He was in the book, but he’s much changed in the movie. I don’t remember him being retarded in the book, and he seemed to spend most of his time shooting rats, burning garbage, and pining/lusting for the girl in the town.
I think you were right in categorizing these together. I can imagine the conversation:
Producer: Where’s the gay character?
Writer: Huh?
Producer: Where’s the gay character? We gotta have a gay character. It’s the year 2004. We can’t have a production without a gay character! You want people to think we don’t support alternative lifestyles? Now get back there and make somebody gay!
Writer: Mumble, grumble.
The opening of the book was totally out of Wolves of the Calla.
The contemporary touches are jarring for those of us who remember the book and original miniseries, but it makes sense to update the details–the point of the novel was to do Dracula in a modern setting. The 1975 novel was chcockablock wuth purposely inserted references to Vietnam, thw changing mores of the 70s, rock music, and so forth. But a movie set in 1975 is now a period piece, so the writers were correct, IMO, to update the story.
Andre Braugher isn’t old enough to play Matt Burke because the character supposed to be in his old age, but Braugher is barely in his 40s. The gay thing just takes a bit of subtext and places it in the foreground. I always thought that there was something there in having Mike Ryerson, a hot young stud, stay over in Burke’s guest bedroom.
My problem is that the movie is too clunky and slowoooowwwww. C’mon, get to the damn bloodsucking already. Moreover, I hate that the camera vcuts away from the killing. The director is not getting the maximal horror from the story, and for me the first half just limped.
Did anyone else notice that Pig Killer from Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome plays Larry Crockett? Robert Grubb does an excellent American accent.
C’mon, people – it’s set in a small town in Maine! How could there not be a gay black schoolteacher?
Seriously – forgot the damned thing was on. Still, TNT repeats everything, so I’m sure I’ll have another chance. I remember liking the original miniseries; for me the creepiest part was when they were holding vigil in the morgue, waiting to see if the certifiably dead woman under the sheet would begin to stir…
I just hope they follow Joe Bob Brigg’s rule for movies dealing with vampires: establish the rules early on, and then stick to them.
Evil Death, you have been warned – at least twice before – about no personal insults in Cafe Society. You want to insult someone, open a thread in the Pit.
My patience is at an end. I have destroyed your post. That’s too bad because you had content that others probably wanted to read. If you want to say the same thing, say it without insult.
Where on earth did you get that idea from? Matt likes Mike because he was a good student and a personable guy. He invites Mike to stay in his guest room because Mike looks sick and Matt is worried - and also to try and allay his suspicions about what is going on. The only thing even remotely pointing at Matt being gay is that he never married.
Turek - while Dud wasn’t overtly retarded in the book,
he goes under Barlow’s power very readily. There’s more than a suggestion that Barlow can only hypnotise the unwary, the frightened and the weak of mind, and Dud is neither of the first two. SO he may well be damaged in some way.
Anyone else watching this and thinking it’s “Sam Seaborn vs The Vampires”? (West Wing reference). Seriously - the way the character speaks, his obsession with writing - seriously, it’s as if they just took what’s-his-face’s old Sam Seaborn character, and plunked him into rural, vampire-infested Maine. I half-expect to see President Bartlett order the 101st airborne into Salem’s Lot.
Blech. Part 2 had some nice moments, but it was so far off from the book that it may as well have been a different story entirely. Looking at it that way, as an original story, it’s not terrible, but not something you could recommend.
Maybe it is just that I’m older now, but this version doens’t seem half as scary as the original David Soul version. Or it could be that David Soul drinks in my local pub quite often and is unrecognisable, which is scary in itself. Not that I say no when he wants to buy me a drink!
I think I’ll watch the original miniseries next Sunday morning on TNT, and compare them. Frankly, the new version is as dull as dishwater … hopefully I can get a few shudders off the original.
Anyone else notice the number of Australian and Kiwi actors is this? Was it filmed downunder?
Just finished watching the second part. Man, that was bad. In every discussion I’ve ever had about no-so-good movies based on Stephen King’s stories, someone always trots out the old “Stephen King just doesn’t translate well to the medium of film” bit. I mean, of course, that must be it, right? It couldn’t have anything to do with the filmmakers scrapping huge chunks of the story and just doing whatever the hell they want, could it? :rolleyes:
I guess this version of 'Salem’s Lot could have been worse, though. On a scale of one to five stars, I suppose I’d give it two, which is more than I’d have given the It or Tommyknockers TV movies.
Okay, I liked both parts of this, but I’m quick to point out that I’ve neither read the book nor seen the original movie.
I have a question (and I apologize for not knowing anyone’s name) - in the scene where the head vampire bursts into the kid’s house and kills his mom… how exactly does he get in? He just busts through the window; how come no one had to invite him?
Well, I think those films are the exception to the rule. Usually when I have these conversations, people are talking about movies like It, The Tommyknockers, the original Salem’s Lot, Stanley Kubrick’s version of The Shining, etc. I thought the original Carrie (and up until the end, the TV remake), Misery, and several others were actually very good. But that just proves my point. The ones that were good were the ones that were faithful to the source material. It’s when they start second guessing King and trying to improve upon the material that they screw it all up. You’d think they’d have learned their lesson by now, but apparently not.
I know! I’m just glad that the power didn’t go out last night. Since AEP took over for PSO, we seem to be losing power a lot more easily.
I was thinking the same thing. The way the vampires got “dusted” remined me of Buffy.
I’m going to be rereading the book over the next few days in an effort to displace the memory of the miniseries, so I’ll find out for sure, but I don’t remember vampires needing an invitation under King’s “rules”. I know they did in this particular adaptaion, but I forget if that’s the case in the book.
Hey, since the whole story was centered on the old Marsden house – which the vampires were using as their base of operations and shelter from daylight, and which was generally perceived as a focus of “evil” – as soon as the Fearless Vampire Hunters figured out what was happening, why didn’t they just get some cans of gasoline and go up the hill and burn down the fucking house? Why wasn’t that the first thing they did?
There’s definitely several scenes in the book where the vampires are trying to convince someone to invite them in.
In the book, I don’t remember how Marlow got into Mark’s house. I vaguely recall something about Barlow being so old and powerful that he no longer needed to be invited in, but don’t quote me on it.
It may be true that the original miniseries doesn’t stand the test of time too well, but at least it had some truly horrifying moments. This had nothing even remotely scary in it.
In particular:
The sequence in the morgue when they’re waiting to see if the body comes to life. It was absolutely terrifying in the original, largely due to the tenseness of waiting as Ben becomes more and more frightened and his inability to remember the Lord’s Prayer when it really mattered. In this version, it looked like a scene out of Evil Dead II and took about fifteen seconds, tops.
where’s Buffy?