L'auteur Ben Mears retourne dans la ville de son enfance, Jerusalem's Lot, à la recherche d'inspiration pour son prochain livre. Il découvre alors que sa ville natale est la proie d'un vampi... Tout lireL'auteur Ben Mears retourne dans la ville de son enfance, Jerusalem's Lot, à la recherche d'inspiration pour son prochain livre. Il découvre alors que sa ville natale est la proie d'un vampire assoiffé de sang.L'auteur Ben Mears retourne dans la ville de son enfance, Jerusalem's Lot, à la recherche d'inspiration pour son prochain livre. Il découvre alors que sa ville natale est la proie d'un vampire assoiffé de sang.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 nominations au total
Avis à la une
I loved the book when I read it in the 80's and looked forward to this movie but I was let down.
I'm not a purist and don't usually mind different interpretations of a fictional story, but the changes weren't really the worst parts, that would be the bland storytelling and the movie just felt rushed.
There was no character development whatsoever, the acting was mediocre, though Alfre Woodard stood out and I wish she was shown more as she was the best part of the movie for me, though she was hardly in it, and I can't say it enough, there was nothing really happening with the story to keep me interested.
A little backstory on anyone would have been nice, an actual view of the budding romance that was taking place to help us actually feel the main characters grief, anything at all other than the bland scenes we got.
Unfortunately an utterly forgettable film.
Not Recommended.
I'm not a purist and don't usually mind different interpretations of a fictional story, but the changes weren't really the worst parts, that would be the bland storytelling and the movie just felt rushed.
There was no character development whatsoever, the acting was mediocre, though Alfre Woodard stood out and I wish she was shown more as she was the best part of the movie for me, though she was hardly in it, and I can't say it enough, there was nothing really happening with the story to keep me interested.
A little backstory on anyone would have been nice, an actual view of the budding romance that was taking place to help us actually feel the main characters grief, anything at all other than the bland scenes we got.
Unfortunately an utterly forgettable film.
Not Recommended.
Ok I just watched one of my all time favorite Stephen King novels. I loved the 1979 version which I watched eagerly when I was 15 years old. I had been anticipating watching this for quite a while at least since the whispers started that a remake was coming. The movie was not terrible I gave it a six (that may be to generous) because the movie was watchable. I had so hoped it would be remade with the kind of money writing acting everything that "It" had when the last remake was done. Everything was just a little off with this movie. The acting was just ok. Character development was pretty non existent. They could have done a lot better on developing some interest in the characters. I think it was to rushed toward the end the drive in ending was terrible some should have pumped the brakes hard on that one! Why? Why remake something if not to make it outstanding! Stephen King is an awesome writer and if the production is done correctly then it should be awesome. Very disappointed ...
This new adaptation of Stephen King's classic, "Salem's Lot", is a missed opportunity.
It's now well-known that this movie fell victim to studio meddling, both from WB and producer James Wan. The result is a mediocre, bland, and lifeless product.
King's strength has always been his focus on the human element-the characters, and how their relationships inform the narrative and provide an emotional core to his stories. Here, none of that exists.
It seems, based on what's left, that director Dauberman had an idea of how to tell the story while staying faithful to the source material. His directorial approach is simple, almost naive, but for a story like this, it could've worked.
However, any resemblance of life has been sucked out (likely in the editing room), leaving behind what I'd call a "non-film." The pacing is so brisk it becomes annoying, making it impossible to care about the one-dimensional characters, who exist more as narrative devices than as real people.
The visual style doesn't help either, as it's reminiscent of The Conjuring series-visually slick, sterilized horror aimed at the masses. The few character-driven moments seem shot for efficiency, with the most basic framing, blocking, and composition, rather than any attempt to convey real emotion.
Alfre Woodard (Dr. Cody) delivers a performance that's a cut above the rest. Makenzie Leigh (Susan), John Benjamin Hickey (Father Callahan), and Lewis Pullman (Ben Mears)-in that order-do their best with the material. The younger actors are fine, but everyone else... not so much. A couple of performances are even laughably bad.
If the characters come off as one-dimensional despite the actors' best efforts, it feels fitting that the main antagonist can't even be described as such. His only discernible trait seems to be going "Bleaarrggghh" before feeding on his next victim.
There's virtually no blood or gore and most of the violence happens off camera.
The score and sound design are serviceable but far from memorable, doing little to enhance the nonexistent emotional impact of the story.
After nearly two hours of nothingness, the film devolves into a boring, senseless, and meaningless "action-packed" finale (keep an eye out for the sun moving at plot-convenient speeds). The sequence is topped off with sub-par CGI and one of the most anticlimactic endings I can remember.
