with 3 seasons to tell the story would be fine to see both points of views of the town before and after some of the people were turned into vampires. Keep it in the 70s and include One for the Road to introduce a potential spin off to see how the other vampires live and what type of community they have built and how do they function without a leader?
👋Ben! x roll on the new SL release in UK on October 11th!
So happy you got a chance to see it Ben! Hope you can arrange Sam and Danny to see too maybe? Dunno how these screener things work.. don’t cause yourself problems by answering this! ;)
I watched Salems Lot. Very dissapointed to be honest, Stephen King saying it was a slow burner proved that he never watched it! Too many characters were cut. Crockett was no where to be seen apart from 1, 20 second scene. The light up cross thing was terrible, Susan was cringey and the way all the characters knew instantly about vampires and were not afraid of being haunted by evil was hilarious. I'd give it a 2/10. A typical new age Comedy/horror. Dauberman is not a good choice for horror! I think someone like Robert Eggers should take on Salems Lot. This definitely shouldn't of been released.
Great review Ben! Can’t wait to see it!!
@@raymondfundora5541 thank you
There's a good interview with Gary Dauberman on the Den Of Geek website, where he reveals that his initial cut of the film was around 3 hours. Saying there's a lot left out.
@@jackreed7287 I will check that out. Sure hope we get that release too
That makes sense. It definitely seemed like there were parts cut out.
I woke up at 3 a.m. just to watch it, and I really enjoyed it! After nearly two years of anticipation, it did not disappoint. Some of the ideas were a fantastic surprise-scary, sad, familiar, and yet different all at once. Love the original miniseries, and I love this one too. It was everything I hoped for and more. I would watch a TV show based on this 😄
First full review I have watched. I was excited after seeing the trailer, then downhearted after seeing some of the negative responses to the movie. The original means a LOT to me (sorry) so having heard this from a fellow '79 fan boy, I am back on track and can't wait :)
This review gives me hope. I know it'll never beat the 1979 version, but as long as its better than the 2004 remake I'll take it 👍
Same here
Dauberman didn't set out to beat the original. It's his version adapted from the book.
I didn't think it was as good as 2004 lol
@@outpost31737weird because it didn't seem like Dauberman read the book lol
@alexperry4691 it's much better than 2004 just by virtue of the fact that it's a more entertaining movie to watch, better visuals etc. Better acting too. Rob Lowe was as wooden as a plank in 2004
Great review man! You got me more excited for this movie I’m signing up for Max just to see this.
Now maybe these naysayers will shut the f------up about this movie. I grew up in the 70s the 79 version scared the hell out of me it was a excellent movie. But people kill me talking about these actors its terrible its know good, I knew it would be good. Old people and I am talking about me and anybody else saying this is just terrible it will never live up to the original. Look old people give it a break its for the next generation not you and I can't wait to watch it and hopefully they just might make part 2. Shut up critics and old people. 😏
I'm the next generation and this was terrible. Cgi sucked! Original way better.
Critical Overlord? Wow! That's some fuckin name buddy!! 🙂✌️
Wow excellent review. Ok this made my year 👏👏👏
@@Frater369 so glad to hear.
Ben - I've been watching a lot of the so called reviews on Facebook and it's been copping and absolute bagging by 'movie reviewers in the industry (who have no qualifications whatsoever)' .... yours is the first honest one. I so want to see this even more now. I was scared sh*tless with the original 79 version (I'm of the same vintage as Lance Kerwin) and remember taking my first girlfriend to the movie release of it (Salem's Lot 79 was a theatrical release in Australia). I'm one of those fans of the story that the 2004 version is ok as well (most filmed here in Australia).... but your honest review here has pushed this film over the line and I'm so please I will be able to see it - albeit via streaming - in less than a week ..... Cheers from Australia and long live the BoogeyMan Ben !!!!!
I have never been more excited for a film than i am this one.
cheers ben , cant wait to see it
Fantastic! Thanks for your thoughts Ben, I can't believe its here as well. We are both big fans of this franchise. We have a family "Salems Lot 2024" viewing party set for 10/4. My wife is 50 and never saw the original, so we are watching The Shining, Dr. Sleep, then the original Salem's Lot as a build up.
@@gillesthibault367 very cool. That sounds like a great plan. Love it
I finally had the chance to see it. I'm... not fond of it. I'm glad we've seen it, but in my opinion it focuses on the set-pieces and loses the soul of the story.
One of the problems, I feel, is the de-powering of the vampires. This idea that vampires perish in sunlight is not part of Polidori's or Stoker's accounts. Perhaps enchanted by the careful way photographic film had to be handled, Murnau killed his "Count Orlok" by sunlight, and the idea's hung around since then. Stoker allows Dracula to walk around normally in sunlight, just stripped of his evil powers. Lugosi's Dracula could transform into a bat. In King's novel, vampires lose consciousness in sunlight, and crawl away from it to rest in the deep shadows, but it doesn't kill them. Mike Flanagan's Midnight Mass vampires self-immolate in sunlight, but entirely defy the traditional aversion to holy symbols and consecrated ground. The vampires of this most recent adaptation have both weaknesses, making them perhaps the feeblest vampires to date; they're much less of a threat than the zombies of the various zombie apocalypse films.
King mourned the decline and fall of small-town life. He was correct that the 1950s vision of suburbia captured and preserved in The Andy Griffith Show and Leave it to Beaver would not survive the Vietnam War and Watergate. His 1975 novel has the time-lost, hoary old Dracula symbolize the decay and squalor that small town life descended into.
The '79 adaptation captured this well, I think, with its soap-opera-with-a-budget authentic '70s feel. The '04 awkwardly tried to transplant the idea into the era of cell phones, and managed only to make 'Salem's Lot look like a place not worth saving. This new incarnation doesn't care about any of that, and just wants to show us vampires in an action movie. I felt embarrassed by the movie when say, Ben judo-throws one vampire onto another he's just staked, killing both. Or when we see Ben's face through the hole he just poked in Barlow.
Ironically but not surprisingly, Mike Flanagan's Midnight Mass is perhaps the best 'Salem's Lot adaptation to date, being both thoughtful and elegiac in tone. The contrast between the two could not be more stark, and illustrates why Mr. Flanagan's become my favorite living director.
I get that feeling, I had 40 years ago I will not be watching it on my own my kids want to see it too. And the fact you mention the studios biggest blunder in film history means it’s that good.
Great review Ben, so glad you liked it. I'll take your opinion over those so called critics anytime. They all want perfection, which is never going to happen. It looked fine to me when I saw the trailers etc, so roll on the 11th. Also looking forward to a blu ray release sooner rather than later. It would sit nicely on the shelf next to the 1979 version 👍.
I thought the Screenrant headline was good "This Vampire Movie Could’ve Been Great, But Horror Fans Will Love It Anyway"
Obviously I haven't seen it yet but given all the reviews the two main Achilles heels for this version is the structural problems and over reliance on CGI which preventing it from ever hitting that 'great' status like 1979 but still a good watch for many(and certainly better than stuff like The Crow reboot which they released in the theater).
@@83442handle the cgi is actually done well in this. I personally didn’t feel there was an over reliance on it. I think they should have made it longer. The condescend runtime is a hindrance because it does not allow for a lot of the characters to be fleshed out before the 💩 hits the fan. That
Being said, I still really loved what was done and feel that everyone involved paid tremendous respect to source and original adaptation
Has anyone else seen "Deathdream" (1974), aka "Dead of Night", directed by Bob Clark? IMO it is excellent.
Great video as always Ben and so pleased you’ve passed 6k subs! I live in Scotland so hopefully will see it in the cinema, it certainly looks better than the 2004 adaptation.
Now all we need is the Salems lot minority to lead the campaign for WB to release the wonderful original in cinemas for the 50th anniversary!
I don’t think I’ve ever heard your thoughts on the BBC radio play so would love to hear your opinion on that one day 🧛🏼
Thanks Ben, for the review! I feel about the original as you do. It's part of my DNA at this point, so it's great to know that if you like the new film, that says a lot. I'm sure it's going to be a blast, and I'm planning on watching it on Friday. Maybe a BBQ and some cold drinks:) Can't wait to see it:)
I’d trust your opinion on this movie more than anyone else on the Internet because I know how much the material means to you & how big a fan you are of 79’
Salems Lot is not only my favorite King story ever, it’s my favorite vampire story ever & probably my favorite horror story
I’m happy you enjoyed this so much bc I have a feeling I will also…Thank Boogeyman Ben
@@eddigiovanni1079 I hope you enjoy the new film. The way that I watched it was to just take it in for a what it was and not compare it to the 1979 miniseries as best I could. That worked for me. The film does have some shortcomings, it should have been 2.5 hours minimum, but I still enjoyed it immensely.
@@BoogeyManBen I figured as much.
Simply on the basis of the fact that now so much of the effects in movies are CGI, I was expecting to watch it as its standalone film.
While it languished in development hell…the people who reported about the test screenings made it sound like it was literally the worst movie ever made…
Thanks again Boogeyman
This sounds like a fair and balanced review. I’m looking forward to watching it on max.
I actually kinda like the Rob Lowe 2004 Salem's Lot. It has a scene in the jail that is terrifying where the Lowe character, Ben, and a guy just bitten get into a fight and arrested. They're in separate cells and the guy finishes turning in jail. Ben hears a scraping sound coming from the air vent and looks and sees the vampire has forced himself into the too small vent and is slowly snaking his way to him saying he can smell him.
So cool you got a screener, Ben! Well deserved! Glad you liked it. Cannot wait for the "minority's" experiences from Ferndale! PS Europeans will also get it on the 3rd, but only where MAX is available.
Does Larry Crockett appear? Or Dud Rogers? Or what about charlie Rhodes? Three characters direct from the source material and what about Bonnie Sawyer? Or Reggie Sawyer? (Called Cullie Sawyer in the Hooper version, for some strange reason). Do any of these characters appear in the new movie, i wonder? And what about Weasel Craig? It seems this new version of Salem's Lot has left out some realy great characters. Someone told me Larry Crockett does appear in the new movie and i was given the name Michael Costello but, upon looking the actor up, found nothing to connect him to the character or Salem's Lot. Larrys daughter does appear in the new movie, im told, played by the gorgeous Avery Beaderman. I wish Dauberman would have included more of kings characters from the source material. But i understand the movie is under two hours long. However, im still very much looking forward to seeing this highly anticipated movie!! 🙂✌️
@@johnbleakley4125 Crockett is in it briefly
@@BoogeyManBenis he really? Actors name? Michael Costello I was told months ago, but looked the actor up and could find nothing to connect him to the character or Salem's Lot. I have heard Larry's daughter, Ruthie, appears in the new one. And isn't Susan Norton (the lovley Makenzie Leigh) working in real estate in the new one? So I'm thinking she sells Straker and Barlow the Marsten House? Or am I way off, Ben? 🤔
@@johnbleakley4125 Susan's occupation matters very little to the story, just a new way to meet Ben in a condensed timeline.
Ok if someone who’s a fan of the story, and of the 79 miniseries gives it their approval, then I’ll most definitely watch. I mean I was gonna watch either way, but now I’m super excited 😁😁
Nice to see a positive review of this movie from a true fan of the original, the knives have been out for this from the get go but I'll go on your take of it 👍
Hopefully there'll be an extended cut somewhere down the line.
Only review I trust..
Same. I've seen other reviews that say it's mediocre but if Ben says it's really good then that works for me. He's the biggest Salem's Lot aficionado there is, and a huge fan of the original. If he approves of this remake then I know it's awesome.
I really enjoyed it. I genuinely wish these actors and directors got a mini series kind of run time. I would have loved to seen this expanded and given more time to breathe more akin to Midnight Mass. It felt a little rushed but the mood and atmosphere was excellent. Definitely had a 30 days of night vibe. The Tobe Hooper version still reigns supreme as the best to date with this one coming a very commendable second.
