Where do I even start with this one? This film reeks of wasted potential. Just throw this in the bin of Stephen King adaptations to avoid. This takes a great, horrifying story and turns it into a schlocky TV film. The acting is just so cringe worthy! The production value is distractingly bad. This movie has not aged well, it was made in '79 and you can tell. Do yourself a favor and just watch The Lost Boys instead.
Enjoyable vampire story with a fine cast and a pretty good story. Some of the subplots does however little to add to the suspense and could have been left on the cutting floor. The film itself is equal parts hokey and silly and atmospheric and eerie. The score by Sukman is however first rate all the way, even when the film stumbles. Good stuff!
Salem's Lot does a great job at bringing a 400+ pages book to life without sacrificing too much. Hooper and his team really managed to come up with some scary scenes and impressive visuals on a low budget with no technology. Barlow now looks like Nosferatu and the scenes in which he appears are always memorable. "Salem's Lot" is a great vampire movie and a fine adaptation of one of King's best novels.
The work of a matured director. Very american in its unrelenting speed of staging, its shots are yet able to breathe. Hooper creates with camera movements, wide angles, atmospheric lightning and sound effects a world filled with horror and evil, where we face the metaphysical through the materiality of his shots. That's fucking hard to do, so I guess this is one of his most accomplished pictures.