Salem's Lot

Vampires, Screams, and ‘Eh?’: The New Salem’s Lot Has Us Feeling Mixed!

The latest adaptation of Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot is out on HBO Max, and it's as average as needlessly rebooting a classic can get!

The long-anticipated reboot of Stephen King’s beloved horror novel, "Salem's Lot", has finally landed on HBO Max, sparking debates and discussions amongst fans and casual viewers alike. This latest cinematic venture is helmed by Gary Dauberman, known for his work on the spine-tingling "IT" series and the ever-creepy "Annabelle Comes Home". Yet, despite its pedigree, critics are calling this adaptation aggressively average, glancing perhaps even apathetically, at the original classic. Could Dauberman have conjured a more chilling spell, or is it just time to let sleeping vampires lie?

The film follows Ben Mears, played by Lewis Pullman, as he returns to the town of Jerusalem's Lot, facing old demons that include roommate-vampire bloodsucker issues. This version brings along a star-studded cast including Alfre Woodard and Makenzie Leigh, yet the negative reviews often cite that character development is as sparse as a vampire's appetite for garlic bread. With a blend of horror cliches and tropes that seem recycled, some viewers might find themselves wondering, "Hasn’t modern horror moved beyond this?" Yet, before rolling our eyes too hard, let’s remember that sometimes, a strong dose of nostalgia is what the horror doctor ordered, even if it falls flat.

Adding to the chatter is the awkward question of why it took so long for King’s timeless tale of terror to get this treatment as a feature film three times over. Perhaps it was wise to delay this adaptation until the world was ready to face the grand schadenfreude that is horror. And yet, as frequent visitors to the horror genre know, reboot fatigue is becoming increasingly real. Would an original horror concept yield more chatter, or will we forever be watching rehashed plots with new actors trying to revive interest?

"Salem's Lot" does remind us that adaptations can often miss the mark, but they also create opportunities for viewers to revisit the original narrative. To further enthrall horror aficionados, it’s essential for them to explore the contrast between the novel and the screen debacles, reigniting debates and theories. As for the ending of this iteration, without spoiling too much, Ben Mears faces a dilemma that leaves more questions than resolutions, raising eyebrows rather than closing chapters.

Additionally, horror enthusiasts might delight in the fact that this adaptation marks the third outing for King's unsettling tale. Historically, the first was a 1979 miniseries, which gained cult status, and the second in 2004 featured an updated twist but didn't quite make as much noise as expected. With that curiosity around its cinematic journey, fans are left to ponder if the real horror is not the vampires but perhaps our insatiable hunger for nostalgia brought back to life!