Series one and two

[AtomicAgeEthan]

So I saw both series. The 1st one when I was a kid and the 2nd years later. I really like both for almost similar reasons. While I thought the Ben Mears of the original series was a lot more like the character in the book, I thought Rob Lowe did a great job as the character and he physically looked a lot more like the character in the book over the blonde haired version. The 1st one is so terrifically horrifying especially with Danny Glick floating outside as a vampire asking to be let in. I remember that scene from when I was a kid. It terrified me for years. I felt like the new series lacked that specific horrifying detail. The other is when Mike turns and confronts his old teacher in the original TV series. In the book, King does a great job also. I felt like the new series had some weird sexual overtone that wasn't included in the book. I don't know if the directors were trying to do something with the alternate lifestyle since times had changed but it just came off as silly.
I thought the Marsden house in both versions were equally frightening. Both series, to me, overall had the same feel to me even if some things had changed from series to series.

Thoughts?

[Renzo]

I actually have only seem the 2nd series and was not all that impressed by it. I did like Rob Lowe as Ben in appearance, but his acting felt flat to me. The rest of the actors just didn't do it for me, especially Mark (my favorite character from the book).

That sexual undertone that you mentions was definitely there because I remember turning to my wife and saying, "That was a Cosmopolitan version of the book." I dunno, everyone just felt too pretty and sexy. I was expected more grit and dirt and blood.

I never felt the same sense of despair that I did when reading the novel, either. That feeling that Ben and Mark surely felt knowing that everyone around them was dying and something was lurking in the shadows. That sense of isolation after the Lot was essentially a ghost town was absent too.

If you read my "Favorite scenes from Salem's Lot" thread on this board, I can't remember a single scene from my list from the book being remotely as vivid in the show as it was in my mind from the novel. The only scene I really remember from the tv show and the novel equally is when Barlow flew through the window and attacked Mark's folks.

[Brainslinger]

I disliked what they did with Father Callahan in the second series.

[AtomicAgeEthan]

Right on. The book is totally rife with despair over the entire town being sucked under (no pun intended). And yea, Rutger Hauer attacking Marks folks won in my mind as an insane scene all around but if you havent seen the original, you should check it out. I do feel that the sense of despair is lingering and when Ben freaks out as Mrs. Glick comes to life in the Hospitol, the actor who plays Ben does a great job of making you think he's really soiled himself. There are a lot of changes from the book to the screen in both versions but I feel that the 1st version hit it better than the 2nd one.

[aeroplane]

Both versions have their good and bad points. I doubt anyone could really produce a perfect version of Salem's Lot on the screen.

I guess this is my cue to ramble in no particular order about my thoughts on both versions.

Frankly, the second version did a better job of including more characters from the book. The original combined so many characters that I thought it really compromised the story, when compared to the original book. It also didn't make any sense to change some of the characters names in the original either, such as "Jason" Burke and "Ned" Tibbetts. WHY?

I can't imagine how anyone particularly enjoyed what Larry Crockett became in the 2nd version from 2004. Larry is turned into a guy who molests his daughter, attempts to kill himself at one point and then ends up getting eaten alive in the town dump by his own daughter instead of ever becoming a vampire. Not to mention his wife from the book is not even included in the movie.

The Marsten House seemed larger and more terrifying in the second version. It didn't look menacing from the inside during the first movie, at least I didn't think so.

To me, the Mark Petrie from the second version was a rotten kid who I didn't find any sympathy for. He damn near got Charlie Rhodes fired from driving the bus out of spite, after spending the better part of the movie causing him grief. The Mark Petrie from version 1 was much closer to the way I saw him when reading the book.

Finally, I didn't mind Burke's alternative lifestyle being brought up in the 2nd version. However, I did find the scenes between him and Mike Ryerson in the house to be rather unsettling.