|
|
Post by Ludders II on Oct 2, 2024 20:09:04 GMT
Disappointing review of the new version which is hitting most cinemas around Oct 11th. www.theguardian.com/film/2024/oct/01/salems-lot-movie-review-stephen-kingUnsure whether I'll bother going to the cinema, but I'm such a big fan of the original 1979 version (not to mention the novel) that I'm tempted. On the down side, I tend to be disappointed by remakes. Even the 2004 version with Rutger Hauer was dismal. We'll see. |
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Oct 2, 2024 22:50:27 GMT
My hopes aren’t high. Most critiques are damning already, and if it goes into the same aesthetic direction as the Andy Muschietti directed adaptations of “It”, I can’t see it being especially noteworthy.
Tangentially, I wonder if Robert Eggers’ new adaptation of Nosferatu (released this Christmas) will be any good. I’ve not *loved* everything he’s made, but I can’t say he’s made a truly *awful* film yet. At least it’s not being helmed by Moffat!
|
|
|
|
Post by iank on Oct 3, 2024 5:47:58 GMT
I think I'll stick with James Mason and David Soul.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Oct 3, 2024 12:29:57 GMT
My hopes aren’t high. Most critiques are damning already, and if it goes into the same aesthetic direction as the Andy Muschietti directed adaptations of “It”, I can’t see it being especially noteworthy. Tangentially, I wonder if Robert Eggers’ new adaptation of Nosferatu (released this Christmas) will be any good. I’ve not *loved* everything he’s made, but I can’t say he’s made a truly *awful* film yet. At least it’s not being helmed by Moffat! I agree, it looks as though it will be fairly run of the mill. I'll probably wait for the download rather than bother my local cinema. As for Nosferatu, that will be something that I'll be very curious to see, but I can't see anything replacing the 1979 Herzog film in my affections. I've got a copy of Eggers' 2015 film; 'The Witch', which was recommended to me, but I've not got around to watching so far. Though I plan to before Nosferatu comes out. |
|
|
|
Post by UncleDeadly on Oct 3, 2024 13:12:05 GMT
My hopes aren’t high. Most critiques are damning already, and if it goes into the same aesthetic direction as the Andy Muschietti directed adaptations of “It”, I can’t see it being especially noteworthy. Tangentially, I wonder if Robert Eggers’ new adaptation of Nosferatu (released this Christmas) will be any good. I’ve not *loved* everything he’s made, but I can’t say he’s made a truly *awful* film yet. At least it’s not being helmed by Moffat! Oh f*ck, Moffat Nosferatu...  |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Oct 7, 2024 7:30:31 GMT
Just watched it.
Spoilers ahoy
Sadly it's fairly run of the mill as mentioned earlier. I think part of the problem is the usual issues in adapting quite a long novel down to a 1hr 40min movie. Despite what artistic liberties the 1979 mini-series took with the novel, the fact that it was over 3 hours long, at least allowed the story that it presented to develop as it should.
It actually starts off fairly well, but after about 30/45 minutes or so it gradually devolves down into pretty standard affair. The character of Ben Mears is largely under-used and is little more than a bit-part until towards the end. Similarly, Straker's appearances are little more than nominal, and Barlow is compromised by being given some of the dialogue previously given to Straker, and so wonderfully delivered by James Mason. IM0, Barlow works much better as an extremely powerful, mentally and physically, but nevertheless, mute creature.
The casting of Mark Petrie feels little more than a nod to diversity, but it fairness it doesn't really affect the character. The main problem for me is that the kid playing him seems too young for the role, and it's stated that he's 11+ years old, whereas in the '79 version he's clearly at least 13, and it makes a big difference to the believability of what the character does. For me the character behaves far too much like an adult who doesn't balk at killing, where as the original character was far more realistic and believable because of his manner and behaviour in the situation.
The classic scene with the Glick boys at the window is realised in a very perfunctory manner and lacks the sheer creepiness of the original, similarly the confrontation between Barlow and priest lacks the impact of the original version. And despite the heavy make-up job, Barlow is just a little bit too nice looking somehow. lol
By the latter half I was starting to get bored. The film just lacks character. It hasn't got a vibe or atmosphere of its own. It feels like it's just any old generic vampire movie. It's not the worst ever, but after pretty reasonable start, it just seems so ordinary once it gets going. I tried not to go into it without a preconceived notion of its quality, and give it a fair chance. But I think I mainly achieved that by not turning it off....
A generous 4/10.
|
|
