‘Salem’s Lot (2024) | REVIEW

Directed by Gary Dauberman (Annabelle Comes Home) — Screenplay by Gary Dauberman.

This long-awaited Stephen King adaptation has gone through what many would describe as development hell. The film started principal photography in late 2021 and was originally slated to be released theatrically in 2022, but it was shelved or delayed due to a variety of circumstances including COVID-19-related post-production issues. Despite there having been talk about releasing it a year ago around the time of the SAG-AFTRA strikes, it remained shelved for quite some time, which led many to fear that, like Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah’s Batgirl or Dave Green’s Coyote vs. Acme, it could be yet another finished but unreleased and permanently shelved Warner Bros. Pictures product. Earlier this year, Stephen King even got involved and questioned its shelving, but, eventually, it was finally released straight to Max almost two weeks ago. Though not exactly a gem in its current state, there are definitely things to like about this adaptation that has, thankfully, finally seen the light of day.

Based on Stephen King’s iconic 1975 novel of the same name, Gary Dauberman’s ‘Salem’s Lot follows author Ben Mears (played by Lewis Pullman) as he returns home to his hometown of Jerusalem’s Lot, Maine in an attempt to become inspired. A little bit of a local celebrity, Mears runs into plenty of people that are eager to introduce themselves, including Susan (played by Makenzie Leigh), who he soon starts a romantic relationship with. However, he slowly starts to realize that something is wrong in his hometown. In a strange pattern, numerous people disappear, die, or drastically change their behavior. Soon Ben, and a group consisting of other brave locals, team up to fight back against what certainly appears to be vampires.

As it is based on an iconic Stephen King novel from the 1970s, this is obviously not the first adaptation of the story. It was notably adapted into mini-series both in 1979 and in 2004, both of which obviously tried to tell the 400+ page novel with a sizeable runtime. This recent film adaptation, with a runtime of less than two hours, obviously didn’t have that same approach, or, at least not in its current form, as its director has claimed there once was a three-hour cut that has been significantly trimmed. And, well, frankly, you can tell that is the case. It feels compressed, rushed, and truncated. There are moments with a lot of exposition, some of which appear to be the product of ADR, and arcs, relationships, and characters are quite thinly drawn or rushed through. The central romance basically jumps from the initial awkward meeting to a date at the snap of a finger, and the plot, at one point, jumps forward a week thus giving off the feeling that a lot happened off-screen that was cut out. Furthermore, so many characters are, as mentioned, thinly sketched — so much so, in fact, that they feel like they’re only there to be vampire fodder. All of that is the one major problem with the film, and for some, it will be tough to overlook that element, which I completely understand, as it ought to have been a three-hour flick or, frankly, another mini-series.

That said, there are moments when you feel that this adaptation definitely has something to it that is quite fetching. Every now and then, you get hints of a King-esque charm to Dauberman’s adaptation despite the flattening of the narrative. It’s also surprisingly funny, and, along those lines, I kind of dug Pilou Asbæk’s very cartoonish and broad interpretation of Richard Straker. Speaking of which, with Asbæk, Pullman, Alfre Woodard, and Bill Camp (Jordan Preston Carter’s Mark Petrie will also be a fan-favorite), this adaptation has a really strong and watchable cast. There are moments when the film nails the creepy atmosphere (e.g. the opening scenes), and, despite being a relatively superficial adaptation, it’s got more than enough vampiric action to keep you entertained. I also think it is stylistically quite satisfying, as the film features sharply glowing crosses that look like weapons, occasional well-used red light, some really inventive transitional match cuts, and super cool scene where we’ve got this blue-pink gradient background matched with silhouettes of characters and the woods (in general, cinematographer Michael Burgess and editor Luke Ciarrochi do a good job of helping Dauberman to elevate the otherwise superficial and rushed fast thrills adaptation).

Gary Dauberman’s ‘Salems Lot adaptation won’t be the definitive version as it is far too superficial of an adaptation to be that (thin characters, red shirts, extremely fast-paced), but, nonetheless, there are a good number of fast thrills along the way, and its moments of sufficient style made it so that I still had a good time with it despite its obvious drawbacks (though perhaps that’s due to lowered expectations due to the film’s bumpy ride to release). It’s definitely a mixed bag that feels rushed and incomplete, but it’ll do the job as a lightweight, fast-paced popcorn movie ‘spooktober’ entry despite its clear and obvious problems.

5.7 out of 10

– Review Written by Jeffrey Rex Bertelsen.