Tobe Hooper's very memorable, very eerie and frightening adaptation Salem's Lot is a representation of a violent outrage that's an outward warmth. An external nature of gentleness is an actual nature of devastating hostility. A devastating hostility is a tranquility that's tranquil. A tranquil tranquility is a hate that's without reason. A hate that's without reason is being an external nature of gentleness.An external gentleness is a coldness that's internal. Internal is the soul, and the soul is the inexplicable. A hate that's without reason is being a hate that's without reason.A hate that's without reason, is a kindness that's logical. A kindness that's logical is a kindness that's logical. A repetition of kind logic can't be a kind logic - a kindness that's sane is forced to be unique. Logic is necessity. The necessity of kindness is dependent on uniqueness. The necessity of kindness is needlessness that's needless: the pointlessness of pointlessness is dependent on uniqueness.Pointless pointlessness is importance that has no reason. Uniqueness is the only thing that can create importance that has no reason. Inexplicable importance is the same as an unimportant explanation. Uniqueness is the only thing that can create an unimportant explanation. An explanation, is an exposure. In order for an exposure to be unimportant, a uniqueness is required. An exposure is a loss of mystery. A loss of mystery is a gain of identity. Uniqueness is the only thing that can create a gain of identity that's unimportant. A gain is a help. An identity is a distinction. A distinction that helps is a symmetry that's obstructive. In order for a destructive symmetry to be unimportant, a uniqueness is necessary. A destructive symmetry is a destruction of reality: uniqueness is the only thing that can permit a destruction of reality that's acceptable. Uniqueness isn't the destruction of reality. Uniqueness is the maintenance of reality - the maintenance of reality is the only thing that can permit the destruction of reality. Reality is destruction. The destruction of destruction can only be acceptable if given permission by the maintenance of destruction. The destruction of destruction is peace that has no reason: the maintenance of peace that has no reason needs the permission of the peace of destruction. The peace of destruction is peace that has reason - corrupt peace. Pure peace needs the permission of corrupt peace in order for pure peace to overrule corrupt peace. If corrupt peace doesn't let pure peace destroy corrupt peace, pure peace won't have the ability to live. Pure peace needs to live, but, it hasn't the corrupt heart to destroy another force without the permission of the other force. The 1979 adaptation, Salem's Lot, is a very beautiful, very peaceful and very memorable allegory about a corrupt peace (the vampire Barlow) having the decency and having the heart to sacrifice itself for the benefit of humanity

How can you not like this? Suspense...the late and great James Mason? (one of his very last roles) The window scenes and the prevailing menace of he film make it worthwhile. 20 odd years ago I let my daughter ( after badgering me) watch it when she was 9 years old...and she still winds me up about it even now..could not sleep for a month ( did warn her) but that's kids... Is it cerebral?..no..is it fun?.. hell yeah.. great book and David Soul isn't half bad either. and Mr. Tobe Hooper died today, Thank you for this Tobe..and Poltergeist and Texas Chainsaw... you will be missed bud x #RIP

Great adaptation of Steven King that is struggling to escape from 3 hours of boring movie. Everyone who knows at least bit of King will recognize his background here, even those who did not read this book or even knew about it. Story is completely Kingish and it's very good. Acting, music, scenography, everything is great. But nevertheless I fell asleep during watching this movie and I had to rewind few times. Story simply does not contain enough material for 3 hours movie. If they took more details from the book 3 hours wouldn't be nearly enough, but when they reduced the book to minimum there was not enough left to fill 3 hours. I suppose they intended to build tense atmosphere slowly and gradually, and maybe in 70's movie was accomplishing that goal, but today, or at least for me, this was extremely boring experience.6/10

This movie was made before Stephen King was, really, Stephen King. By that, I mean that the legend had not yet become the horror icon that he is today. He was really still a young, aspiring horror writer gathering some reputation for himself. As has been documented previously, the rights to this novel were purchased, initially, with a feature film in mind. However, the romantic version of Dracula and remake of NOSFERATU were both hitting screens around the same time, so the producers decided to avoid the competition and go for something totally different.There is probably a large segment of the horror fan community that is too young to remember the heyday of the television movie. Back in the 70s and early 80s, network TV would sink large budgets into creating original films, often spread out over several nights. These were, typically, adaptations of popular novels featuring fairly well- known, if b-list, actors. Today, networks would rather fill the time slots with much cheaper reality TV, but I digress.I have been wanting to see this for some time now, as it was always spoken about reverentially since I was a kid in the 80s. Being sometimes difficult to find on DVD (as a rental), it took me some years to finally manage to see this movie. I would say that it is a fairly effective chiller that is held back quite a bit by the trappings of the television movie genre in which it was created.The movie is far too long, to begin with. I recognize that it was intended to be a "2-night event", but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't have been better trimmed to a standard length movie. This, also, allows the movie to capture more of the novel, but I'm not a viewer who cares about this, at all. I am an avid fan of fiction, but I've never been the kind of fan who cries out when a movie strays from the book. I see them as two completely separate entities and do not feel that the movie version has any obligation to stick to the novel so closely. Large segments of this movie could have been trimmed down to make for a tighter film.It's also full of the sort of overacted melodrama that was an integral part of the TV movies, of these times, though our two main heroes, David Soul and Lance Kerwin, come off completely opposite. I found both of them to be emotionless automatons and I never really developed an empathy for either of their characters.The entire first half of this movie is really slow and takes awhile to build some steam. More off-putting, when the scares do start to come, they are often presented in really annoying freeze-frame style. A hand reaches out, the image freezes, we get some music akin to "dun dun dun" and cut to commercial. I found this eliminated any tension or mood that was trying to be created. I enjoy several of Tobe Hooper's movies, but found this to be missing a lot of his trademark stylings. It too often comes across as generic.The movie does pick up very well in the second half. The finale in the Marsden house is actually fairly tense. I really enjoyed the creature makeup on the vampire. I thought it was an excellent decision to deviate from the look of King's novel and go for the Nosferatu style instead, though the odd blue tone could have been better conceived.The most famous scene is the young Glick boy coming to visit his brother outside the window, a scene mimicked in THE LOST BOYS. Though somewhat dated, I found it to still carry quite a bit of atmosphere. Another scene I noticed was later ripped off was when the human medium, Straker, meets his demise. The scene was lifted almost shot for shot in FRIGHT NIGHT. Overall, I found this to be an enjoyable movie if taken for what it is, a late 70s TV movie light on gore and scares. I would like to see the trimmed down European cinema release as I feel that I would probably enjoy it more than this somewhat bloated exercise in TV horror.