Doesn't hold a candle to original. Missing the dark and scary eeriness of the 1st. I had to watch the original right after to appreciate how great it was.
I’ve been telling my friends “if you’re looking for a goofy spooky movie that you don’t have to take seriously, this is it. But that’s the only itch that it’ll scratch.” I only just started reading the book for the first time, but as far as the screen goes, nothing will beat the 2004 miniseries for me.
11.22.63 and The Outsider (HBO) are two great King miniseries adaptations, watch two season long Castle Rock if you're into Stephen King lore. These three are really great adaptations in TV space.
Both of those shows are great. This movie felt poorly edited and suffered from what far too many movies suffer from today, feeling likeness in too much of a hurry to get from one moment to the next before it's over and you're off to the next.
@@Tyler_W yeah, I knew it since this one was supposed to get released in ‘20 and then later got botched and edited million times eventually to get a straight to streaming release 4 years later. It was destined for a failure. Really excited for ‘The Monkey’ and ‘Life of Chuck’ adaptations tho. These will release early next year and are done by Osgood Perkins and Mike Flanagan respectively. Flanagan really knows how to dabble in King territory and by the looks of rave reviews Life of Chuck got after it premiered in TIFF, I’m hopeful for getting at least one good King adaptation next year. And if ‘Welcome to Derry’ also slaps as it will also premiere on HBO next year, we’re in for a treat as King fans.
It was horrible. I watch the original first for remembrance and then watched this one. This current one was way too fast. The movie started with the moving of the wooden casket, which in the original, was so much scarier. There was not an enough time given to see how the characters connected with one another. I did not mind that there were some story lines left out, some changed, and some characters given different occupations, but I felt like it should have been some characters introduced for the sake of the story. This should have been a series and given more time to expand such a terrific tale. So sorry that it ended up this way.
Just not good. It just didn't flow smoothly and seemed fragmented story wise. There is only one true " Ben Mears," and that IS David Soul. Now, let me say that Rob Lowe was a close second, and his portrayal of Mears was excellent. I can't say I didn't like the actor who played Ben in this 2024 remake. Everything just didn't gel as the original. I enjoyed some of the effects such as the extra bright vamp eyes, and glowing crosses. Really, with all due respect to the fine actors in the 2024 version, the original cast just can't be topped. No ifs, ands or buts. No replacing, Bonnie Bedelia, James Mason, Lance Kerwin, Geoffrey Lewis, Fred Willard, and I just have to reiterate, the whole freaking cast from the 1979 adaptation. Interestingly enough, quite a few of them are dead. Thank you for your review. You really do an awesome job of it, and I do appreciate it.
@@AWolfMan75 1 star movie at the very most, personally I think the movie should have been an hour longer. Movie would have been 2-3 stars if there was some sort of build up to get the viewer connected with the characters and interested in the story, scares were fine and that’s it. Movie ended so abruptly too
@@GlitterGunk Supposedly about 60 minutes ended up on the cutting room floor. Completely agree that it deserved more character development. Warner Bros. should have green lighted this movie as a limited series, or two movies. But they didn't and put too many restrictions on the production. I think Gary Dauberman, cinematographer Michael Burgess, and the cast did a creative and quality job with the limits they had. And you can tell that it was designed with a live audience in mind. Not a "great" movie, but certainly not a bad movie either. Still 3 out of 4 / 5 stars for me.
what was there was fine, but man does this film feel edited to hell to fit the 2 hr runtime. Huge parts feel ripped out of the film. I’d really like to see the full cut and hope it becomes available at some point. Emulates a lot of the best parts of the Tobe Hooper original mini series.
The best way to describe this movie is pure cringe from everyone almost instantly believing in vampires, to a kid committing murder and shrugging it off like it was nothing, to the inconsistency of when the cross works, to the pure stupidity of the characters Pros of this movie : It looks good The vampires look like Skyrim vampires with the eye glow Cons: Acting isn't good its like a highschool acting project Writing is terrible The script is terrible Characters are unrealistic even for an unrealistic circumstance with vampires Everyone is dumb mostly Decisions characters make are unrealistic In summary this movie would be better watching under the influence of some sort I give it a 4/10
Just finished, and I was let down big time. Why don't these big production companies respect and adhere to the source material. Wonderful opportunity to blown. What of Callahan? Even in the book we have a chapter where he tries to enter his church, and burns himself.
Idk who needs to hear this. But a big director once made a movie and changed most of the stuff from the source material and at the time of release, EVERYONE hated that movie. Especially Stephen King. Even though the movie had style and flair and good acting (kind of like this movie). Now, years later, the movie is now considered to be the best Stephen King movie and is considered to be one of the best Stanley Kubrick movies. Not that I’m comparing this to The Shining. This is more like Christine or Cujo or even Dolores Claiborne.
@@Sharpe1502Very good point. The Shining was panned when it was released in 1980. Now it's considered to be one of the best horror movies ever made. Go figure. I never listen to critics. I just judge for myself. Also, Dolores Claiborne is criminally underrated. What a powerhouse of a film! It's a shame it never got more recognition.
@Sharpe1502 I hear what you're saying, and the shining was a good movie. It's iconic,but at this point I'm feeling like these companies are doing us wrong. I'm tired of hoping for a good Starwars movie or a Marvel movie that's never going to come.
Was really looking forward to this movie. It's sort of disappointing. It was rushed, there is little suspense. Mark the kid, reads a comic book about vamps. Of you pay close attention the name Straker is in the comic book and Mark mumbles to himself I need to kill Barlow. This is before Mark even knows Barlow is the vamp. It's an okay watch, but lacks the deep feeling of dread from the first movie, it also feels rushed. The team buys into the vampire idea a little too quickly. The Dr is saved from a vamp bite with a rabies vaccine and application of a cross.... that's certainly not in any lore I've ever seen. This is a fun watch, but if you read the book or saw the 1st movie you'll be disappointed. Best King adaptation is The Shining of course. It's masterful!
Overall, I enjoyed it. It hit most of the story beats of the novel and the vampires were suitably scary. My only real issue with the story is that they changed Ben’s connection to the town, and the reason for him returning and researching the history of the town. Had that been kept in and focused on more in the first half it would’ve added a lot of the “why” that you were missing. Now in terms of filmmaking craft, and maybe it’s just me, but I felt like the scenes didn’t really flow well. Especially in the first half before things get going. Events didn’t feel like they were unfolding naturally, it just went from one scene to the next, with no reason beyond we gotta get to the next story beat. I agree, Mike Flanagan would’ve made a masterpiece out of Salems lot.
As far as I understand it, the reason a lot of the scenes feel chopped up and pasted together is because they made the director cut out a whole hour from the original run time, so some of the scenes may be playing of parts of the movie they cut to shrink the runtime. Just my best guess though. Personally I loved it, but I totally understand what people are saying about the flow of it being a little off.
@@Gabriell1126 Even another 30 minutes of runtime would have made a difference. The atmosphere was way off too. It didn't feel way creepy enough from the actors point of views. Several other issues as well, but as a stand alone vamp movie it was ok.
Yeah, Ben's connection to the Marsten House and the Marsten House history with the Lot in general is not fully shown. In one the publicity stills it showed Ben with the snowglobe in his hand like from the book. So, there's a ton of this background stuff on the editing room floor somewhere. It's my favorite novel, Ben's my favorite King protagonist, but so much of this story is rushed through when it should be a slow burn.
This never deserved to be in theaters and I’m glad. This was less scary than an episode of stranger things. Good cast and they tried. It’s been 40+ years and you didn’t improve on blood or vampires. The lead vampire would get stomped by the 70’s version. 4/10 for just the cast
If you are a King fan and have read the book my guess will be you are not happy with this take on the novel. I think part of it is the desire to crunch it all into less than 2 hours. So we miss on the understanding of various character's motivations and backgrounds that add huge depth and meaning to the story. There are also so many changes that don't make any sense and are changes that negatively effect the plot and story. The world building is non-existent. So it is a simple vampire jump scare book without the depth of the book. I think it is a very poor attempt although I liked many of the actors.
The movie does have very good use of imagery and some very good atmosphere. The cast was quite well done. The movie just tried to rush way too much. The actual town invasion was handled very poorly and way too quickly. They did not showcase the townspeople neatly enough. It sets them up just to do nothing with them at all.
Just not good. It just didn't flow smoothly and seemed fragmented story wise. There is only one true " Ben Mears," and that IS David Soul. Now, let me say that Rob Lowe was a close second, and his portrayal of Mears was excellent. I can't say I didn't like the actor who played Ben in this 2024 remake; rather reminiscent of Bruce Payne, however Mr. Payne would have been better suited to play Straker, or even Barlow. Everything just didn't gel as the original. I enjoyed some of the effects such as the intensified brightness of the vamp eyes, and glowing crosses. Really, with all due respect to the fine actors in the 2024 version, the original cast just can't be topped. No ifs, ands or buts. No replacing, Bonnie Bedelia, James Mason, Lance Kerwin, Geoffrey Lewis, Fred Willard, and I just have to reiterate, the whole freaking cast from the 1979 adaptation. Interestingly enough, quite a few of them are dead. Thank you for your review. You really do an awesome job of it, and I do appreciate it.
I did not like it. Original was far superior, Even the remake of the original was better. The group of heroes was completely uninspiring. Even after suspecting the presence of vampires they were completely unprepared for everything despite Mike and all his alleged research. And they couldn't seem to execute any plan until it was 10 minutes till sundown. It was an overall let down especially after comparing it to the original 😞
I thought it was pretty good but the ending/last third kind of fell a little flat or felt rushed. I think it would have been awesome if they’d turned it into a short limited series instead to flesh things out more. The visuals were great.
I usually like these types of streaming movies, but they didn't really try with this one. Why did they tell us about the author's parents when it was never gonna come back. The author and the girl barely had a relationship for him to react the way he does later on
Disappointed Not much character development Barlow had a minor role unlike the original. The young hero killing vampires was a little hard to believe. I still like the original best
Just watched this movie (10/5) and I've gotta say: What a steaming pile of horse shit this was! This was a bare bones version of Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot. It was like a parallel universe version where they had the basic (very basic) premise, but then changed things around so much that it's almost unrecognizable. I realize movies can't delve into things quite as deep as a King novel does, but this didn't even try. The town and it's citizens are whole characters unto themselves yet they barely got a mention. They were just props, basically. And that climactic scene at the drive-in theater was so cringy that I almost didn't bother with finishing it, but I did. If you've read the novel, you know about how the terror slowly builds, one vampire victim after another. This movie? Meh, whatever.
I liked it. I give it a 7. There were a few times when the characters did stupid things, and there are times when the characters should have been dead, with the villains being inconsistent in strength, and it needed to be a lot longer like the first one, but it was still good. Mark did a great job.
Just finished the new movie. I enjoyed it but it had the potential of being really good. Way too rushed. It was like a highlights reel of a much longer film. The town and the Marsten House were major characters in the book and 79 version. Very little had to do with the Marsten House in this. I did enjoy some of the plot changes. Made it more interesting for those of us so familiar with the story. The 1979 original stands supreme. Hopefully the rumored 3 hour cut of this new one will get released.
So I'm assuming that they don't mention Hubie Marston at all in this new adaptation? I haven't watched it yet. That's a shame because Marston's backstory was one of the creepiest parts of the novel and the David Soul version.
@@josebro352 He is mentioned...but barely. Several characters are barely mentioned or not mentioned at all in this movie. It suffers from a short run time.
@@2005Aztek That's too bad. I was hoping they'd have flashback scenes featuring Hubie and his wife. I guess the Rob Lowe version is the only adaptation that does, however brief. Coincidentally I read an article earlier today about how a longer director's cut will be released eventually. The opening scene has a young Ben Mears finding Hubie Marston hanging by his neck in the house. Dauberman says he was very upset that particular scene had to be cut but promises it will be in the director's cut version. Hopefully it'll be released soon.
Midnight mass is snails pace garbage for no real pay off. Haunting of hill house was much much better all around. 79 version of lot also as aged like garbage ...nostalgia glasses giving some people brain damage it seems.
@@Yetis-o3zI’d rather watch Midnight Mass on repeat for the rest of my life than watch this shitty, simpleminded, abortion or a remake ever again. One of the worst fucking remakes of ALL TIME
The original is just a great movie. Especially, if you were a young kid when it came out. The Rob Lowe one is decently done too. The original was a 2 part, over 3 hr long movie. This movie felt like a cliff notes edition. The doctor, author, and Mark all acted well. But for a one time watch it was worth it. But a real miss for me. Just like the Firestarter remake. I had such high hopes since I absolutely love both versions of IT. And Doctor Sleep was so excellent. If you have such a classic already. Then if you are going to remake it. Really improve it and stick to the source material. Stephen King is a master of horror writing.
The other inconsistency. With spoilers, I didn't want to ruin it for others, so not in my original comment. So the Glick boy was a big rapture of blood all over the antique dealer. But the Glick Mom was no blood. I guess hadn't fed. The school teacher burns from sunlight. Susan would be in sunlight despite the movie screen and trunk lid. I mean, what was that scene. At night it would be scary. But Sunlight is sunlight and I know they put the shadow comment in. But you get a sunburn under the shade of a tree. Doesn't work. One disappointed Stephen King fan. It had some cool scenes. But won't be going in my library of movies. Cool to see they made Mark a black kid. With today's hostile environment. And one super brave and smart kid at that. So points for that.
I was looking forward to this being a series. I'm not unhappy its a movie I just wanted more time for these characters. a 4 part mini series or something like they used to do with Stephen King. Still excited for it though.
This is a good movie if you have a realllly low bar for good movies. The rushed pacing removes all of the elegance of the story and undercuts the dramatic stakes of the movie. Some of the performances were weak/miscast too.
I remember when the original cane out. For a remake, not gonna lie...I liked it. The characters were good enough. The visuals were cool too. Put aside the whole, "Oh it doesn't hold a candle to the original" view and just enjoy a pretty cool vampire flick.
Cinematography was great. Everything else was absolute garbage in my opinion. It was doomed from the moment that it was decided that it would be a 2-hour movie instead of a miniseries. The acting is laughably terrible. I couldn't believe how terrible it was, especially with the budget and some of the big names it had. The characters make nonsensical decisions that differ greatly from the book, in which they were actually somewhat logical. The tone was off. They glossed over/ completely cut out most of the important backstory and character moments fact that really drew me in when I read the book. I'm hoping in 10 years somebody will get their head out of their ass and make it a six episode mini series.
I didn’t mind it at all, it was enjoyable, not sure why people are tearing it up. Would it have succeeded as a theatrical release? Who knows! An entertaining movie for spooky season. MISERY is my favorite Stephen King movie, hands-down.
Mark was too much of a fearless kid badass. There's nothing wrong with badass kids in horror movies like Phantasm and The Lost Boys, but they have to show fear. From the moment Mark had his encounter with undead Danny he was all "Welp, better start getting to work". And taking out Straker? That's silly.
Agreed he was a little too wooden and robotic, or just some kind of psychopath lol. No kid that age is going to be so blase and jaded about all he saw and did lol
Uhm, he took out Straker in the book and I believe that he was the one that ended the vampire Barlow as well. It's been a minute since I've read it, so someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
The editing for this film was terrible and seemed all over the place. I was very disappointed in this film to say the least. If They're going to continue remaking Stephen King horrors they should do Silver Bullet but do it right!
I watched the original immediately to bleach my eyes of this hot garbage 😂 Looking through comics to figure out how to take out the vampires That gave Stranger Things vibes lol And why did they make the cop so useless in this one?? He was practically trying to solve the case in the original and here they made him not give a shit at all about anything It fell flat on so many levels
I love, love, love Stephen Kings movies and books but this was like a really bad episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. They should stop remaking Stephen Kings movies if they’re not going to do something to elevate the material. The remakes of Carrie, It, Pet Cemetery and this film were and are all horrible (no pun intended), smh.
4:14 Me too! Flanagan would have given us a limited series about the town of Salems Lot- complete with many of the characters- instead of this bare bones, breakneck speed, jump scare riddled remake.
As a generic vampire film, it’s fine.. As ‘Salems Lot, it’s a complete joke, and a complete insult to the source material..Should not even have the same name..
It was better then expected, but the tone/rating really confused me, genuinely figured they were trying to do a more introductory horror for the teen/pre-teen audience which is fine.. I mean, Stephen Kings Rose Red miniseries has stuck with me since childhood, even though it's a little goofy/cliche at times, but it has a great buildup.
So if an 11 year old isn’t afraid, why should the audience be? Yes, Mark in the 1979 wasn’t exactly chicken shit either, but he was older. He also seemed to take the death of his parents pretty well.
Needed a mini series to capture what made the book great. Things just happened too quickly with no emotion impact. Fine for kids. This was targeted at the younger teen audience and it showed. If I were 13 or 14 again, I would have enjoyed this as a fun vampire romp rather than the slow, terrifying destruction of a small town. Pity for us aul ones
It was ok. They problably should've made a miniseries to flesh things out better and develop the characters properly. If they were gonna focus on the vampires and make them scary they should've done something similar to 30 Days of Night, trying to add more to the tension of being trapped in aa town full of vampires with more and more friends and loved ones being bitten. Some of the CGI was pretty bad. The scene with the kid flying to enter the room had me burst out laughing. Oh, and they absolutely whiffed Father Callahan's story, who is a big character in Stephen King''s lore. Considering how good The Midnight Mass was, this would've been another Stephen King adaptation Mike Flanagan would've aced.
I did enjoy it for all the strong points that you mentioned in the video. As a person who has watched the original version, I personally feel like this wasn't as bad as it could have been. (Spoiler Alert here) However, I do want to point out that the scene of the floating kid in the original version was much scarier compared to this one. Perhaps it was partly because I was a kid back then and had never witnessed such creepy imagery, and it was seared in my brain for the longest time, or maybe the effects in that version were actually somehow scarier.
I'm a huge fan of the novel. This movie had a great look, but it felt rushed. Not horrible... but it needed more development. I felt it would have worked better as a series.
Oooooh, I'm watching the hell of this one tonight, no big expectations, but I love me some vampire movie time. I really enjoyed the prequel series , Chapelwhite, and judging by your review, now I wish this one was made into a series or miniseries as well. Thanks, Austin!
Isn't it strange, they took a short story out of Night Shift and made it into a multi-part mini-series (8 episodes I believe?). But they take the novel and rushed through it and made into a sloppy, bad two hour movie.
i am aware on the story very well, read all king books related to the sotry as well. I also like the 2004 movie, I am open for this one, i will watch in Cinema ones launched on 11th in UK. I love and admire all adaptations and emrace them as unique works. After all S.King has approved them.
I think in the book, they dumped a bunch of iodine or something on her (his) neck and then pressed the blessed cross right on the bite. That seemed to do the trick.
Just watched this 2024 version. Watched the 1979 version again a week or so ago. This new version was very disappointing in comparison to the old one. The acting was bad, the pacing was terrible, the story was disconnected, the characters were cardboard. Not very scary at all. 5/10.
The movie ended up being better than it should have been, this should've been a 8 part series. I felt with more fleshing out the characters & story, this could have been really good.
SPOILERS .................................................one of my fav scenes as a classic car owner.. i loved the drive in theatre scene when all the trunks of old cars from the 50s and 60s unlocked and you saw those eyes and long sharp finger nails in the shadows
I have seen the movie yesterday and I was F****G surprised. it's a 9/10. Everything is good about this movie, the choice of the plot, the actors, the acting, what they say, the action, the special effects, the house on the hill, simply put....I am glad I have seen it. A rarely in 2024, a good movie that is. The glowing crosses was a genius idea (about time). It was refreshingly new in many ways compared to the previous movies. Saying it was not scary is wrong. The action was just 'tight' and We actually feel for the actors. Very good acting btw. Those who think it's not good, they simply do not know what a good movie is.
I enjoyed this movie. The characters were way too onboard with it being vampires. A lot of the things they did made no sense but that’s typically how horror movies go.
I really enjoyed it 👍 I really liked the plot, mark was my favorite character, the cinematography was great!, The first 2 acts were a little slow BUT THE 3RD ACT I WAS HOOKED IN, I only have 2 negatives 1. I didn't think it was that scary 2. there were some scenes that looked goofy liked danny getting dragged up by the vampire IT LOOKED SO GOOFY AND BAD 🤣, I give this movie a 9/10 If you like vampires check this out edit: also there are so many dumb characters like *SPOILERS AHEAD* danny here's a noise outside and GOES OUTSIDE idc if he's like 6 hes dumb
straight fumbled it. this movie was so weak...they could have made such a great remake...but nope. contrived, forced, and unbelievable characters and lame writing. The only thing this had was great cinematography and visuals/special effects. other than that...was trash.
I really enjoyed this movie.. I say well done to the director and the producers. I will watch it again. No problem from this bloke with this film 👍👍👍👍👍
My favorite Stephen King movie is Carrie. I prefer the original Salem's Lot, this version wasn't bad, but I feel like it lost the magic of the first film.
Did I miss something, I was watching through half the movie and people are already talking about vampires, and apparentlly know the name of the lord vampire Barlow. I dunno it just took the mystery and suspense away. I thought this movie was a light horror....very kid friendly
@@AustinBurke Oh, you should. It's a great read. And the book is not one of his giant ones like The Stand or It. Plus it's a real page turner so you should get through it quickly.
OH, please read the Shining and Salem's Lot and this will give you a fantastic introduction to King. He has great characters, plot and world building. Once you read at least these two books you will hopefully see why this film is so poor.
I really liked this movie and I had the exact same thoughts Austin! This movie felt like an ideal family horror film, which is a weird thing to say. But it was oddly cozy? Great vibes. Good acting. Solid cinematography. I’m glad it ended up getting released.
This was just okay. I really wish they had made it into like 5-6 episodes and fleshed some things out.
The kid is Blade as a child
Since the vampires didn't started singing and dancing in the middle of sucking blood. I'll give this movie a 6 😊
😂😂
I think that's because Lady Gaga isn't in this movie.
A serious deficiency of any scene of horror/violence in a film.
Doesn't hold a candle to original. Missing the dark and scary eeriness of the 1st. I had to watch the original right after to appreciate how great it was.
I could never get through the original personally. And I normally love atmospheric horror.
You mean the original mini series (79) directed by tobe hooper starring David soul James Mason
@@Sharpe1502But you can watch this load of garbage seriously bro you need to sort your muffin out.
this person never even said the og bad, why mad?
and that's in an OPINION is not that serious, i love both tbh@@rachaelhogan7850
I’ve been telling my friends “if you’re looking for a goofy spooky movie that you don’t have to take seriously, this is it. But that’s the only itch that it’ll scratch.” I only just started reading the book for the first time, but as far as the screen goes, nothing will beat the 2004 miniseries for me.
It was OK, but the 70th adaptation was amazing
What do you about the book so far?
11.22.63 and The Outsider (HBO) are two great King miniseries adaptations, watch two season long Castle Rock if you're into Stephen King lore. These three are really great adaptations in TV space.
Both of those shows are great. This movie felt poorly edited and suffered from what far too many movies suffer from today, feeling likeness in too much of a hurry to get from one moment to the next before it's over and you're off to the next.
@@Tyler_W yeah, I knew it since this one was supposed to get released in ‘20 and then later got botched and edited million times eventually to get a straight to streaming release 4 years later. It was destined for a failure. Really excited for ‘The Monkey’ and ‘Life of Chuck’ adaptations tho. These will release early next year and are done by Osgood Perkins and Mike Flanagan respectively. Flanagan really knows how to dabble in King territory and by the looks of rave reviews Life of Chuck got after it premiered in TIFF, I’m hopeful for getting at least one good King adaptation next year. And if ‘Welcome to Derry’ also slaps as it will also premiere on HBO next year, we’re in for a treat as King fans.
It was horrible. I watch the original first for remembrance and then watched this one. This current one was way too fast. The movie started with the moving of the wooden casket, which in the original, was so much scarier. There was not an enough time given to see how the characters connected with one another. I did not mind that there were some story lines left out, some changed, and some characters given different occupations, but I felt like it should have been some characters introduced for the sake of the story. This should have been a series and given more time to expand such a terrific tale. So sorry that it ended up this way.
The kid kicked more ass than anyone!
Soo refreshing to not see cell phones for a change. Thx for the review
It's two hours of your life you will never get back.
Just not good. It just didn't flow smoothly and seemed fragmented story wise.
There is only one true " Ben Mears," and that IS David Soul. Now, let me say that Rob Lowe was a close second, and his portrayal of Mears was excellent. I can't say I didn't like the actor who played Ben in this 2024 remake. Everything just didn't gel as the original. I enjoyed some of the effects such as the extra bright vamp eyes, and glowing crosses.
Really, with all due respect to the fine actors in the 2024 version, the original cast just can't be topped. No ifs, ands or buts. No replacing, Bonnie Bedelia, James Mason, Lance Kerwin, Geoffrey Lewis, Fred Willard, and I just have to reiterate, the whole freaking cast from the 1979 adaptation.
Interestingly enough, quite a few of them are dead.
Thank you for your review. You really do an awesome job of it, and I do appreciate it.
Damn I actually thought it wasn’t bad at all
Right! Maybe I was the only one screaming and pausing the movie. Took me 3 hours to get thru it 😂😂
same im like did we all see the same movie?
It was a decent 3 out 4 star movie. I enjoyed it. A fun, creepy popcorn flick.
@@AWolfMan75 1 star movie at the very most, personally I think the movie should have been an hour longer. Movie would have been 2-3 stars if there was some sort of build up to get the viewer connected with the characters and interested in the story, scares were fine and that’s it. Movie ended so abruptly too
@@GlitterGunk Supposedly about 60 minutes ended up on the cutting room floor. Completely agree that it deserved more character development. Warner Bros. should have green lighted this movie as a limited series, or two movies.
But they didn't and put too many restrictions on the production.
I think Gary Dauberman, cinematographer Michael Burgess, and the cast did a creative and quality job with the limits they had. And you can tell that it was designed with a live audience in mind.
Not a "great" movie, but certainly not a bad movie either.
Still 3 out of 4 / 5 stars for me.
what was there was fine, but man does this film feel edited to hell to fit the 2 hr runtime. Huge parts feel ripped out of the film. I’d really like to see the full cut and hope it becomes available at some point. Emulates a lot of the best parts of the Tobe Hooper original mini series.
The novel says most people thought Ben and Mark were father and son. That's one way this is different from the book.
They did. Before the book starts Ben and Mark are together before you read what’s to unfold.
The best way to describe this movie is pure cringe from everyone almost instantly believing in vampires, to a kid committing murder and shrugging it off like it was nothing, to the inconsistency of when the cross works, to the pure stupidity of the characters
Pros of this movie :
It looks good
The vampires look like Skyrim vampires with the eye glow
Cons:
Acting isn't good its like a highschool acting project
Writing is terrible
The script is terrible
Characters are unrealistic even for an unrealistic circumstance with vampires
Everyone is dumb mostly
Decisions characters make are unrealistic
In summary this movie would be better watching under the influence of some sort I give it a 4/10
Just finished, and I was let down big time. Why don't these big production companies respect and adhere to the source material. Wonderful opportunity to blown. What of Callahan? Even in the book we have a chapter where he tries to enter his church, and burns himself.
Yeah this movie missed the mark and not only Callahan but Matt's fate was entirely changed as well which made no sense
Idk who needs to hear this. But a big director once made a movie and changed most of the stuff from the source material and at the time of release, EVERYONE hated that movie. Especially Stephen King. Even though the movie had style and flair and good acting (kind of like this movie). Now, years later, the movie is now considered to be the best Stephen King movie and is considered to be one of the best Stanley Kubrick movies.
Not that I’m comparing this to The Shining. This is more like Christine or Cujo or even Dolores Claiborne.
Callahan's story continues in The Dark Tower Wolves of the Calla.
@@Sharpe1502Very good point. The Shining was panned when it was released in 1980. Now it's considered to be one of the best horror movies ever made. Go figure. I never listen to critics. I just judge for myself. Also, Dolores Claiborne is criminally underrated. What a powerhouse of a film! It's a shame it never got more recognition.
@Sharpe1502 I hear what you're saying, and the shining was a good movie. It's iconic,but at this point I'm feeling like these companies are doing us wrong. I'm tired of hoping for a good Starwars movie or a Marvel movie that's never going to come.
Was really looking forward to this movie. It's sort of disappointing. It was rushed, there is little suspense. Mark the kid, reads a comic book about vamps. Of you pay close attention the name Straker is in the comic book and Mark mumbles to himself I need to kill Barlow. This is before Mark even knows Barlow is the vamp.
It's an okay watch, but lacks the deep feeling of dread from the first movie, it also feels rushed. The team buys into the vampire idea a little too quickly.
The Dr is saved from a vamp bite with a rabies vaccine and application of a cross.... that's certainly not in any lore I've ever seen.
This is a fun watch, but if you read the book or saw the 1st movie you'll be disappointed.
Best King adaptation is The Shining of course. It's masterful!
Overall, I enjoyed it. It hit most of the story beats of the novel and the vampires were suitably scary. My only real issue with the story is that they changed Ben’s connection to the town, and the reason for him returning and researching the history of the town. Had that been kept in and focused on more in the first half it would’ve added a lot of the “why” that you were missing. Now in terms of filmmaking craft, and maybe it’s just me, but I felt like the scenes didn’t really flow well. Especially in the first half before things get going. Events didn’t feel like they were unfolding naturally, it just went from one scene to the next, with no reason beyond we gotta get to the next story beat. I agree, Mike Flanagan would’ve made a masterpiece out of Salems lot.
As far as I understand it, the reason a lot of the scenes feel chopped up and pasted together is because they made the director cut out a whole hour from the original run time, so some of the scenes may be playing of parts of the movie they cut to shrink the runtime. Just my best guess though. Personally I loved it, but I totally understand what people are saying about the flow of it being a little off.
@@Gabriell1126that’d be a really odd choice since they just dropped it on Max with no theatrical release
@@JD-jz5gu Yeah, not too sure what the reasoning behind it was.
@@Gabriell1126 Even another 30 minutes of runtime would have made a difference. The atmosphere was way off too. It didn't feel way creepy enough from the actors point of views. Several other issues as well, but as a stand alone vamp movie it was ok.
Yeah, Ben's connection to the Marsten House and the Marsten House history with the Lot in general is not fully shown. In one the publicity stills it showed Ben with the snowglobe in his hand like from the book. So, there's a ton of this background stuff on the editing room floor somewhere. It's my favorite novel, Ben's my favorite King protagonist, but so much of this story is rushed through when it should be a slow burn.
This never deserved to be in theaters and I’m glad. This was less scary than an episode of stranger things. Good cast and they tried. It’s been 40+ years and you didn’t improve on blood or vampires. The lead vampire would get stomped by the 70’s version. 4/10 for just the cast
Both versions of Barlow suck. I laugh at the 70 version.
Dracula is just not that scary to be fair. 😂
No jump scares Nevermind Dracula.
@@FunnyBunny161he supposed to look like count Orlock from Nosferatu
@@CyrilViXP And Nosferatu is supposed to look like Book Dracula.
If you are a King fan and have read the book my guess will be you are not happy with this take on the novel. I think part of it is the desire to crunch it all into less than 2 hours. So we miss on the understanding of various character's motivations and backgrounds that add huge depth and meaning to the story. There are also so many changes that don't make any sense and are changes that negatively effect the plot and story. The world building is non-existent. So it is a simple vampire jump scare book without the depth of the book. I think it is a very poor attempt although I liked many of the actors.
Dude, you are being generous. This movie is not good. Wooden script, pacing, acting, characters, etc. This was a total miss.
No fucking joke. This dude gave too many props for a disappointing movie.
It’s gonna be okay, I promise lol
Nothing wrong with any of the things you pointed out. It was good.
this s just another shill channel...everything is great and never any real critiques.
It was rushed and the ending was a letdown. The original series was scarier, but I was a kid then.
The movie does have very good use of imagery and some very good atmosphere. The cast was quite well done. The movie just tried to rush way too much. The actual town invasion was handled very poorly and way too quickly. They did not showcase the townspeople neatly enough. It sets them up just to do nothing with them at all.
Just not good. It just didn't flow smoothly and seemed fragmented story wise.
There is only one true " Ben Mears," and that IS David Soul. Now, let me say that Rob Lowe was a close second, and his portrayal of Mears was excellent. I can't say I didn't like the actor who played Ben in this 2024 remake; rather reminiscent of Bruce Payne, however Mr. Payne would have been better suited to play Straker, or even Barlow.
Everything just didn't gel as the original. I enjoyed some of the effects such as the intensified brightness of the vamp eyes, and glowing crosses.
Really, with all due respect to the fine actors in the 2024 version, the original cast just can't be topped. No ifs, ands or buts. No replacing, Bonnie Bedelia, James Mason, Lance Kerwin, Geoffrey Lewis, Fred Willard, and I just have to reiterate, the whole freaking cast from the 1979 adaptation.
Interestingly enough, quite a few of them are dead.
Thank you for your review. You really do an awesome job of it, and I do appreciate it.
I did not like it. Original was far superior, Even the remake of the original was better. The group of heroes was completely uninspiring. Even after suspecting the presence of vampires they were completely unprepared for everything despite Mike and all his alleged research. And they couldn't seem to execute any plan until it was 10 minutes till sundown.
It was an overall let down especially after comparing it to the original 😞
I thought it was pretty good but the ending/last third kind of fell a little flat or felt rushed. I think it would have been awesome if they’d turned it into a short limited series instead to flesh things out more. The visuals were great.
I usually like these types of streaming movies, but they didn't really try with this one. Why did they tell us about the author's parents when it was never gonna come back. The author and the girl barely had a relationship for him to react the way he does later on
Of course, my favorite Stephen King movie adaptation is The Shawshank Redemption. I also loved Stand by Me, Carrie, and The Green Mile...
Those choices are 💯
The Green Mile 💚
Disappointed Not much character development Barlow had a minor role unlike the original. The young hero killing vampires was a little hard to believe. I still like the original best
Just watched this movie (10/5) and I've gotta say: What a steaming pile of horse shit this was! This was a bare bones version of Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot. It was like a parallel universe version where they had the basic (very basic) premise, but then changed things around so much that it's almost unrecognizable. I realize movies can't delve into things quite as deep as a King novel does, but this didn't even try. The town and it's citizens are whole characters unto themselves yet they barely got a mention. They were just props, basically. And that climactic scene at the drive-in theater was so cringy that I almost didn't bother with finishing it, but I did. If you've read the novel, you know about how the terror slowly builds, one vampire victim after another. This movie? Meh, whatever.
I liked it. I give it a 7. There were a few times when the characters did stupid things, and there are times when the characters should have been dead, with the villains being inconsistent in strength, and it needed to be a lot longer like the first one, but it was still good. Mark did a great job.
Just finished the new movie. I enjoyed it but it had the potential of being really good. Way too rushed. It was like a highlights reel of a much longer film. The town and the Marsten House were major characters in the book and 79 version. Very little had to do with the Marsten House in this. I did enjoy some of the plot changes. Made it more interesting for those of us so familiar with the story. The 1979 original stands supreme. Hopefully the rumored 3 hour cut of this new one will get released.
So I'm assuming that they don't mention Hubie Marston at all in this new adaptation? I haven't watched it yet. That's a shame because Marston's backstory was one of the creepiest parts of the novel and the David Soul version.
@@josebro352 He is mentioned...but barely. Several characters are barely mentioned or not mentioned at all in this movie. It suffers from a short run time.
@@2005Aztek That's too bad. I was hoping they'd have flashback scenes featuring Hubie and his wife. I guess the Rob Lowe version is the only adaptation that does, however brief. Coincidentally I read an article earlier today about how a longer director's cut will be released eventually. The opening scene has a young Ben Mears finding Hubie Marston hanging by his neck in the house. Dauberman says he was very upset that particular scene had to be cut but promises it will be in the director's cut version. Hopefully it'll be released soon.
@@josebro352 I will look forward to it.
I saw it on the big screen in the uk and believe me it’s awesome! The atmospheric feel was through the roof!
I just have to appreciate your review. explaining perfectly what it is. Thanks.
Appreciate it
This movie was absolute nonsensical garbage. If people want a Salems Lot adaption they just need to watch Midnight Mass.
Midnight mass is snails pace garbage for no real pay off. Haunting of hill house was much much better all around. 79 version of lot also as aged like garbage ...nostalgia glasses giving some people brain damage it seems.
@@Yetis-o3zI’d rather watch Midnight Mass on repeat for the rest of my life than watch this shitty, simpleminded, abortion or a remake ever again. One of the worst fucking remakes of ALL TIME
Midnight mass is such an epic show
One of my favourites
Of all time
The original is just a great movie. Especially, if you were a young kid when it came out. The Rob Lowe one is decently done too.
The original was a 2 part, over 3 hr long movie. This movie felt like a cliff notes edition. The doctor, author, and Mark all acted well. But for a one time watch it was worth it. But a real miss for me. Just like the Firestarter remake. I had such high hopes since I absolutely love both versions of IT. And Doctor Sleep was so excellent. If you have such a classic already. Then if you are going to remake it. Really improve it and stick to the source material. Stephen King is a master of horror writing.
The other inconsistency. With spoilers, I didn't want to ruin it for others, so not in my original comment. So the Glick boy was a big rapture of blood all over the antique dealer. But the Glick Mom was no blood. I guess hadn't fed. The school teacher burns from sunlight. Susan would be in sunlight despite the movie screen and trunk lid. I mean, what was that scene. At night it would be scary. But Sunlight is sunlight and I know they put the shadow comment in. But you get a sunburn under the shade of a tree. Doesn't work. One disappointed Stephen King fan. It had some cool scenes. But won't be going in my library of movies. Cool to see they made Mark a black kid. With today's hostile environment. And one super brave and smart kid at that. So points for that.
I was looking forward to this being a series. I'm not unhappy its a movie I just wanted more time for these characters. a 4 part mini series or something like they used to do with Stephen King. Still excited for it though.
This is a good movie if you have a realllly low bar for good movies. The rushed pacing removes all of the elegance of the story and undercuts the dramatic stakes of the movie. Some of the performances were weak/miscast too.
I remember when the original cane out. For a remake, not gonna lie...I liked it. The characters were good enough. The visuals were cool too. Put aside the whole, "Oh it doesn't hold a candle to the original" view and just enjoy a pretty cool vampire flick.
Totally agree, really liked Mark, vampires were scary and I enjoyed the third act😊
Literally this is Kid Blade, I had a fun time watching this. TBH dont take it seriously and just have fun?
Who would win 100 vampires or a skinny 11 year old boy, these vampires were weak af and the "showdown" was laughable
Cinematography was great. Everything else was absolute garbage in my opinion. It was doomed from the moment that it was decided that it would be a 2-hour movie instead of a miniseries.
The acting is laughably terrible. I couldn't believe how terrible it was, especially with the budget and some of the big names it had. The characters make nonsensical decisions that differ greatly from the book, in which they were actually somewhat logical. The tone was off. They glossed over/ completely cut out most of the important backstory and character moments fact that really drew me in when I read the book.
I'm hoping in 10 years somebody will get their head out of their ass and make it a six episode mini series.
Another fantastic video! Thank you!
I didn’t mind it at all, it was enjoyable, not sure why people are tearing it up. Would it have succeeded as a theatrical release? Who knows! An entertaining movie for spooky season. MISERY is my favorite Stephen King movie, hands-down.
Mark was too much of a fearless kid badass. There's nothing wrong with badass kids in horror movies like Phantasm and The Lost Boys, but they have to show fear. From the moment Mark had his encounter with undead Danny he was all "Welp, better start getting to work". And taking out Straker? That's silly.
Agreed he was a little too wooden and robotic, or just some kind of psychopath lol. No kid that age is going to be so blase and jaded about all he saw and did lol
Uhm, he took out Straker in the book and I believe that he was the one that ended the vampire Barlow as well. It's been a minute since I've read it, so someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
yea, very unbelievable character.
The editing for this film was terrible and seemed all over the place. I was very disappointed in this film to say the least. If They're going to continue remaking Stephen King horrors they should do Silver Bullet but do it right!
I watched it today and thought it was good but that drive in sequence was amazing ill give it a solid 7.
What a big let down 3 /10
I watched the original immediately to bleach my eyes of this hot garbage 😂
Looking through comics to figure out how to take out the vampires
That gave Stranger Things vibes lol
And why did they make the cop so useless in this one??
He was practically trying to solve the case in the original and here they made him not give a shit at all about anything
It fell flat on so many levels
I love, love, love Stephen Kings movies and books but this was like a really bad episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. They should stop remaking Stephen Kings movies if they’re not going to do something to elevate the material. The remakes of Carrie, It, Pet Cemetery and this film were and are all horrible (no pun intended), smh.
Yo Austin what is your top 3 favorite Stephen King movie adaptation?
That sounds like a good idea for a video!
@@AustinBurke Sounds good to me! My favorite is probably The Shining!
Misery has got to be one of the best Stephen king adaptation. Also a big fan of the dead zone
I’m about to watch it Austin! Hyped!
4:14 Me too! Flanagan would have given us a limited series about the town of Salems Lot- complete with many of the characters- instead of this bare bones, breakneck speed, jump scare riddled remake.
As a generic vampire film, it’s fine.. As ‘Salems Lot, it’s a complete joke, and a complete insult to the source material..Should not even have the same name..
It was better then expected, but the tone/rating really confused me, genuinely figured they were trying to do a more introductory horror for the teen/pre-teen audience which is fine.. I mean, Stephen Kings Rose Red miniseries has stuck with me since childhood, even though it's a little goofy/cliche at times, but it has a great buildup.
So if an 11 year old isn’t afraid, why should the audience be? Yes, Mark in the 1979 wasn’t exactly chicken shit either, but he was older. He also seemed to take the death of his parents pretty well.
Needed a mini series to capture what made the book great. Things just happened too quickly with no emotion impact. Fine for kids. This was targeted at the younger teen audience and it showed. If I were 13 or 14 again, I would have enjoyed this as a fun vampire romp rather than the slow, terrifying destruction of a small town. Pity for us aul ones
It was ok.
They problably should've made a miniseries to flesh things out better and develop the characters properly. If they were gonna focus on the vampires and make them scary they should've done something similar to 30 Days of Night, trying to add more to the tension of being trapped in aa town full of vampires with more and more friends and loved ones being bitten.
Some of the CGI was pretty bad. The scene with the kid flying to enter the room had me burst out laughing. Oh, and they absolutely whiffed Father Callahan's story, who is a big character in Stephen King''s lore.
Considering how good The Midnight Mass was, this would've been another Stephen King adaptation Mike Flanagan would've aced.
No stakes in this movie, its just so rushed & the jump scares are pretty weak
Lost almost 2 hours of my life but man, the kid is the baddest of them all
I did enjoy it for all the strong points that you mentioned in the video. As a person who has watched the original version, I personally feel like this wasn't as bad as it could have been. (Spoiler Alert here) However, I do want to point out that the scene of the floating kid in the original version was much scarier compared to this one. Perhaps it was partly because I was a kid back then and had never witnessed such creepy imagery, and it was seared in my brain for the longest time, or maybe the effects in that version were actually somehow scarier.
