So WTF happend on Salem's Lot?
- Thread starter Nocturnal
- Start date
Fingolfin269
Lifer
- Feb 28, 2003
- 17,948
- 31
- 91
What point are you referring to? Did you miss it or are you looking for clarification?
BTW, I thought part 2 turned out to be pretty good. Part 1 really sucked.
BTW, I thought part 2 turned out to be pretty good. Part 1 really sucked.
WT
Diamond Member
- Sep 21, 2000
- 4,816
- 59
- 91
I'm lost as well. I watched about 90% of the first episode and 80% of the last one. My bigges tproblem was I missed 15 of the last 20 minutes, from when they burned down the mansion until the hospital attendant chased the boy out of the hospital and opened the door for him to escape. I briefly caught a few scenes in there, but nothing to explain the events that transpired. Anyone care of offer an explanation ?
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,755
- 599
- 126
There really wasn't one that I could see...That chick came back as a vampire, and he wouldn't invite her in...when she tried to kill the boy he staked her. Then they lit the house on fire and narrowly escaped from the town, leaving all the vampires behind alive as near as I could see. Then the priest said 'damn you to hell Rob Lowe!'. After that the boy smothers the priest in his hospital bed and you pretty much know the rest.
I assume you saw them kill barlow.
Not sure what my take on that movie was, the vampire kids were pretty creepy, but I got sort of pissed at the end when all the vampires were lurching around like zombies...uh, vampires are quick and can fly...why would they stumble around with their arms out? I guess maybe the extras playing them were idiots.
Fingolfin269
Lifer
- Feb 28, 2003
- 17,948
- 31
- 91
I think they were hungry or something. The problem with the movie is that it didn't do a great job with time passage.
jcwagers
Golden Member
- Dec 25, 2000
- 1,150
- 14
- 81
Having read the book, the movie was a disaster IMO. I realize that they were simply trying to make a more "up to date" version but it was sorely lacking in a lot of places. Aside from having Barlow as a human, I thought that the old movie was a lot more true to the book than this new one. They mixed up a lot of the details in the movie. Mark Petrey didn't go into the Marsten house until AFTER his parents were killed in the book(and he actually had TWO parents rather than just one like in the new movie). The doctor DID NOT sleep with that chick......it was somebody else who was pretty much insignificant to the story. The Nortons did NOT run a cafe. The black guy's character in the movie used a crucifix to get Matt Ryerson to leave his house whereas in this movie.....he simply blubbered about and the vampire's confusion seemed to make him leave. Both movies fail to properly take care of the Susan Norton situation and in this case the NEW movie would've made more sense than the old one. Ben Mears did NOT actually see the Marstens in the house.....he went in on a dare and was so scared that he "pictured" Hubie Marsten hanging in a room. It was a nightmare for him but the vampire Susan Norton did NOT clear up his past for him. There are other differences as well but I can't think of them right now. Overall, this was a creative attempt to retell a story that was told much better in the book and reasonably well in the first movie. I can give them credit for trying to be creative.....but that's about it.
jc
jc
(ever wandered into the first page of a thread and feel like you've clicked on page 5 by accident?)
jcwagers
Golden Member
- Dec 25, 2000
- 1,150
- 14
- 81
The Marsten house was a "beacon" for evil. By burning the Marsten house, they eliminated the largest concentrated place for the vampires to hide. That scattered them and took away their resting place. It also put them on the run somewhat as they knew that Ben Mears and Mark Petrey would be coming after them. While I wasn't impressed with this new movie.....it was still WORLDS better than "Return to Salem's Lot". That movie was one of the worst EVAR!
jc
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,755
- 599
- 126
Having not read the book or seen the first movie, my impression was it was working fairly well until the last half hour or so. Then it just felt sloppy and incoherent. No explaination of what condition the priest was in (was he a vampire? no, then what was he? a slave like the donald sutherlands character?). They leave Matt behind, but they never discovered that he was dead. I assume it was poor editing that caused it, but it appeared they just said 'fvck him' and left. The vampires being hungry makes sense when you see them eating dead birds...but there didn't appear to be more than like a few days passage of time in the movie.
So many loose ends with characters that were fairly prominent in the beginning like that slutty woman and her husband. More explaination of the vampires habits would have been nice.
It wasn't that bad, but like I said, it sort of fell apart at the end. Like many King movies I've seen, they take an elaborate well explained tale, and while forcing it into a 2 hour movie mold lose to much character development and rush the plot.
So many loose ends with characters that were fairly prominent in the beginning like that slutty woman and her husband. More explaination of the vampires habits would have been nice.
It wasn't that bad, but like I said, it sort of fell apart at the end. Like many King movies I've seen, they take an elaborate well explained tale, and while forcing it into a 2 hour movie mold lose to much character development and rush the plot.
lol, I thought the movie was pretty good. I'm going to read the book, the books are always better then the movies.
I didn't like it. The original Salem Lot was damn good and quite scary. This was a poor remake. It was ok. It didn't suck but it was no where on the level of the original.
Yea that sucked totally. Some movies just can't be remade to capture the greatness of the first. Salem's Lot is one of those movies that just can't be remade.
Kelemvor
Lifer
- May 23, 2002
- 16,928
- 8
- 81
I saw about a minute of that movie. Turned it on when they were in some sort of junk yard looking place and the dad was talking to his daughter and offered her hsi neck. But she said they didn't want his blood, but wanted his flesh. Wife made me turn it off after that. heh.
Looked interesting though.
Looked interesting though.
Fingolfin269
Lifer
- Feb 28, 2003
- 17,948
- 31
- 91
AND the baby that Rob took and put in the hospital? Whatever happened to him? His black friend being staked...it ticked me that they never went back to him so for all they know, he was still alive in the hospital.
I agree...the ending was terrible. It was like those in charge just got tired or lazy or something....or else they ran out of time and just tried to cram in whatever. I do believe the priest was just a slave and not actually a vampire since he was never bitten....
I agree...the ending was terrible. It was like those in charge just got tired or lazy or something....or else they ran out of time and just tried to cram in whatever. I do believe the priest was just a slave and not actually a vampire since he was never bitten....
Fingolfin269
Lifer
- Feb 28, 2003
- 17,948
- 31
- 91
Well, if he were a vampire then the beginning of the movie would have been completely different... considering they're running around on top of buildings during the day.
hahahahahhahaha
Anyways, :thumbsdown: on Salem's Lot. Definitely glad this was made for TV and not something I paid to see.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter