tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post4578094453484209561..comments2024-01-16T06:50:55.337-08:00Comments on Trash-Aesthetics: For The Thousandth Time: Part V (Gone To Bed Series)Chick Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01237639618482587471noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-90644434579066472962009-10-30T17:20:08.187-07:002009-10-30T17:20:08.187-07:00Salems Lot 1979 is still one of the greatest vampi...Salems Lot 1979 is still one of the greatest vampire stories of all time. Dated? maybe. But there are legendary scenes and wonderful performances that over shadow any thought that this movie is dated. I watch this at least 6 times a year and never tire of it.I remember being 11 years old when it premiered on t.v. Scared me then and still carries shock value now! Salems Lot forever!!!Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-35334935980758251452008-05-01T22:58:00.000-07:002008-05-01T22:58:00.000-07:00Tali,Sutherland's performance is inexcusable! As f...Tali,<BR/><BR/>Sutherland's performance is inexcusable! As for more book accurate? That's debatable, and were we to actually get into a debate on the transliteration process, the one thing we would both agree upon for a "successful" adaptation is that the "essence" of a work is retained. The process requires abbreviation as we know and condensation of character, plot, expository passages, and so on. Both films are guilty of certain things - agreed. I am with you about Ben and Susan in the remake, but overall, it comes down to taste. And sir, I completely respect yours even though I am in near total disagreement. Do you really like it more than Hooper's????? My god man..<BR/><BR/>Gangrene - I don't work for Synapse, they are just good friends. And I try to offer suggestions for films, or perhaps might write some liner notes in the future - etc.Chick Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01237639618482587471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-8032846028431425202008-04-20T05:43:00.000-07:002008-04-20T05:43:00.000-07:00Hands down, the scariest part of Salem's Lot is th...Hands down, the scariest part of Salem's Lot is the child scratching at the window. The last time I watched it I figured out why it is so eerie -- the shot is shown in reverse, make the boy's movements look otherworldly.<BR/><BR/>That being said, the concept of eating artichoke hearts is far more terrifying to me than anything in Salems's Lot.<BR/><BR/>offtopic - Chick do you actually work for Synapse or are you just friends with those guys?Gangrene Widescreenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12580259415582225271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-76782104914703437492008-04-20T01:21:00.000-07:002008-04-20T01:21:00.000-07:00Chick - I deny the allegation of any chemical aid ...Chick - I deny the allegation of any chemical aid to writing reviews lol. ;)<BR/><BR/>I realise that my stance was controversial and the original film scared the hee-bee-gee-bees out of me when I was a kid - as did the book.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps it was having read the book again not long before watching the remake (and I watched the two back to back) but it did strike me as, in some places, more book accurate. It also had some nice moments and starting the entire thing with Lisa Gerrard warbling will always put me in a positive frame of mind.<BR/><BR/>I actually loved Sutherland's performance - yes it was hammy but it was great, like a satanic santa. That helped.<BR/><BR/>Hauer was woefully under-used and the visual impact of Nalder was greater in the original... I think, more than anything, I bought into the characters that bit more... especially Ben and Susan. Their dynamics were more natural (than the book as well it has to be said)<BR/><BR/>All told, however, in my opinion both worthy parts of vamp cinema. Like you, I respect your opinion on this one.<BR/><BR/>Incidentally, if you can track it down try and have a listen to the BBC radio dramatisation of 'salem's Lot with Doug Bradley. Excellent stuff.Taliesin_ttlghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10105263634442191232noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-29126760412189430702008-04-18T18:18:00.000-07:002008-04-18T18:18:00.000-07:00i think it is very telling that the original was r...i think it is very telling that the original was released theatrically overseas. it is VERY cinematic. this is a trend that has continued to this day. before firefly, i never considered cinematography to be important in the television medium. now, we have shows like lost and battlestar galactica. these shows hold up and in most cases surpass most of what is released in theaters these days.<BR/><BR/>by the way, the novel 'salem's lot is directly connected to the dark tower series (as are most of stephen king's novels).Root Mean Squaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18122913944573241894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-47723082584931415082008-04-18T17:42:00.000-07:002008-04-18T17:42:00.000-07:00I concur sir. On all accounts. The original is a ...I concur sir. On all accounts. The original is a superlative effort and the remake is a let-down (at least to you and me). Salem's Lot is super important in my personal lexicon of cinema (even though it's channel of distribution was television - yet look what he got away with!) <BR/><BR/>Yes, I have LIFEFORCE and I love it. That chick is tooooo hot.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your input buddy boy.Chick Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01237639618482587471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-59081231707918200032008-04-18T16:00:00.000-07:002008-04-18T16:00:00.000-07:00Once again, you've hit the nail squarely on the he...Once again, you've hit the nail squarely on the head with this one. i am a huge fan of the original 'salem's lot. i saw it again a few years ago and it still holds up. some of the clothes are dated, but if you consider this a period piece, you can ignore it and just revel in the horror of the story. <BR/><BR/>as far as the remake goes, it is just puzzling to me. a few observations:<BR/><BR/>* the cast that they assembled is excellent. rob lowe, rutger hauer and james cromwell are rock solid performers...the problem is that they aren't given anything to work with. when i read the book a few years back, i actually heard all of these actors speak the dialogue in my head (i should explain that, ever since i started reading novels when i was a child, there was always a movie going on inside my head...you might say the perfect movie because budget isn't a limitation...this is a subject that i'll explore over in my blog).<BR/><BR/>* james cromwell is the perfect father callahan...at least he should be. the way in which they screwed with that character arc in the remake is criminal. <BR/><BR/>* what they did with straker is just sad. donald sutherland has always been one of my favourite actors, which makes this even more sad. the absolute brilliance of james mason's performance in the original is the fact that he is seductive. you WANT to be on his side...this is very true to the novel. the way in which donald sutherland plays him, on the other hand, is just plain loopy. i mean, honestly, if you were barlowe, would you want someone like sutherland's straker to be your human emissary? yes, what a grand idea, let's attract all sorts of the WRONG attention...let's not attempt to blend in at all. wretch.<BR/><BR/>* the remake just isn't scary. it doesn't hold up to the expectations of its genre. <BR/><BR/>finally, the original mini-series stands shoulder to shoulder with the best feature horror films. the scene where the glick boy scratches at mark petrie's window is a seminal moment in horror films. tobe hooper was firing on all cylinders (sadly, i still have not seen the original texas chainsaw massacre...it's just one of those films that i haven't gotten to yet...fret not, it's on the must see list).<BR/><BR/>(incidentally, have you seen hooper's "lifeforce"? great campy b-movie fun, with some cool set pieces thrown in for good measure.)Root Mean Squaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18122913944573241894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-30798201744868533432008-04-18T12:31:00.000-07:002008-04-18T12:31:00.000-07:00Thanks for your comment Miss L. I agree - truly a...Thanks for your comment Miss L. I agree - truly amazing. I've read that novel twenty plus times and still think that Hooper's mini-series is a fabulous adaptation in many regards. It's rare to have the "perfect" adaptation.Chick Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01237639618482587471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612525184539175284.post-63981418668032431502008-04-18T10:21:00.000-07:002008-04-18T10:21:00.000-07:00I will have to say Salem's Lot is a truly amazing ...I will have to say Salem's Lot is a truly amazing movie. I was so excited whenever they would re-run it on TV, usually around Halloween. Also, I enjoyed the book too. I remember watching the first part on TV but for some reason didn't see part two until reruns. One of my first papers I wrote on film was for a 10th grade English class comparing and contrasting the movie and book (I think I got an A). <BR/><BR/>This one was scary even when I re-watched it in the late 80s and early 90s. I might need to revisit this soon.Larahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08187329981460443668noreply@blogger.com