The production values are clearly there, though. Even if it was never going to be a masterpiece, there was a chance to make an emotionally resonant film with the timely theme of a small American town's fear of "the outsider."
Alas, what we're left with is an hefty, bloated serving of nothing.
It's now well-known that this movie fell victim to studio meddling, both from WB and producer James Wan. The result is a mediocre, bland, and lifeless product.
King's strength has always been his focus on the human element-the characters, and how their relationships inform the narrative and provide an emotional core to his stories. Here, none of that exists.
It seems, based on what's left, that director Dauberman had an idea of how to tell the story while staying faithful to the source material. His directorial approach is simple, almost naive, but for a story like this, it could've worked.
However, any resemblance of life has been sucked out (likely in the editing room), leaving behind what I'd call a "non-film." The pacing is so brisk it becomes annoying, making it impossible to care about the one-dimensional characters, who exist more as narrative devices than as real people.
The visual style doesn't help either, as it's reminiscent of The Conjuring series-visually slick, sterilized horror aimed at the masses. The few character-driven moments seem shot for efficiency, with the most basic framing, blocking, and composition, rather than any attempt to convey real emotion.
Alfre Woodard (Dr. Cody) delivers a performance that's a cut above the rest. Makenzie Leigh (Susan), John Benjamin Hickey (Father Callahan), and Lewis Pullman (Ben Mears)-in that order-do their best with the material. The younger actors are fine, but everyone else... not so much. A couple of performances are even laughably bad.
If the characters come off as one-dimensional despite the actors' best efforts, it feels fitting that the main antagonist can't even be described as such. His only discernible trait seems to be going "Bleaarrggghh" before feeding on his next victim.
There's virtually no blood or gore and most of the violence happens off camera.
The score and sound design are serviceable but far from memorable, doing little to enhance the nonexistent emotional impact of the story.
After nearly two hours of nothingness, the film devolves into a boring, senseless, and meaningless "action-packed" finale (keep an eye out for the sun moving at plot-convenient speeds). The sequence is topped off with sub-par CGI and one of the most anticlimactic endings I can remember.
The production values are clearly there, though. Even if it was never going to be a masterpiece, there was a chance to make an emotionally resonant film with the timely theme of a small American town's fear of "the outsider."
Alas, what we're left with is an hefty, bloated serving of nothing.
I have t read the book so I can't compare it to that. I loved the look of the vampires. There was definitely good creepy atmosphere. Good action scenes. It had the makings of a good horror movie, I just think it would have fared better as a mini series. We needed more time to get to know these characters better. More time to develop these relationships. I think Lewis does a really good acting job with what he's given but his character needs more development. His backstory doesn't play into the story in any way, except for a vague "only the outsiders win" kind of way. Like I thought him being a writer (besides being the obvious Stephen King stand in) would serve a purpose, like maybe he's the one to do research, but no. The only other thing we know about him is that his parents died when he was a kid and that serves no purpose either. He's kind of nothing character. Again, at least Lewis does a good job with what little is given to him. But as said, I think a mini series would have been better to give more time for the characters.
I believe this movie could have used another 30-40 minutes to flesh thing's out. To much rushed scenes to get to the next. More back story could have happened with the care taker which he was a waste unlike the original which was much better and very much more creepy. Could have seen how he became barlow's servent. Backstory on Barlow the master himself how he became what he is. Offer something different or adding to that what the original or remake didn't have that set's it apart not saying it would be better then the original but hold up as very worthy remake. I still enjoyed it but just something to think about for people wanting to do remake's.
Stephen King Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
Stephen King Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
See how IMDb users rank the feature films based on the work of Stephen King.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesWriter Gary Dauberman told Den of Geek in June 2019 that his goal with the new version of Salem's Lot is to make vampires frightening again. He wants to get away from the sexier, more romanticized undead that have infested pop culture for much of the past quarter century, thanks to everything from Interview with the Vampire to Twilight to The Vampire Diaries.
- GaffesWhen Ben is reading old newspapers on microfilm in the library, a headline reads "Local Couple Victims of DUI". The paper was supposedly printed in 1956, at a time when the term "DUI" was not yet in use.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Half in the Bag: Top 10 Horror Movies (2024) Part 1 (2024)
- Bandes originalesSundown
Written and Performed by Gordon Lightfoot
Courtesy of Warner Records
By arrangement with Warner Music Group Film & TV Licensing
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- El misterio de Salem's Lot
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut mondial
- 851 156 $US
- Durée1 heure 54 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
- 2.39:1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant