MovieChat Forums > Salem's Lot (2004) Discussion > Which one of the 'Salem's Lot' is more l...

Which one of the 'Salem's Lot' is more like the book?


I watched the 1979 miniseries and I loved the character of Kurt Barlow. I liked the Nosferatu/Count Orlok appearance. I am wondering which miniseries is more like the novel?

reply

Sort of like The Shining, the newer one is closer to the book, but the older one is superior and scarier. Salem's Lot follows the same path, with the one truer to the source also lacking the qualities that made the original so memorable and good.

- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?

reply

The 79 version of Salem's Lot is not scarey. It's campy. The 04 version is a lot closer to the book, I prefer it.

reply

Campy is not a word that applies to the old one. Do you even know what it means at all? Never mind, as you have already exhibited that you do not know.

The 2004 version is a bore fest with silly looking zombie vampires that are not scary at all...even one little bit. The old film certainly deviates from the source material, but so does this one even if less so. But this one simply isn't good. It lacks any sort of scary atmosphere and proves that in the wrong hands, a truer adaptation doesn't mean much. This version is pretty much forgotten by the vast majority, where as the old one is still remembered and talked about.

Anyhow, dislike the old one till your heart's content, as I really could care less. You are welcome to your opinion. Just get a clue what the term "camp" means and stop embarrassing yourself by slapping it onto something just because you don't like it.

- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?

reply

Campy.

reply

Campy is not a word that applies to the old one. Do you even know what it means at all? Never mind, as you have already exhibited that you do not know.

The 2004 version is a bore fest with silly looking zombie vampires that are not scary at all...even one little bit. The old film certainly deviates from the source material, but so does this one even if less so. But this one simply isn't good. It lacks any sort of scary atmosphere and proves that in the wrong hands, a truer adaptation doesn't mean much. This version is pretty much forgotten by the vast majority, where as the old one is still remembered and talked about.

Anyhow, dislike the old one till your heart's content, as I really could care less. You are welcome to your opinion. Just get a clue what the term "camp" means and stop embarrassing yourself by slapping it onto something just because you don't like it.


Agreed. I can't think of any scenes in the old version that could be called campy.

As for which version is closer to the book, they're both about on even ground with the number of changes they make, but the old version is much better. Better characters, better story, more creepy vampires, much better atmosphere, and genuinely scary.

reply