I consider myself an excellent candidate to evaluate the latest adaptation of Salem’s Lot. I haven’t read the famous 1975 Stephen King novel or seen any previous miniseries. Before watching the new film, my knowledge was limited to the existence of vampires, which is enough to pique my interest! Consequently, I approached the viewing experience with minimal preconceptions, which I assume would be ideal for the creators, given that I lacked a basis for comparison. Why am I saying this? Keep reading, dear reader…

This was written and directed by Gary Dauberman, who has written several films in The Conjuring movie universe and co-wrote both It remakes. His directorial debut was Annabelle Comes Home (2019). I am a massive fan of the It remakes, especially the first one. This is the third adaptation of Salem’s Lot and the first feature film, since the last two were television miniseries from 1979 and 2004. Stephen King is an executive producer on this 2024 film, which is interesting, because he approved its release, which almost feels unfinished.

We follow author Ben Mears (Lewis Pullman) as he returns to his hometown of Jerusalem’s Lot, Maine, searching for his next book’s inspiration. He wants to write a book about the Marsten House, a creepy old house on top of a hill overlooking the town with a reputation for being haunted. He considers renting it but discovers that it has been bought by a new resident named Richard Straker (Pilou Asbaek), who is opening an antique shop with an undisclosed partner named Kurt Barlow (Alexander Ward).

With the help of Susan (Mackenzie Leigh), Matthew Burke (Bill Camp), Dr. Cody (Alfre Woodard) and Mark (Jordan Preston Carter), the group joins forces to fight the bloodthirsty vampires trying to take over their town.

Oddly, this movie has experienced several significant delays. It was first announced in 2019 and filmed in 2021. The premiere was delayed multiple times before finally showing at Beyond Fest in September 2024. After a planned theatrical release, it went straight to MAX in October. After watching the film, I can see why there were multiple delays. I suppose the filmmakers were trying to figure out how to condense this movie into a sensible runtime, as opposed to the TV miniseries, which would have been two separate episodes totaling 183 minutes.

But what they did to make this a single, full-length feature film hurt it the most. This movie could have been improved by having a longer runtime or being broken into a series. The original novel is 439 pages long, and you can tell a lot of content had to be cut. As a result, the editing feels choppy, and the movie jumps from one scene to the next, leaving out essential parts of the story. I haven’t read the book, so I’m not referring to specific plot points, but there are multiple scenes where something happens, and then suddenly it’s morning.

It’s confusing and abrupt, making me feel like I must have missed something. Additionally, there isn’t much character development for any of the characters, making the climax flat.

Even though it might sound like I didn’t enjoy this film, I had a positive experience while watching it. The setting immerses you into an enchanting autumn atmosphere, evoking images of a quaint town that likely hosts a fall festival every weekend, complete with an array of pumpkin-spice treats. The captivating array of fall foliage showcases the quintessential colors of New England’s autumn. The meticulous production design, cinematography and beautiful score set the stage for a perfect October thriller. One scene shows two boys in the woods, with only their silhouettes visible, which I found really cool and practical.

I found the vampires pretty cool when they weren’t computer-generated. I particularly like the subtle details like their glowing eyes, the rolling fog and the knocking on the windows. There is a dead body that reanimates at one point that had me covering my eyes. However, the brightly glowing crosses used to fight the vampires became increasingly distracting as the film progressed, making them a cheesy addition. This movie reminded me of horror films from the 2000s with subpar CGI, so including the glowing crosses seems to align with that aesthetic.

Mike Flanagan should be in charge of all Stephen King adaptations. His work on Gerald’s Game and Doctor Sleep has been outstanding. He is also set to work on The Dark Tower series in the future, which is exciting news considering his recent successes with Midnight Mass, The Haunting of Hill House and Bly Manor, among others.

Salem’s Lot is a lighthearted, somewhat incomplete, yet enjoyable story depiction. Its release in this state may be attributed to the advanced production stage. Maybe in the future, King’s short stories should only be adapted into movies and his novels into miniseries. I’m not a professional, but it sounds like a good idea.

I give this movie three out of five stars, which is quite generous. However, I had a good time, making it a fun Friday night film. Despite its flaws, it’s an entertaining watch that will keep you engaged… if you’re not a Salem’s Lot aficionado.