I always wondered why no one ever tried to make a full legnth movie out of this one. I know there were a couple of TV movies but neither seemed to capture the feeling the book had. It's a good book; not King's best though, despite the fact that SK claims it as his personal favorite
I am nearly finished with the book...shwn He took Susan I got sick to my stomach even though I knew it was coming. I wish in the book that Susan would have had as large a role after the bite as before.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
this version of the movie is way better then the older version is stupid and cheesey 11 dislikes are twilight fans or old fags who like old corny shit
I just bought this and the older version, which I always loved. When I first saw te newer one I didn't like it because I was so used to the older one. However, when I simply set aside the older one and then watched this for itself, I realized how good it was. It had more of a New England feel to it, too, then the older one. I'm now a big fan of both.
I haven't seen original movie or read the book, so for me, this movie was outstanding, I'm sure book and 79's film fans were sceptical at this movie from the start. Nonetheless, great film.
They really fucked up the book in this remake. None of the crap Susan said never actually happened in the book or even followed the timeline in the book. And a proper vampire would never just stand there and have a proper conversation with their intended victim before killing them or would even go to the bother or doing something nice for them. This isn't Twilight! What was this director thinking!?
@Lauranna Ever see Bela Lugosi in Dracula? It's the Elvis Presley of vampire movies, and Count Dracula DOES have "proper" conversations with victims and intended victims in the film. I think you're being a bit harsh in your feelings about this version of "Salem's Lot." While the 1970's version is my favorite, I found this Robe Lowe version quite entertaining....
@Lauranna I can't argue with the points you make, but rather than pick every scene apart (or just this scene) , I think this movie deserves to be appreciated for the sum of its parts. When Lowe was locked up in jail it totally creeped me out when that vampire was trying to get at him, and the entire movie held my attention...had enough suspense, and was high enough on the creepy scale to deserve a "thumbs up" from me. To compare it to "Twilight" was too harsh....it's ultimately a good film.
@Lauranna Imo if the series was that bad then King would've requested his name be removed like he has done before. At least the changes are kept in the same mood as the book. The Twilight comparison is a little harsh thou; at least Susan isn't running around in daylight glowing like gitter and Barlow isn't jumping through trees. Plus if you read more traditional vampire stories which King based this story off of, vampires would often have conversations with victims before killing them
everyone keeps pointing out the differences between the book and the movie and how disrespectful it is to stephen king that hollywood distorts his stories to make money. But thats how all book-movies are. But its okay. Stephen King will keep pushing out international best sellers and will outlast the film industry whores :)
Ya that girl is pretty cute but seriously, for the religious: would hell await a person willfully becoming a vampire? For the humane: would you really want to become something that needs to kill other people to live? As hot as vampires are (currently) it's a lot to think about...........or is it? Isn't it all rhetorical anyway?
As well as this, during my EMT training in NYC there was a cop who was an EMT as well instructing us. He said there was plenty of things along the lines of alien abductions, Vampires, and ghosts that doesn't make the news that people in the NYPD knew about. The news only reports about what it hears from street sources and other news casts. There are plenty of strange things that, cops, FBI, firefighters, citizens and EMTS keep to themselves that never make the pages or broadcasts of the news.
Vampires are supposed to scare the shit out of you, not give you a boner..this doesn't hold a candle to the original..no way..it had appropriate build up, suspense and genuine horror.
It would take about 3 minutes at most to lose conciousness from a deprivation of air to the lungs. But anyway to the main comment. Yes vampires are supposed to be scary, even the ones that ARE ATTRACTIVE because they still contain elements of a dead body ie.... their flesh and lips would be cold and maybe stiff like a corpse undergoing rigormortis. However it would be natural for them to evolve into a sexually attractive being to move through society easily and attract prey.
The first miniseries wasn't great, but it had a few moments. I expected better from this one, but it turned out to be incredibly mediocre. And why so many drastic changes in the story? Matt Burke as black and gay? Jimmy boinking the white trash Sandy? Larry Crockett boinking his daughter? Eva having some kind of demonic sex life (with Hubie Marsten?!) when she was young? Why all the tawdry sex? It didn't add to the story. And the acting of Rob Lowe and Samantha Mathis is terrible!
Look if you hold the 79 version in higher regards that is cool, but lets not pretend it's vampires were actually scarier than the book. I'm not trying to say they were garbage but they were extremely shallow, and lacked any visual impact due to the ridiculous amount of blue paint, and use of massive yellow contacts. The book, and 2004 film actually created an atmosphere of dread, and caused you to feel fear over what was happening to the town.
@jellyfish74 I would probably agree with you if I saw the 79 version first instead of seeing it several years after the 2004 edition. My pick for "Scariest Vampires ever" would be the faux-vamps in Twilight saga (I really hate using the word saga in conjunction with Twilight). However, they are scary for a completely retarded reason. The idea of future vamp series authors taking inspiration from S.Meyers is absolutely horrifying, and nightmare inducing!
I wanna get really rich and remake all the shitty stephen kings movies the way they were supposed to be, totally fucking awesome!. Like Firestarter, great book pathetic movie. Im not saying all of them are bad but a good number are. IT was a good one and so was children of the corn but yeah. Thats my dream! :D
I hear ya... My biggest problem with the Stephen King movies is that they look cheap, and the actors, directors ( not ALL of the time) SUCK. I don't care if the movie follows the book exactly. Take Kubrick's shining, AMAZING movie, but way different from the book. If we've already read the book, we have THAT story....nothing can change that. the problem is the shitty acting and directing. Mick Garris has killed many SK books, with his crap movies, that follow the books.
This is a very strange, unconventional scene, one that requires two seriously talented actors to pull it off - neither of which are present, sadly. Still, Bonnie Bedelia seems to be trying her best.
Illuminati=ET kin aka gods, Ea, Sirians, Satan, Pepsi, angels/demons, dragons, hulu, vampires, bluebloods, Al Gore, Windsors, Rothschilds, Rockefellars etc who rule cults like Freemasonry. Their agenda: continually cull/victimize people via vaccines/other toxins, Codex Alimentarius, carbon taxes, internet 2, WW3 then stage an alien invasion to get a fascist world government/religion with us chipped. Support Dr Deagle, Stewart Swerdlow, Oracle Broadcasting, gardeners and free-energy technology!
David Soul was not a good choice for Ben Mears... but neither was Rob Lowe, and David Soul was better than him anyways. Both movie versions do no justice to the book and they both are bad imo.
Very good point, I can't give my truly honest opinion about the 1979 film because I haven't seen it all. The 70's feel really helped the film's atmosphere from what I can tell, but the book requires a theatrical release imo.
Thats easy, because it was better by far. I loved the original Salem's Lot movie. I thought David Soul was outstanding in it.
I always thought that if they did a remake it would be improved but it was'nt. I read the book and it was brilliant too. Maybe they should do a proper remake and bring back David Soul to react his part.
I'm trying to think of why I liked the old version of this scene so much better. I think the acting and dialogue feel to down to earth. They sound so every day chatting. It looses the sense of magic and makes it feel more like a soap opera. I liked the other worldly feel of this scene in 79 and how the angelic light was cast on her and made her look so beautiful. Also we loose the epic music they had in the old version and she's reasoning with him instead of acting strange.
What an utter shit-fest of a remake!! Nothing can hold a candle to Tobe Hoopers '79 classic. Portraying the master vampire as swaove sophisticated animal works well on paper but when it comes to on-screen Hooper is right on the money. They SHOULD be ugly beasts, frightening abominations of the night. Frankly, Rutger Hauer had about as much menace as a fucking gay in a nail bar!
I think this version was underrated. It never matched the scares from the Tobe Hooper version but was closer to the source material and there was some damned fine acting.
This scene between Ben and Susan tugged at my heartstrings. Poor Susan.
Nothing like the book, she died for the second time near the of the book (before Barlow was slain), after she turned into a vamp, Ben plunged a stake into her heart, then she was stuffed with garlic and blue flowers, then she was put in a coffin upside down and went floatind down a river/stream.
yeah... we do live wiht you guys... but don't worry... i won't kill an one... but... i'm kinda like erward and them... but not all of us are good....we do need human...blood...i got to go..
tell me were you live and i'll go over there and show you the real me... then you won't be saying that we are not real... yeah your right we are fake like you... humans are fake... and UFOs are fake too and Bigfoot is fake?... what about ghost are they fake?
magnifica pelicula remake de mikael salomon de el año 2.004 con shamantha mathis rob lowe y los grandes actores : donald sutherland y rutger hauer .- excelente remake de el misterio de salem,s lot emitido por rtve el dia 8 de abril de 2.008 a las 3:45 de la mañana y que termino sobre las 5:45 de la mañana .- buenisima pelicula de mikael salomon.-
I'm really sorry, but these things freak me out sooo much!
dnt read this(cuz it really wrks). u will gt kissd on the nearest frieday by the love of ur life. 2mara wll b the bst day of ur life hwever if you dnt post ths comment 2 at least 3 vids u will die withn 2 days nw uv startd readn this dnt stp this is so scary snd ths ovr 2 5 vids in 143 mins when ur done press f6 nd ur crush's name wll appear on the screen n big letters ths is so scary cuz it actully wrks ths really wrks
erm... not to be funny here, but thats not salems lot, this dont seem like a patch on the original, i remember seeing the scene in the jail from the original for the first time, where the master kills the guy in the cell, nearly hit myself wen he popped up infront of the screen, mind u, i was 10 at the time... lol
I am not complaining about the remake based on this one clip. I'm talking about the lack of scares through the whole film. This remake is a lot more faithful to the novel but just didn't pull it off. The bit in the police cell is well done but that's about it. Mind you i've seen worse remakes, Halloween and The Fog spring to mind. Fucking awful.
