JP Nunez
Like most film fans, I don’t usually get excited when I hear that a classic movie is being remade, but Salem’s Lot was one of the rare exceptions. I just love Stephen King’s original novel so much I’m always happy to see a new take on it, and when I found out it was being made by the guy who wrote and directed Annabelle Comes Home, I was completely sold. I was confident that this new adaptation would carve out its own niche in the horror world alongside Tobe Hooper’s beloved made-for-TV version, and I couldn’t wait to see how it turned out.
Salem’s Lot was written and directed by Gary Dauberman, and it stars Lewis Pullman, Alfre Woodard, Makenzie Leigh, Bill Camp, Pilou Asbæk, John Benjamin Hickey, Alexander Ward, and Jordan Preston. In the film, author Ben Mears returns to his hometown, Jerusalem’s Lot (or Salem’s Lot for short), to do some research for his next book, but when he arrives, he gets a bit more than he bargained for.
A powerful vampire named Kurt Barlow has also moved to the Lot, and along with his familiar, a man named Richard Straker, he’s opened up an antique shop in town. However, as you can probably guess, the store is just a front for Barlow’s real work: turning the entire population of Jerusalem’s Lot into an army of vampires. He nearly succeeds, but before he can completely take over the place, Ben Mears and some of his new friends band together and try everything in their power to stop him.
If you’re familiar with King’s novel, it should come as no surprise that this new adaptation had to leave a lot of the original story on the cutting room floor. Hell, Tobe Hooper’s Salem’s Lot cut a lot out as well, and this new iteration is about an hour shorter. It’s unfortunate, as the extra material gives these characters incredible depth and relatability, but that unavoidable choice also has a silver lining.
By trimming all that fat, writer/director Gary Dauberman is able to get right to the heart of this story, so once Barlow’s reign of terror begins, the narrative moves at an almost lightning-fast pace. It can feel a bit rushed if you compare it to the book and the 1979 film, but if you take it on its own merits, it works just fine.
In fact, in a certain sense, this pacing is even better than Tobe Hooper’s. As great as that first adaptation is, it sometimes feels caught between a book and a movie. For example, the subplot about Bonny Sawyer cheating on her husband with Larry Crocket works well in King’s original novel, but in the film, it feels a bit extraneous. This new version of Salem’s Lot ignores all that and focuses solely on the main characters, and that makes for a much leaner plot.
However, the breakneck pace also comes with a downside. This movie doesn’t develop its characters nearly as much, so the acting has to kick it up a notch. It’s up to the performances to make you care about these people, and thankfully, this cast does A+ work. Even the kids are believable and likable, so they’ll have you invested in their characters in no time.
The only exception is Pilou Asbæk, the actor who plays Straker. If you’ve seen this guy before, you know how good he can be, but unfortunately, his character gets short-changed pretty badly. He’s just not given much to do, so Straker comes across as a rather bland appetizer to the bloodsucking main course.
And speaking of Barlow, he’s awesome…well, mostly. Dauberman keeps the Count Orlok-inspired look from the made-for-TV Salem’s Lot, with the bald head and pointy ears, but his vampire looks a bit more human. This design is the best of both worlds, but to be frank, the execution doesn’t entirely hit the mark. When you see this bloodsucker up close, his face has a somewhat plastic feel to it, and that took me out of the film a bit every time Barlow got close to the camera.
Thankfully though, the horror in Salem’s Lot is good enough that this ended up being little more than a minor annoyance. When Barlow and his minions go for the jugular (often literally!), they’re genuinely terrifying, and even when you don’t see them, Gary Dauberman still manages to creep the hell out of you. He cranks the atmosphere up to 11 at will, and when you know something terrible is about to happen, he’ll keep you on the edge of your seat until he breaks the tension.
When you put that all together, you get a worthy adaptation of Stephen King’s original novel and a worthwhile remake of a made-for-TV classic. To be fair, I don’t think this version is better than Tobe Hooper’s, but it doesn’t have to be. It just has to be a fun ride in its own right, and it totally passes that test.
Aside from my nitpick about Kurt Barlow’s look, my only real complaint with Salem’s Lot is that I wish it would’ve gotten a theatrical release. It deserves to be on the big screen, but hey, a streaming release is better than no release at all. At the end of the day, I’m just happy we’re finally getting a chance to see it, and I think it’s going to make a lot of horror fans very happy.
Salem’s Lot is set to stream on Max starting October 3.
Tobe Hooper’s TV adaptation was banal. Real actors had to fight to keep it interesting because David Soul? was cast because he was in starsky and hutch then never seen again. His boring performance made the 2 parter something to never watch again. Tobe Hooper can direct. Starsky or hutch? can’t act.