@@rustierbaby yeah, it does have moments where it feels rushed. They chopped an hour off it. Hopefully we will see that cut one day
@@BoogeyManBen I hope we see a directors cut. Early on wasn't there supposed to be scenes of young Ben in the Marston House? You can really sense that there was some real creative push and pull from different people involved in the production. I'm a creative myself and it's so rare that you're allowed to show your own vision without others chiming in. It rarely results in a better product. However, irrespective of studio interference it's still an impressive take. I particularly liked the Ralphie Glick abduction and subsequent sacrifice. It combined the book and mini series version quite effectively and very nasty indeed. Wished it had more of that sense of dread personally.
Sorry that some toxic individuals on here can't discuss a piece of media without getting personal to yourself. That attitude sucks as do they. Yeah, vampires exist. They live on the internet and feed on positivity rather than blood. A good block stake should sort them out. Keep on keeping on. I enjoy your takes. To those particular vampires, I know the book and mini series inside out. This film had it's issues but I could see from some of the well crafted scenes that they really tried to do the story well within the constraints they had.
"Whew" - Thanks Ben, for this review. It's been getting some mixed reviews but I certainly trust your judgment here. It looks great. I'm gonna see it either way, but after watching this I can't wait.
@@darkbloodrevisited again, I am being honest how I feel and I sure hope people enjoy it. If I was not a fan I would have been honest and said I wasn’t
@@BoogeyManBen Cool. For me, there's a high bar to pass with the original movie. There will be little things that won't be perfect - the cast looks young, it should have been an 8 hour miniseries, etc. But I can be forgiving. You have to be these days.
@@darkbloodrevisited I understand
Thanks for the review Ben! I trust your opinion on this movie more than any other! Sounds like they did it justice as far as the production, sounds like Warner Brothers really screwed up!
Thanks for the review mate! 👍 So glad you enjoyed it. I was unsure because of all the rubbish talk about the film, so like you, loved the original, but definitely going to see it when it releases in the UK. Thanks.
Take care 👊
Im excited. Best vamp book n movie of all time. Next to Captain Kronos and Dracula A.D. 1972
Just found it online so gave it a watch and I have a simple question to the writers..... *_If an 11yr old boy isn't afraid of the vampires then why would you expect the audience to be afraid?_*
Sorry Ben but Jordon Preston Carter was by far the worst part of the film for me, not because he's a bad actor, but his portrayal of Mark simply wasn't believable due to the truly awful writing. There are many reasonable excuses as to why this was never going be a great film, but bad writing is not one of them. Even if a directors' cut does emerge it still won't solve that fundamental issue. It was a very poorly written film.
It had some positives, the cinematography was very good and it at least looked atmospheric and I loved the look of the town overall. I really enjoyed Makenzie Leigh as Susan, she was the standout performance for me and Bill Camp did a very good job as Matt Burke too. The only vampire scene I enjoyed was Danny breaking out of the coffin, reasonably creepy and quite a good jump scare, the rest were just...meh.
A pretty bad film overall, I certainly won't bother watching it again, but it had some redeeming qualities and I was expecting a lot worse.
Havent seen it yet (UK based), but already - I NEED THE DIRECTORS 3 hour cut!
@@markmilburn4895 yep! Me too
I'm a big fan of the original, but honestly this new version was not good! So many flaws this new film has, from bad special effects to character development. It's really a shame, man.
I watched the original when it debuted in British tv when it first came out. I love the original… the more I see from sources I usually agree with, the more trepidation I have for it. It’s being absolutely panned at the moment. Let’s see if the script is as terrible as most are saying it is. Dauberman has a pretty shocking record overall.
@@tonyyoung_wry well, I really liked it. I was 100% honest in my opinion of it but I am not saying that everyone needs to feel
The way I do. I don’t let critics make decisions for me and I don’t expect people to think that I am telling them how to think either. I hope people will give it a chance. I do think it would have benefited greatly from being longer film or a two parter.