Can't help making comparisions. It will always happen with remakes. I think making the vampire like Nosferatu in the 1979 Salems Lot made it scarier than the book in some ways. And the bit with the kid vampire floating through the window and Mrs Glick in the mortuary. Fuck waking up to her in the morning.
@bitingbill Well on one hand it stuck closer to the book than the original did, of which I've been a fan since it was first released. And I love the original 79 version. However, this one has some kick in it!
ok everyone, i think this isnt the greatest remakle of this video and yes the orginal is better. But like this conversation has come up like 40 times now, it needs to end. Comment about the vampiures and not the comparison from the book or movie.
This was ok, but i much prefer the original. That "look at me, teacher" scene from the original still scares the crap out of me. Check it out, it's here on youtube...
Either be wise and read the immensely gripping novel, 'Salem's Lot, or be ignorant of the written word and watch slapdash talkies like this - make the right choice!
For good vampire films see: 30 Days of Night, Blade 1 and Blade 2 - avoid Twilight at all costs!
it was a four part tv series wasn't it from what i can remember. it was on sci fi one night and i'm sure it was like four seperate episodes or something.
I thought this version was very articulate, atmospheric and just generally very well done. Much prefer it to the rather gratuitous and camp 1979 version. i thought Rob Lowe was brilliant and so was the actor playing mark, he's a dote. I've seen him in few things actualyl
Book is excellent. By far Stephen King's best! Then The body, then the shining and then Carrie
WOW - unfaithful to the plot and flooded with bad acting - not something any fan of 'Salem's Lot would be proud of. Notice how they tried to make the lead protagonist look as much like Stephen King as possible xD It goes to show that adapting classics is a tricky, almost 'reckless' business
I think the 1979 version is better, but I disagree with you....this 2004 version is well done and definitely worth watching. Rob Lowe, Donald Sutherland, and Rutger Haurer are all great. Dracula (1931, Bela Lugosi) has been done again and again, so I have no problem with another version of Salem's Lot. You should lighten up and enjoy the ride.
even though this is a horrible movie and Rob Lowe is a bad actor, I'll still watch anything with him in it cuz i think he's hot. yeah, it's pathetic. i know.
Rob Lowe is best known for his Brat Pack roles and then West Wing. NOT for playing in a bad interpretation of a Stephen King movie or for playing in Wayne's World. Yeah he's known for being in them but there aren't his "signature" roles.
This was TNT's remake of Stephen King's original classic, with Rob Lowe, Donald Sutherland, Samantha Mathis, and Andre Braugher..absolutely horrible..and unwatchable..stick with the original..
I wouldn't say absolutely horrible, but it wasn't great either. The original with David Soul and James Mason was a classic. The original didn't need blood and gore to make it scary. This is just my opinion though.
yeah i seen this dvd and thought it was the original coz i didnt even know there was a remake...but its alot better...realy good stuff...try movieland.
Why couldn't he have told her, just because you are a vampire, that doesn't make you a bad person. I would have said I can help you. Just a thought. I was so sad when those two didn't end up together. TY for the post. I love Susan.
What? She never said any of that in the book? o..o
kIzzFAces 2 weeks ago
it's so weird when you first read a book and than u see a film o.O
btw susan is hot wooohooo!!!xD
BboyYurko 3 weeks ago
I always wondered why no one ever tried to make a full legnth movie out of this one. I know there were a couple of TV movies but neither seemed to capture the feeling the book had. It's a good book; not King's best though, despite the fact that SK claims it as his personal favorite
reshad813 3 months ago
How come the female vampires in this version have crimped hair and lavender eye shadow?
cynthiacher 3 months ago
"I think they're dead." Of course they're NOT dead, you twit! They're UNdead!
cynthiacher 3 months ago
Poor dude, Ben's love life sucks....( No pun intended) and his girlfriend sucks, but in a bad way.... :P
luckable3 4 months ago
apparently becoming a vampire crimps your hair?
manikscribe 5 months ago
I am nearly finished with the book...shwn He took Susan I got sick to my stomach even though I knew it was coming. I wish in the book that Susan would have had as large a role after the bite as before.
PotatoGunsRule 5 months ago
@JustWorkFFS the book is so much better. scarier.
SpunkWHAT 6 months ago
This is a pretty good adaptation tbh.
Sure it changes things (Callahan's ending especially) but in terms of atmosphere and tone it's probably one of the more faithful King adaptations.
It has nothing on the book, but it's still a very passable way to spend an (overcast and windswept, stormy) evening.
TomClark2002 7 months ago
this version just embarrasses King's book
2010pies 8 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this version of the movie is way better then the older version is stupid and cheesey 11 dislikes are twilight fans or old fags who like old corny shit
igotthatsnowmayn 10 months ago
I just bought this and the older version, which I always loved. When I first saw te newer one I didn't like it because I was so used to the older one. However, when I simply set aside the older one and then watched this for itself, I realized how good it was. It had more of a New England feel to it, too, then the older one. I'm now a big fan of both.
ptl1143 10 months ago 2
The video needs to be fixed, the sound is coming out before mouths even move.
ThatChickwithSigns 11 months ago
I haven't seen original movie or read the book, so for me, this movie was outstanding, I'm sure book and 79's film fans were sceptical at this movie from the start. Nonetheless, great film.
Cl0suR3 1 year ago
They really fucked up the book in this remake. None of the crap Susan said never actually happened in the book or even followed the timeline in the book. And a proper vampire would never just stand there and have a proper conversation with their intended victim before killing them or would even go to the bother or doing something nice for them. This isn't Twilight! What was this director thinking!?
Lauranna 1 year ago 6
@Lauranna Ever see Bela Lugosi in Dracula? It's the Elvis Presley of vampire movies, and Count Dracula DOES have "proper" conversations with victims and intended victims in the film. I think you're being a bit harsh in your feelings about this version of "Salem's Lot." While the 1970's version is my favorite, I found this Robe Lowe version quite entertaining....
colderbeer 11 months ago
Comment removed
cdoherty805 11 months ago
@Lauranna I can't argue with the points you make, but rather than pick every scene apart (or just this scene) , I think this movie deserves to be appreciated for the sum of its parts. When Lowe was locked up in jail it totally creeped me out when that vampire was trying to get at him, and the entire movie held my attention...had enough suspense, and was high enough on the creepy scale to deserve a "thumbs up" from me. To compare it to "Twilight" was too harsh....it's ultimately a good film.
colderbeer 11 months ago
@Lauranna Imo if the series was that bad then King would've requested his name be removed like he has done before. At least the changes are kept in the same mood as the book. The Twilight comparison is a little harsh thou; at least Susan isn't running around in daylight glowing like gitter and Barlow isn't jumping through trees. Plus if you read more traditional vampire stories which King based this story off of, vampires would often have conversations with victims before killing them
Cyberpit2000 10 months ago
Shit shit shit, I shouldn't be on here watching this and reading comments,spoiling myself. XD
Yet, I can't resist...
..oh well.. :/
KikyoChanXD 1 year ago
@JustWorkFFS Also she was the first one they staked.
mikeisntgod 1 year ago
anyone like the return to salems lot movie?? ido. :)
8989billy 1 year ago
oh my god this is bollocks
bastardfingers 1 year ago
Does anybody know where I can watch this online?
rcc1111 1 year ago
Stop judging, vampires have feelings too! :> Ow, and Happy Halloween, everyone!
zombie32wes 1 year ago
Susan Mathis was hawt on this part!
catman351 1 year ago
what is this weak acting bullshit
spaceorbison 1 year ago
This remake is silly in so many ways. After Susan and Mrs. Glick are vampirized they both inexplicably have crimped hair and lavender eye makeup!
cynthiacher 1 year ago
everyone keeps pointing out the differences between the book and the movie and how disrespectful it is to stephen king that hollywood distorts his stories to make money. But thats how all book-movies are. But its okay. Stephen King will keep pushing out international best sellers and will outlast the film industry whores :)
unlimited647096 1 year ago
this is stupid. didn't happen in the book. dumb!!!
auntriri22 1 year ago
if vampires were real it would be great to be one..except for the whole sunlight thing.
MissusFingerBottom 1 year ago
Ah the good old days. Remember this when it came on TNT wasn't it? and they were promoting the hell out of it.
Nesnej1501 1 year ago
Ya that girl is pretty cute but seriously, for the religious: would hell await a person willfully becoming a vampire? For the humane: would you really want to become something that needs to kill other people to live? As hot as vampires are (currently) it's a lot to think about...........or is it? Isn't it all rhetorical anyway?
PotatoGunsRule 1 year ago
She may be undead, but I'd still bang her.
herbaliser555 1 year ago
As well as this, during my EMT training in NYC there was a cop who was an EMT as well instructing us. He said there was plenty of things along the lines of alien abductions, Vampires, and ghosts that doesn't make the news that people in the NYPD knew about. The news only reports about what it hears from street sources and other news casts. There are plenty of strange things that, cops, FBI, firefighters, citizens and EMTS keep to themselves that never make the pages or broadcasts of the news.
strideninja 1 year ago
@strideninja There's plenty of strange bullshit, too. If you're an EMT in NYC, then monkeys will fly out of my butt!
ghoststun 1 year ago
@ghoststun
Would you like those monkeys lubed or unlubed?
strideninja 1 year ago
Vampires are supposed to scare the shit out of you, not give you a boner..this doesn't hold a candle to the original..no way..it had appropriate build up, suspense and genuine horror.
TheLeatheryman 1 year ago
@TheLeatheryman
It would take about 3 minutes at most to lose conciousness from a deprivation of air to the lungs. But anyway to the main comment. Yes vampires are supposed to be scary, even the ones that ARE ATTRACTIVE because they still contain elements of a dead body ie.... their flesh and lips would be cold and maybe stiff like a corpse undergoing rigormortis. However it would be natural for them to evolve into a sexually attractive being to move through society easily and attract prey.
strideninja 1 year ago
I don't think you'd die instantly from a crushed larynx.. but you'd would eventually die.. in this video you would die with about 3 seconds lag.
TheLeatheryman 1 year ago
NOT JIMMY!
DeadLeopardSikCougar 1 year ago
WTF this wasn't in the book! SON OF A
mfourparttwo 1 year ago
The first miniseries wasn't great, but it had a few moments. I expected better from this one, but it turned out to be incredibly mediocre. And why so many drastic changes in the story? Matt Burke as black and gay? Jimmy boinking the white trash Sandy? Larry Crockett boinking his daughter? Eva having some kind of demonic sex life (with Hubie Marsten?!) when she was young? Why all the tawdry sex? It didn't add to the story. And the acting of Rob Lowe and Samantha Mathis is terrible!
cynthiacher 1 year ago
Look if you hold the 79 version in higher regards that is cool, but lets not pretend it's vampires were actually scarier than the book. I'm not trying to say they were garbage but they were extremely shallow, and lacked any visual impact due to the ridiculous amount of blue paint, and use of massive yellow contacts. The book, and 2004 film actually created an atmosphere of dread, and caused you to feel fear over what was happening to the town.
RuinerxxSINCITY 1 year ago
@RuinerxxSINCITY disagree. i've always thought the vamps in the original SL were some of the downright scariest i've ever seen.
jellyfish74 1 year ago
@jellyfish74 I would probably agree with you if I saw the 79 version first instead of seeing it several years after the 2004 edition. My pick for "Scariest Vampires ever" would be the faux-vamps in Twilight saga (I really hate using the word saga in conjunction with Twilight). However, they are scary for a completely retarded reason. The idea of future vamp series authors taking inspiration from S.Meyers is absolutely horrifying, and nightmare inducing!
RuinerxxSINCITY 1 year ago
Shit remake
hellview78 1 year ago
audio is off.
flickerman68 1 year ago
she looks like a innocent vampire, like the blonde lady in red from castlevania 64.
tubernery 1 year ago
Well, I don't seem to remember this in the book.....
CrackAttack17 1 year ago
I wish he just stake her already.
Mysteryfan28 1 year ago
Love the Book and the movie was great to. =) I wish i could find the older version ....however.... but, the 2004 is good 2 =)
superchickwinx 1 year ago
@superchickwinx You can find the older version. Just search salemslotmov (a server here on youtube) and you can watch the whole thing.
ButterflyRedrum 1 year ago
@ButterflyRedrum thank you soooo much u rock =)
superchickwinx 1 year ago
I wanna get really rich and remake all the shitty stephen kings movies the way they were supposed to be, totally fucking awesome!. Like Firestarter, great book pathetic movie. Im not saying all of them are bad but a good number are. IT was a good one and so was children of the corn but yeah. Thats my dream! :D
generalshermancross 1 year ago
@generalshermancross
I hear ya... My biggest problem with the Stephen King movies is that they look cheap, and the actors, directors ( not ALL of the time) SUCK. I don't care if the movie follows the book exactly. Take Kubrick's shining, AMAZING movie, but way different from the book. If we've already read the book, we have THAT story....nothing can change that. the problem is the shitty acting and directing. Mick Garris has killed many SK books, with his crap movies, that follow the books.
lithjimmy 1 year ago
@generalshermancross it'll happen man, give it 20 years or so, trouble is the remakes'll probably be 3rd world quality shit too
EvilKris 1 year ago
@generalshermancross
the Shining w/ Jack Nicholson was the BEST
Dix994 1 year ago
And she was incredibly beautiful, and asleep. She's awake here, and looks slutty
Stretchball 1 year ago
This was the most saddest scene in the whole movie
777horror 1 year ago
Comment removed
Cardiff67235 1 year ago
This is a very strange, unconventional scene, one that requires two seriously talented actors to pull it off - neither of which are present, sadly. Still, Bonnie Bedelia seems to be trying her best.
TheBermudaMan 1 year ago
Sorry, I meant to say Samantha Mathis, not Bonnie Bedelia.
TheBermudaMan 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Illuminati=ET kin aka gods, Ea, Sirians, Satan, Pepsi, angels/demons, dragons, hulu, vampires, bluebloods, Al Gore, Windsors, Rothschilds, Rockefellars etc who rule cults like Freemasonry. Their agenda: continually cull/victimize people via vaccines/other toxins, Codex Alimentarius, carbon taxes, internet 2, WW3 then stage an alien invasion to get a fascist world government/religion with us chipped. Support Dr Deagle, Stewart Swerdlow, Oracle Broadcasting, gardeners and free-energy technology!
deagla2 1 year ago
David Soul was not a good choice for Ben Mears... but neither was Rob Lowe, and David Soul was better than him anyways. Both movie versions do no justice to the book and they both are bad imo.
YellowTurtle13 2 years ago
At least the original movie had it's frightening and jarring moments. This version is just... bad... and weird.
palehorseman 2 years ago
Very good point, I can't give my truly honest opinion about the 1979 film because I haven't seen it all. The 70's feel really helped the film's atmosphere from what I can tell, but the book requires a theatrical release imo.
YellowTurtle13 1 year ago
what! David Soul was the character 100% he had the right combination of sadness and intelligence,.
amandeepv 1 year ago
David Soul is nearly 70, I don't think it would be a good idea for him to reprise his role should another Salems Lot remake be done!
thegreeninferno 2 years ago
Thats easy, because it was better by far. I loved the original Salem's Lot movie. I thought David Soul was outstanding in it.
I always thought that if they did a remake it would be improved but it was'nt. I read the book and it was brilliant too. Maybe they should do a proper remake and bring back David Soul to react his part.
STHFGDBY 2 years ago
I'm trying to think of why I liked the old version of this scene so much better. I think the acting and dialogue feel to down to earth. They sound so every day chatting. It looses the sense of magic and makes it feel more like a soap opera. I liked the other worldly feel of this scene in 79 and how the angelic light was cast on her and made her look so beautiful. Also we loose the epic music they had in the old version and she's reasoning with him instead of acting strange.
Mystefier 2 years ago
David Soul would beat the crap out of Rob Lowe.
odh202 2 years ago 3
What an utter shit-fest of a remake!! Nothing can hold a candle to Tobe Hoopers '79 classic. Portraying the master vampire as swaove sophisticated animal works well on paper but when it comes to on-screen Hooper is right on the money. They SHOULD be ugly beasts, frightening abominations of the night. Frankly, Rutger Hauer had about as much menace as a fucking gay in a nail bar!
LordArsehat 2 years ago
@LordArsehat I haven't seen twilight and so forth, but vampires portrayed as monsters is tops!
redD4Dworld 1 year ago
how could anyone watch twilight when you have real vampires?
iwishiwasthestig 2 years ago
ive never seen the original but have seen this one and its pretty good, il have to buy the old one i saw it in hmv the other day for like £3.
inthezone666 2 years ago
This version is somehwat closer to the book then the old one, but it kinda screws it up by trying to put it in a mordern setting.
jeremyIfisher 2 years ago 15
the original version is much better than this one...
AMJMJ 2 years ago
Voice sync please!
hypnodance 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
new collection of limited vampire t-shirt at:
fetish-store . org
xxx
L.
gianluca10070 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Salem's Lot > Twilight
Take that, Twifags!
FullmetalLakers824 2 years ago 29
Comment removed
TheKearnsmike 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fuck you faggot
LukeBailey182 2 years ago
@FullmetalLakers824 So fukkin true... Barlow could kick the Cullen's asses
Devilhunter318 2 years ago
@FullmetalLakers824 stephen king is and will always be a better writer than her. and barlow would dominate them all
dougsusername 2 years ago
I think this version was underrated. It never matched the scares from the Tobe Hooper version but was closer to the source material and there was some damned fine acting.
This scene between Ben and Susan tugged at my heartstrings. Poor Susan.
Adventurestud 2 years ago 3
@Adventurestud
Agreed.
Wytchfinde 2 years ago
Comment removed
BobbyNewb 2 years ago
It IS Samantha Mathis. There were some good things about this version of Salem's Lot, but it really wasn't that great.
cynthiacher 2 years ago
I love samantha mathis in this scene.
L0K3 2 years ago
Nothing like the book, she died for the second time near the of the book (before Barlow was slain), after she turned into a vamp, Ben plunged a stake into her heart, then she was stuffed with garlic and blue flowers, then she was put in a coffin upside down and went floatind down a river/stream.
Outcastkid101 2 years ago 2
sure why not....ummm... i like boys and i have short hair.... i can see in the dark..... but i can't fly....
EmilyAttackHim 2 years ago
Oh No!!! I didnt know Susan Becomes A vampire T.T
joakomora007 2 years ago
Yeah, that scene was really touching....
"you don't have faith enough to keep me out"
"You're wrong - YOU pushed me to it."
trence5 2 years ago 3
hey shut up it don't suck!
EmilyAttackHim 2 years ago
yeah... we do live wiht you guys... but don't worry... i won't kill an one... but... i'm kinda like erward and them... but not all of us are good....we do need human...blood...i got to go..
EmilyAttackHim 2 years ago
oh mi god are you ***serious! !!!!!! YOU ARE NOT A VAMPIRE GET A LIFE. you can't even spell edward! gODDD LIAR
YoMo0910 2 years ago 3
tell me were you live and i'll go over there and show you the real me... then you won't be saying that we are not real... yeah your right we are fake like you... humans are fake... and UFOs are fake too and Bigfoot is fake?... what about ghost are they fake?
EmilyAttackHim 2 years ago
Take your meds...
djchris73 2 years ago
You are fucking retarded.... end of story.
plasoker 2 years ago 2
call me crazy,but i believe in vampires....in fact,i know a few of them.
jmmook1982 2 years ago
The original is wayyyy more creepier. The Vampires walk silently with hissing gasps, and have the dark to shield them from human eyes.
TemplarReturns 2 years ago
and how do you know that we are real?... and ok yeah we do hiss but not all of us walk only in the dark...
EmilyAttackHim 2 years ago
youre an idiot...
ATR108 2 years ago
Comment removed
LoveingTT 2 years ago
LMAO!! Can you post another stupid comment so i can show my friends and laugh?
philthelilninja 2 years ago
i would have said that i had a big vein for her to bite....roflmao
captpinchcard 2 years ago
I saw this a while back, but when you've seen the original too, this really isn't that great next to it. It could be worse, though.
dorkalecki 2 years ago
magnifica pelicula remake de mikael salomon de el año 2.004 con shamantha mathis rob lowe y los grandes actores : donald sutherland y rutger hauer .- excelente remake de el misterio de salem,s lot emitido por rtve el dia 8 de abril de 2.008 a las 3:45 de la mañana y que termino sobre las 5:45 de la mañana .- buenisima pelicula de mikael salomon.-
LOTSMEARS 2 years ago
Windows Movie Maker is an awesome editor.
newstart2009 2 years ago
This one is aiight, but the original - those vampires still creeped me out!
trence5 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm really sorry, but these things freak me out sooo much!
dnt read this(cuz it really wrks). u will gt kissd on the nearest frieday by the love of ur life. 2mara wll b the bst day of ur life hwever if you dnt post ths comment 2 at least 3 vids u will die withn 2 days nw uv startd readn this dnt stp this is so scary snd ths ovr 2 5 vids in 143 mins when ur done press f6 nd ur crush's name wll appear on the screen n big letters ths is so scary cuz it actully wrks ths really wrks
elanabitbol 2 years ago
eh i let her suck on me fuck it
slickinidaho 2 years ago
yeah, that being said - Susan became even more beautiful as a vampire............ She got a bad deal by being turned.
trence5 2 years ago 2
erm... not to be funny here, but thats not salems lot, this dont seem like a patch on the original, i remember seeing the scene in the jail from the original for the first time, where the master kills the guy in the cell, nearly hit myself wen he popped up infront of the screen, mind u, i was 10 at the time... lol
jeffers1975 2 years ago
i think thats the remake from 2006
Shaguar66 2 years ago
I am not complaining about the remake based on this one clip. I'm talking about the lack of scares through the whole film. This remake is a lot more faithful to the novel but just didn't pull it off. The bit in the police cell is well done but that's about it. Mind you i've seen worse remakes, Halloween and The Fog spring to mind. Fucking awful.
bitingbill 2 years ago
Can't help making comparisions. It will always happen with remakes. I think making the vampire like Nosferatu in the 1979 Salems Lot made it scarier than the book in some ways. And the bit with the kid vampire floating through the window and Mrs Glick in the mortuary. Fuck waking up to her in the morning.
bitingbill 2 years ago 3
ok but like im not showing the entire movie so dont complain about the entire remake on one video clip from it.
jrkapus35 2 years ago
@bitingbill Well on one hand it stuck closer to the book than the original did, of which I've been a fan since it was first released. And I love the original 79 version. However, this one has some kick in it!
whatuswattingat 1 year ago
Shit remake.
bitingbill 2 years ago
ok everyone, i think this isnt the greatest remakle of this video and yes the orginal is better. But like this conversation has come up like 40 times now, it needs to end. Comment about the vampiures and not the comparison from the book or movie.
jrkapus35 2 years ago
The original was much better, but this version was pretty good. I don't think it sucked. It's just that the original was a classic.
SHARPsUnite 2 years ago
Her eyes.....those look EXACTLY like real ones.
DeltaPhi79 2 years ago
This was ok, but i much prefer the original. That "look at me, teacher" scene from the original still scares the crap out of me. Check it out, it's here on youtube...
CreatureFeatures75 3 years ago
Yeah, the original is the best. I agree with your comment, but for me, the scariest part in the original is with the guy in the prison cell ...
TheUTubeTeamSucks 2 years ago
Either be wise and read the immensely gripping novel, 'Salem's Lot, or be ignorant of the written word and watch slapdash talkies like this - make the right choice!
For good vampire films see: 30 Days of Night, Blade 1 and Blade 2 - avoid Twilight at all costs!
SourSoldier 3 years ago
it was a four part tv series wasn't it from what i can remember. it was on sci fi one night and i'm sure it was like four seperate episodes or something.
reallygonewhy 3 years ago
no this is a movie not a series
jrkapus35 3 years ago
I thought this version was very articulate, atmospheric and just generally very well done. Much prefer it to the rather gratuitous and camp 1979 version. i thought Rob Lowe was brilliant and so was the actor playing mark, he's a dote. I've seen him in few things actualyl
Book is excellent. By far Stephen King's best! Then The body, then the shining and then Carrie
reallygonewhy 3 years ago
WOW - unfaithful to the plot and flooded with bad acting - not something any fan of 'Salem's Lot would be proud of. Notice how they tried to make the lead protagonist look as much like Stephen King as possible xD It goes to show that adapting classics is a tricky, almost 'reckless' business
SourSoldier 3 years ago
I think the 1979 version is better, but I disagree with you....this 2004 version is well done and definitely worth watching. Rob Lowe, Donald Sutherland, and Rutger Haurer are all great. Dracula (1931, Bela Lugosi) has been done again and again, so I have no problem with another version of Salem's Lot. You should lighten up and enjoy the ride.
colderbeer 3 years ago
When the ring fell down was after the Vampire bit Susan right. Cause I haven't seen this movie In a while I am just curious.
Krypton853 3 years ago
yes it is, the scene wher the ring falls is where ben kills the grand vampire
jrkapus35 3 years ago
I liked the scene where Mrs. Glick comes back as a vampire. This movie's pretty good.
the5chronicles 3 years ago
So vampires have crinkled flat-ironed hair?
toecutterr6 3 years ago
Ah, I didn't look at your info. My apologies.
opnminded1 3 years ago
no proplem
jrkapus35 3 years ago
sir, is this 2004's salem's lot?
yudiputay 3 years ago
Okay, the audio doesn't match up with the video. What's up with that?
opnminded1 3 years ago
i said that the video and audio got fucked up when i posted the video
jrkapus35 3 years ago
I love how she decided to put a crimper to her hair right after becoming a vampire.
SirThinks2Much 3 years ago 4
hahaha the same thing happens with Ruth's hair when shes a vampire
jrkapus35 3 years ago
lol doesn't happen like this at all in the book.
SwordDemon22 3 years ago 2
shes prettier as a vampire then as a human. go figure.
GreatRedDragon53545 3 years ago
most females who turn into vampires are hotter then they were as humans
jrkapus35 3 years ago
I thought this was a great movie / series. Scary as hell.
Leadwerks 3 years ago 2
Scary, if you're 12 and never seen a decent horror film.
castletriglav 3 years ago 5
even though this is a horrible movie and Rob Lowe is a bad actor, I'll still watch anything with him in it cuz i think he's hot. yeah, it's pathetic. i know.
moviegenius54 3 years ago
rob lowe kicked ass in this movie, dude!
and he's famous for playing Ben in this and Ben in wayne's world. weird.
Dexter81388 3 years ago
Rob Lowe is best known for his Brat Pack roles and then West Wing. NOT for playing in a bad interpretation of a Stephen King movie or for playing in Wayne's World. Yeah he's known for being in them but there aren't his "signature" roles.
moviegenius54 3 years ago
Holy bad movie!!
anhacus 3 years ago
Indeedly!
Turtlegoyim 3 years ago
Why oh why in god's name don't they ever make a faithful version of my all time fav book. This was filmed in Australia for gods sake.
linebackertwo 3 years ago
Before i watched the Movie i read the book.the book was better.
MissAshleyKaulitz 3 years ago 3
The 2004 version is just bland and not scary.
Deavi783 3 years ago
This was TNT's remake of Stephen King's original classic, with Rob Lowe, Donald Sutherland, Samantha Mathis, and Andre Braugher..absolutely horrible..and unwatchable..stick with the original..
Sugarbehr1967 3 years ago
I wouldn't say absolutely horrible, but it wasn't great either. The original with David Soul and James Mason was a classic. The original didn't need blood and gore to make it scary. This is just my opinion though.
DBarns7 3 years ago
they're both pretty terrible
ragenut2112 3 years ago
I agree. Both films had their moments but neither came close to the terror of the book.
cynthiacher 3 years ago 2
Rob Lowe should be no where's near a horror movie.
anhacus 3 years ago
i didn't see this film but i read the book and i love it so much
kristal1990 3 years ago
hot vampire
TheVampirFreak 3 years ago
ok this is a remake of the original and i want to know how to find it plz tell me
XdarkvampyreX 3 years ago
yeah i seen this dvd and thought it was the original coz i didnt even know there was a remake...but its alot better...realy good stuff...try movieland.
yoyo6450 3 years ago
you dont have to be sad
now they are together...hes dead
karasu3103 3 years ago
Why couldn't he have told her, just because you are a vampire, that doesn't make you a bad person. I would have said I can help you. Just a thought. I was so sad when those two didn't end up together. TY for the post. I love Susan.
Mormonhunk 3 years ago
its not that bad of a movie. yes the origianl is always better but its still a good movie.
jrkapus35 3 years ago