Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot: This needs to happen

[Sawyer]

Now, yes, the book has been adapted twice into television movies, but, from what I've heard and from what bits and pieces I've seen of both, neither are all that true to the novel and take quite a few liberties with the story and its characters.

This would be a great time for it. There is something of a vampire craze taking place lately with stuff like Twilght, The Vampire Diaries and True Blood. But this would be the antidote to that lovey-dovey, pretty boy vampire falls for the emo human chick stuff that seems to be at the forefront of the craze. Here, vampires wouldn't be the love interest, they'd be the threat. The vampires of the novel are much closer to those of Bram Stoker, as King was inspired to write the book by Dracula. The movie should stick to that.

I also think that, of a majority of King's novels, Salem's Lot could actually fit into the timeframe of a two/two and a half hour movie. I love It/The Stand/The Dark Tower/etc. but all of those would require either a miniseries or multiple films (or in Dark Tower's case, multiple films and a television series) to keep the stories intact, whereas Salem's Lot's story is fairly simple and could concievably be done in one film.

King fans... what do you think?

[Eggyman]

Yeh. I'd buy. It's one of King's best. I didn't mind the old film with that guy in it, but I'd be down for a remake.

[:eek:]

Wouldn't mind a new version with the right director behind it. Who knows, if Let Me In turns out to be successful (and with the reviews I've seen so far it might have a good chance) it might happen. As it is for the moment Hollywood is, sadly, probably more interested in finding the next Twilight.

[Bruce Banner]

As I have posted before Salem's Lot is my favorite King novel, with my favorite protagonist.

Might seem fanboyish for me owning a yellow jeep like the 78 version?

Its the book that made me want to be a writer when I got older.

Not much of a fan of vampires, but my love for the slow destruction of the small town. Salem's Lot feels like Stephen King's small town Bermuda triangle considering how it is referenced in other stories.

I myself have been always thinking (alot more recently) how awesome it would be to see this done justice on camera.


I feel as though it should be taking place in the 1970's like the book. The book itself is dated even King acknowledges that but in that time period it works. The 2004 version being brought up to present day doesn't sit well for me considering how easy it is to communicate with others with modern technology. And how the **** can you kill Father Callahan? The 1978 version had a very menacing Straker with class actor James Mason. And while I can buy David Soul in the role, I think he was too masculine for lanky and bookish Ben Mears.

I personally would prefer this to be a miniseries again, but it could be done in a little over 2 hours as Sawyer mentioned. I want it to be able to build up Ben Mears and his obsession, along with the other character interactions in The Lot. Then show how it all goes downhill from there.

[Sawyer]

Yeah, no matter how it is done, it would need to be a period piece. I wouldn't want the 2010 version of Salem's Lot.

[The Joker]

Mr Straker: "You'll enjoy, Mr Barlow. And he'll enjoy you"

I love the 1979 movie. It had such a great atmosphere, the vampires were way more scarier than today's modern vampires. Mr Barlow has to be one of the scariest vampires ever put on screen.




I didn't care for the 2010 remake, which is a shame because Donald Sutherland and Rob Lowe were perfectly cast in their roles. Although nobody will top James Mason as Mr Straker for me.

[danoyse]

It's my favorite Stephen King book, and I'm still waiting for a decent film adaptation. It's been screwed up into a movie twice.

It's short enough for a good theatrical version, and with the vampire craze right now I can't tell why it hasn't happened yet.

[Jackasscoley15]

1000 times yes. They'd have to cast somebody really menacing to top Mason's Straker, though.

[Doctor Jones]

This book seems interesting. Never read a King book before.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by Doctor Jones

This book seems interesting. Never read a King book before.

Dude, do it. You seriously wont regret it. I started in on King about three years ago after I heard that The Stand was one of the primary inspirations for LOST, and now it's my favorite book of all time. I continued with his stuff from there and they've all been pretty great.

Salem's Lot is definitely one of the best vampire stories of all time.

[CrimsonMist]

I really loved the '79 film. I thought it really captured the atmosphere of the novel. It was really eerie. But they did cut and change alot of things. And despite looking like Nosferatu, I didn't really like how they made Barlow into the attack dog of Straker(James Mason was perfectly cast!). The Glick brothers at the window will be forever imbedded in my brain.

I thought the 2004 film was just awful though. I agree with Bruce Banner: modernizing it really took away a chunk of atmosphere. And some of the acting was bad, too. But Rutger Hauer was PERFECT casting, despite being a blonde instead of black-haired.

I think it's possible to turn it into a 2 1/2 hour film and do it right. Just don't take liberties with the characters and story.

[Doctor Jones]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

Dude, do it. You seriously wont regret it. I started in on King about three years ago after I heard that The Stand was one of the primary inspirations for LOST, and now it's my favorite book of all time. I continued with his stuff from there and they've all been pretty great.

Salem's Lot is definitely one of the best vampire stories of all time.

If I ever get to reading it, it won't be for a while. I'm swamped with alot of reading already for school. So until I can find time to read it, I'll look into it.

[Sawyer]

Also...

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

Though I have yet to read all of The Dark Tower series, I've heard that Father Callahan plays a pretty big role later on in the series. So, if (fingers crossed) the general outline of what is planned of there being a trilogy of films and two televised seasons to bridge the gaps, it would be insanely awesome if they could get the same actor to play Callahan for both Salem's Lot and The Dark Tower.

[VenomVsSpidey]

Agreed, and I want a remake of Apt Pupil also.

[Figs]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

Also...

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

Though I have yet to read all of The Dark Tower series, I've heard that Father Callahan plays a pretty big role later on in the series. So, if (fingers crossed) the general outline of what is planned of there being a trilogy of films and two televised seasons to bridge the gaps, it would be insanely awesome if they could get the same actor to play Callahan for both Salem's Lot and The Dark Tower.

That would be pretty cool and although I enjoyed the original film, I would welcome a new version if it stayed closer to the book.

[Bruce Banner]

Originally Posted by CrimsonMist

I really loved the '79 film. I thought it really captured the atmosphere of the novel. It was really eerie. But they did cut and change alot of things. And despite looking like Nosferatu, I didn't really like how they made Barlow into the attack dog of Straker(James Mason was perfectly cast!). The Glick brothers at the window will be forever imbedded in my brain.

Definately captured the atmosphere for late summer, early fall.

Setting the 2004 version in the winter with the gloomy gray look made it seem like it was trying to hard to give it some moody vibe.

You are right, Barlow did feel like a attack dog.

[Sawyer]

I still want James Cromwell for Callahan, though. I thought he was perfectly cast for the part.

[Bruce Banner]

^James Cromwell is awesome. I don't have to write the reason why 2004 version angered me.

Then again Callahan was criminally underused in the 78 version.

I felt like Sutherland could have been a good Straker, not as good as Mason but I thought he could pull it off. I found him coming off more as a dirty old man than anything.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Banner

^James Cromwell is awesome. I don't have to write the reason why 2004 version angered me.

Then again Callahan was criminally underused in the 78 version.

I felt like Sutherland could have been a good Straker, not as good as Mason but I thought he could pull it off. I found him coming off more as a dirty old man than anything.

Yeah.

They took some great casting and then just flushed it down the toilet with a ****ty script.

[Ken-Kaniff]

Personally, I like the 70s movie and I also consider this to be among King's best books! The movie is really old though, so I can say I would like a remake, but I am concerned, because it my turn out to be a flop. The 2004 one was already a dissapointing remake imo, so I wont have high hopes if they decide to do a 3rd movie!

[Sawyer]

Just thought of two actors I'd love for this...

Gary Oldman - Matt Burke
Tim Robbins - Father Callahan

I don't know what made me think of Robbins, but it just fits to me.

[Mr. Wooden Alligator]

Should they design Barlow to look more like a Grandfather vampire? I believe he is one. The fifth Dark Tower novel, Wolves of the Calla

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

has a flashback narrative that picks up with Callahan after the events of Salem's Lot.

.

[Sawyer]

I'm starting to reconsider whether this would really be better off as a movie, and leaning towards wanting to see a miniseries. The Stand and It are obvious candidates for miniseries treatment just because they're so ****ing long, but with Salem's Lot, whoever would be behind would get the chance to build on what was already done in the book, and flesh it out a little more. With a miniseries, you'd get the chance to see the town slowly degenerate due to Barlow's presence, whereas in a film, it would probably happen almost immediately. In a miniseries, you would get the chance to feel more for the characters, and the events that occur would have more impact. In a film, something like Susan's death would probably come about one hour into the film, but in a miniseries, you would be able to spend hours with her and get used to her as a character.

What really got me to come around to this idea was watching American Horror Story and how they're using a "each season = a miniseries" approach. 10-12 episodes would be a great way to adapt the novel.

[DarkKnight88]

I would prefer a feature film. Not a fan of miniseries or TV in general. They lack that cinematic feel that King is great at conveying in his writing. And Stephen King TV adaptations aren't ever if at all successful. I like the resurgence in his material recently and I can't wait to the see the two-part film version of It and the three-part trilogy of The Stand that are in the early planning stages (hoping they are much better than the miniseries' from the 90s). This project would just need a strong director with a clear vision (ala Frank Darabont) to pull off a big screen version.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by DarkKnight88

I would prefer a feature film. Not a fan of miniseries or TV in general. They lack that cinematic feel that King is great at conveying in his writing. And Stephen King TV adaptations aren't ever if at all successful. I like the resurgence in his material recently and I can't wait to the see the two-part film version of It and the three-part trilogy of The Stand that are in the early planning stages (hoping they are much better than the miniseries' from the 90s). This project would just need a strong director with a clear vision (ala Frank Darabont) to pull off a big screen version.

You'll find that an awful lot of them have one thing in common.

TV is the right place for alot of King's works. You just need someone with talent backing them.