@@BoogeyManBen oh yeah I always make my own mind up and watch stuff regardless. Just a little taken aback by some of the stuff being said by others I usually agree with. Will most likely watch online though as opposed to waiting for the cinema on the 11th.
@@tonyyoung_wry well, it’s an easy target. It was held back for years. The studio is just dumping it out. People are going into it thinking there is something wrong with it so they are already creating a failure in their mind. I find if you go into something thinking negatively then most likely you will end up not liking what you are watching
@@BoogeyManBen or pleasantly surprised. I am open to it like most movies.
Wow!! What a fuckin excellent review!!! And you actually really liked the movie and even compared it to seeing your beloved Tobe Hooper original as a small kid! Brilliant!! Can't wait to fuckin see this now!! Feel bit sad you saying you did not think much of Bill Sadler as constable Parkins Gillespie. I thought a part like that would be right up his street. Fabulous actor. And another performance I was really looking forward to seeing is John Benjamin Hickey as Father Donald Callahan. He's another great actor. But really glad you really liked the movie, Ben. And fabulous review and thank you!! 🙂✌️
Ooh I loved your take on it. It’s going to be hard but I’m going to hold off and watch it late Friday night (I’m a preschool SPED teacher so I have to be on my A game Friday morning hence not watching Thursday night). I remember thinking the original was “delicious” (something a friend and I coined things we REALLY REALLY liked - we were 11) 😂 and I hope the 2024 adaptation is delicious too!!!
@@tindal38 ha ha. I hope you enjoy the new film too. Thank you for always supporting my channel. Really means a lot
In June 2023, Warner Bros. announced that it was selling about half of its film and TV music publishing assets. I think the work up to this sale is why the movie was delayed.
I read somewhere that there was a radio version on Salem's lot in England back in the 90's. Can one of our Brit friends veryify this and is this available to be listened to?
Yes, it was on BBC radio in the 90's. Most faithful adaptation so far. It's on youtube. Its an easy search with key words.
I love Salem’s Lot (2024) same as the 1979 tv miniseries
Hopefully they do a physical release of an extended cut
@@AlucinorProductions me too. It was apparently 3 hours long
Hey Ben! You’re the best! Thanks for the review and the excitement you share and spread! How can we get a screener? Are they easy to get? Did it have a watermark, or any annoying icons as you watched?
Yeah to me it felt so condensed. And wasn’t feeling Barlow a little to cgi for my taste.
Great review!!
@@criticaloverlord4809 thank you my friend. For everything
The Original miniseries, and King's book ranks as my favorite horror movie and book.. I thought the new adaptation was excellent. First the short comings . We had a sort of a Readers digest version of the novel. I think , in fairness they incorporated the scary scenes of the miniseries, and weaved them all in beautifully into a cohesive storyline; which is not an easy task.. The new Barlow, in my opinion ; matched the Nalder character. Basically the same , but with a longer rat like nose, more similar to the Count Orlock of the Nosferatu 1922 movie. The big standout for me was the atmosphere, almost like an early Universal Horror film, but in color.. Excellent. The abduction scene of Ralph Glick was brilliant. Danny Glick at the window. I believe outdid the 79 version. They fell short with the Ryerson scene ; which was superior in the original. Mark Petrie character was also very good. For myself, the movie checked just about all the boxes. The ending was better than the original. It kept the flavor of a small town in the 70's. The vampires on the roofs, was eerie. If this movie had another 45 minutes to add a few more vampire scenes, and more exposition to flesh out the character's a bit more, it would , in my opinion, surpass the original. The way Barlow was kept in the shadows most of the movie, helped; especially our first glimpse of him through Ralphs eyes in the sack. I am sure, that many will still think the original, was way superior, but as a huge fan of the miniseries, I believe this may turn out to be a classic cult film, and I believe the studio really shot their self in the foot, by not releasing it in theaters. I honestly think, that may still come down the pike, if only in limited release.
Love all of your points here. Glad to hear you enjoyed it. I do hope we get the full three hour version released at some point. I really want to see Dauberman’s full vision. The studio completely screwed over this film with its treatment. I think the brass at warners are full on idiots and I love seeing a lot of their projects that they put all their eggs in like the new joker sequel get destroyed critically and financially. Nothing can surpass the original for me but this is my second favorite out of everything that has come before. I hated the 2004 miniseries and the less said about return to Salems lot the better.
@@BoogeyManBen Thanks Ben.. I really did enjoy it; as did my son and brother. I feel some of the negative reviews just missed the mark. This is only my opinion. Salem's lot Miniseries is my favorite horror movie of all time. But like the Exorcist , so much has come after these movies, that many fans are jaded. Many of the scenes are made eerie by the atmosphere. I also think the Marge Glick scene is superior to the original, that included from the book, the shoe dropping. I hope your right about the full version being released on Dvd. This was the main drawback; the pace. To be fair, how could you condense any book with as broad a landscape of characters in 2 hours. They did any excellent job. The abduction of Ralph was almost perfect in my opinion. I thought the actor who played Barlow, had a similar face to Nalder. The long rat-like nose, was a great nod to Nosferatu, If I'm not mistaken, I think some of the original footage contained a scene of Ben as a young boy entering the Marsten House. Every horror fan will remember that Halloween 1 was panned , when it first came out. Carpenter after a couple of previews had actually written it off, until a glowing review of the Village Voice turned it into a hit. Like you I was very disappointed in the 04 version. I just thought the casting was terrible. Rob Lowe was just not right for Mears. David Soul was the best for me. He was not a physical representation of KIng's Mears, but he nailed his personality. Return to Salem's Lot was a joke, and actually was released as horror comedy.. If that's what they were shooting for I guess they achieved their objective.. Really enjoy your channel
I thought that the most recent trailer was excellent. But it was all action scenes with Vamps. I'm curious to see how the acting is. The one thing the the 1979 version had that they can't seem to recreate was the story and the acting that made the 1979 version so great.
@@greglavers I am curious to see what you think of the final product
At 55 years old and watching the very night it first aired so long ago it's refreshing to at least see a anything Salem's lot people will always find a reason to dislike in short looking forward to next week be safe brother
I'm 55 too and like you I also watched the original on TV in 1979. I was ten. I watched it with my babysitter and we popped Jiffy-Pop popcorn. Her name was Lisa and I'll never forget that experience. Absolutely terrifying TV movie especially for a ten year old kid. Loved every minute of it!! Peace.
@@josebro352 yesss grandma's jiffy pops how can I forget great memories my friend
@@petergucci4024 👍👍 😊😊
Ben, first - loved your spoiler-free review - thank you! Here's a question for you...any thoughts about how, if this movie is watched by many/rave reviews, etc. - any thoughts about how this movie could potentially stoke interest in a mini series down the line?
I think Warner Bros was responding to what was happening at the time with a lot of films facing backlash for changing the race of characters. The audience felt it was an anti-white statement and the threatened to boycott it. They had boycotted other films for the same reason. The Lost Boys TV remake was cancelled after the pilot changed the race and gender of characters. The Frog Brothers became The Frog Sisters. I noticed Warner Bros of all the studios seems to be the one backing away from what they call Go Woke, Go Broke.
I am in the UK hoping this will be at my local cinema can't wait 👍🧛🧛
I saw the trailer it looks as terrifying as the original and the Rob Lowe Andre Baugher version. The source material is so perfect you could probably make any version of it and it'd be scary. Muppets Take Salem's Lot. Salem's Lot with Dolls. etc.
The Rob Lowe version was about as terrifying as Bambi.
The Master looks frickin terrifying in the trailer.
@@rebuz if it’s the trailer marked final trailer it’s fake.
It's unfortunate that U.S. audiences are robbed of having a theatrical experience for this film. If poorly executed films such as The Trap can appear on thousands of screens, I'm sure Warner Brothers could have secured a theatrical distribution run.
@@outoftimepictures warners is a joke now