I'm a huge fan of the novel. This movie had a great look, but it felt rushed. Not horrible... but it needed more development. I felt it would have worked better as a series.
Bro I really hated it. One of the worst movies of this year imo
It was too fast. I wish they did a limited series
Oooooh, I'm watching the hell of this one tonight, no big expectations, but I love me some vampire movie time. I really enjoyed the prequel series , Chapelwhite, and judging by your review, now I wish this one was made into a series or miniseries as well. Thanks, Austin!
Isn't it strange, they took a short story out of Night Shift and made it into a multi-part mini-series (8 episodes I believe?). But they take the novel and rushed through it and made into a sloppy, bad two hour movie.
@@kev7161 I'm so sorry to have to agree with you pal, I watched it and.... oooff, I put my hopes in Nosferatu this next December.
i am aware on the story very well, read all king books related to the sotry as well. I also like the 2004 movie, I am open for this one, i will watch in Cinema ones launched on 11th in UK. I love and admire all adaptations and emrace them as unique works. After all S.King has approved them.
It was boring and about as scary as a Lifetime movie. 1.5 stars. Very disappointing.
Rabies shots don’t cure vampire bites.
I think in the book, they dumped a bunch of iodine or something on her (his) neck and then pressed the blessed cross right on the bite. That seemed to do the trick.
Just watched this 2024 version. Watched the 1979 version again a week or so ago. This new version was very disappointing in comparison to the old one. The acting was bad, the pacing was terrible, the story was disconnected, the characters were cardboard. Not very scary at all. 5/10.
The movie ended up being better than it should have been, this should've been a 8 part series. I felt with more fleshing out the characters & story, this could have been really good.
You let your 8 year old watch this prepare for history to repeat.
Loved his MGB GT I owned one in the 1970’s a great sports car
SPOILERS .................................................one of my fav scenes as a classic car owner.. i loved the drive in theatre scene when all the trunks of old cars from the 50s and 60s unlocked and you saw those eyes and long sharp finger nails in the shadows
The Mark character was the most unbelievable character.
🤔
This a very good remake. So much better than the "04" made for TV remake but, still not as good as 1979 version. I'll give this a 6.5- 7.
I have seen the movie yesterday and I was F****G surprised. it's a 9/10. Everything is good about this movie, the choice of the plot, the actors, the acting, what they say, the action, the special effects, the house on the hill, simply put....I am glad I have seen it. A rarely in 2024, a good movie that is. The glowing crosses was a genius idea (about time). It was refreshingly new in many ways compared to the previous movies. Saying it was not scary is wrong. The action was just 'tight' and We actually feel for the actors. Very good acting btw. Those who think it's not good, they simply do not know what a good movie is.
I gave it a 10/10 I really liked this movie 😀
@@tylerhiatt2183 everything was well done. the action was a no nonsense waiting...the vampires were scary also and aggressive.
Your comment has deeply offended me; unless you apologise, I’m gonna drive a 10oz medium-rare Steak through your fart 😡
I liked Mark in the book more, especially the part where he took on that bully
I enjoyed this movie. The characters were way too onboard with it being vampires. A lot of the things they did made no sense but that’s typically how horror movies go.
I really enjoyed it 👍 I really liked the plot, mark was my favorite character, the cinematography was great!, The first 2 acts were a little slow BUT THE 3RD ACT I WAS HOOKED IN, I only have 2 negatives 1. I didn't think it was that scary
2. there were some scenes that looked goofy liked danny getting dragged up by the vampire IT LOOKED SO GOOFY AND BAD
🤣, I give this movie a 9/10 If you like vampires check this out
edit: also there are so many dumb characters like *SPOILERS AHEAD*
danny here's a noise outside and GOES OUTSIDE idc if he's like 6 hes dumb
He went outside because he thought it was ralphie,heard the mouth organ
straight fumbled it. this movie was so weak...they could have made such a great remake...but nope. contrived, forced, and unbelievable characters and lame writing. The only thing this had was great cinematography and visuals/special effects. other than that...was trash.
I loved the book. If you want to see the film version, look for the 1979 miniseries. This version was a real disappointment.
I really enjoyed this movie.. I say well done to the director and the producers. I will watch it again. No problem from this bloke with this film 👍👍👍👍👍
Your comment has deeply offended me; unless you apologise, I’m gonna drive a 10oz medium-rare Steak through your fart 😡
My favorite Stephen King movie is Carrie. I prefer the original Salem's Lot, this version wasn't bad, but I feel like it lost the magic of the first film.
Did I miss something, I was watching through half the movie and people are already talking about vampires, and apparentlly know the name of the lord vampire Barlow. I dunno it just took the mystery and suspense away. I thought this movie was a light horror....very kid friendly
Remake was horrible
Mark is the best thing about this movie, everything else was pretty forgettable imo. But like you said, it isn't the worst thing out there.
Watch Midnight Mass. It's a good vamp story and with a new twist.
Love the channel, but I disagree that this gives you a good salems lot story, it's just not at all like the novel
Didn’t read the novel, so I have no clue what that is! Lol
@@AustinBurke Oh, you should. It's a great read. And the book is not one of his giant ones like The Stand or It. Plus it's a real page turner so you should get through it quickly.
It has positive moments. Ending was weak .id say its the 2nd rank salens lot out of all three
OH, please read the Shining and Salem's Lot and this will give you a fantastic introduction to King. He has great characters, plot and world building. Once you read at least these two books you will hopefully see why this film is so poor.
0:25 rated R ? I saw it and it was PG13
To me they're scarier stuff on tik Tok with real life young kids
Very much concur with you my friend
Thank you buddy!
Its not close to the first one and the first one left so much out from the book,,, this shouldve been a 6-8 part miniseries..
Even a christine cameo
Didn’t like the kid looking at the vampire comic book to learn about them . Looked cheesy
bro has watched 2 bad movies in a row
VETTAIYAN TRAILER REACTION!
I really liked this movie and I had the exact same thoughts Austin! This movie felt like an ideal family horror film, which is a weird thing to say. But it was oddly cozy? Great vibes. Good acting. Solid cinematography. I’m glad it ended up getting released.
Your comment has deeply offended me; unless you apologise, I’m gonna drive a 10oz medium-rare Steak through your fart 😡