A Return to Salem's Lot (1987) Reviews

• It just goes to show you cannot return to a horror treasure.

  ozthegreatat423302007-04-11

  I actually feel embarrassed for Michael Moriarty. He has never had the really good roles he deserves. And he did not deserve this. It is obvious that the studio wanted to exploit the popular "Salem's Lot" without "shoveling" out the cash to do a decent job. This film cannot even in good conscience be called a sequel. There was nothing left of the town at the end of the last film, and suddenly all new characters are coming home to a place that isn't even supposed to exist. I really felt as if my intelligence was being insulted, by this truly poor representation of the subject. If you are renting the film OK, you just wasted a couple of bucks, no big deal. But if you bought it, you've just been bitten big time. This movie deserves an early grave.

• For what it is, an enjoyable campy treat

  medelste2013-03-20

  Return To Salem's Lot fits into a select category of films I like to label ONE A.M. HBO Specials. These were the films HBO showed to death between 11pm and 6am during the mid-to-late 80s, when there weren't 500 other movie channels to choose from. HBO never showed Casablanca or other TCM-type classics, so their stable was somewhat limited. Some were cheap teen-sex comedies (Summer Job, Bikini Car Wash Company), while others were cheapie underground horror flicks (Clownhouse, Student Bodies, Night of the Creeps). RTSL falls into the latter category. If you watch this film the way it was likely intended to be seen (as a campy drive-in special, worth viewing at 2am simply because it beats watching Sha-Na-Na), then it can be quite entertaining in its way. Many of these 1am cheesefests also featured unknown up-and-coming stars (Clownhouse had Sam Rockwell, RTSL has Tara Reid), as well as established actors at the tail-ends of their careers (Andrew Duggan is downright wonderful in RTSL). Granted, not every horror film is The Shining. But movies like RTSL definitely have their place.

• It's NO Salem's Lot....

  BaronBl00d2001-03-16

  But not as bad as others might have you believe either. Michael Moriarity returns from South America to get his mal-adjusted son and brings him to a house he inherited in Maine in the cozy little town of Salem's Lot. This film has no bearing on the original source, nor is it a similair film in any way. Larry Cohen directs and creates his vision. He shows us a town where vampirism is an accepted and seemingly normal lifestyle. The story has plenty of flaws, and sure does ask you to do a lot of suspending belief, but it has at its core a pretty interesting story of a father and a son bonding amidst their own weaknesses and a horde of vampires. Moriarity is good and some of the character actors are in fine form, especially Samuel Fuller barking out one-liners and Andrew Duggan(his last film) as the head vampire with New England grace and charm. Some exceptionally weak areas are special effects. The evil vampire face is absurd-looking, like a mask from a shop! All in all, I enjoyed this very flawed film for its heart.

• An Interesting Idea, done badly

  rockycows2003-03-08

  This movie had a good idea, that is, how a colony of vampires might live, what they do to survive, etc. However, it just didn't work out right. The pacing and performances were not up to snuff, and any movie in which you have characters standing in a barn full of Holstein cattle, and explaining that "Jersey cows make richer milk", obviously had problems in the design phase. Just a bad film...

• Terrible execution ruins what might have been an interesting story

  davejones2004-11-13

  A good story can survive all but the worst treatment. Unfortunately, this really is the worst treatment. The acting is terrible. The editing is worse--choppy and inept. It's the kind of editing that's so bad you have a number of those "What? How'd he get over there?" moments. It's hard to believe that Larry Cohen had ever directed anything before this, it's so amateurish. I would have guessed this to be a first film, if I didn't know better. It looks as if the director just didn't get the shots needed to cover the action and left the editor scrambling to stitch together a movie. Similarly, lines of dialogue come out of nowhere, completely unmotivated, almost nonsensical. The sad thing is, there are good ideas buried in this mess: vampires trying to run a sustainable community by feeding on cows' blood, their attempts to recruit a journalist to record the details of their lives for future generations, the protagonist's perpetually-17-years-old childhood sweetheart seducing him into the Devil's bargain. They're good elements for a story. But the details don't hang together. None of it quite makes sense. And the one or two good special effects are overwhelmed by all the lousy ones. If, like the inhabitants of Salem's Lot, you plan to live forever, you might want to take a look at this movie. But for the living: Believe me, you don't have enough time to waste two of your precious remaining hours on this one.