Patrick (1978) Novelization

From the back of the book:

THREE YEARS IN A DEADLY COMA-- AND ONE KNOWS HE’S WATCHING.

Three years ago Patrick electrocuted his mother and her lover in the bathtub. After two years of unresolved scientific observation, he still lies in a coma in the intensive care ward of a private clinic, a medical enigma, is body is in perfect condition. His eyes are wide open.

In every other way he is dead. When beautiful, blonde Kathy Jacquard becomes Patrick’s private nurse, strange things begin to happen. Doors and windows open and slam shut by themselves. Her apartment is brutally ravaged. Her husband disappears. A doctor almost drowns after flirting with her at a party.

Then the electric typewriter next to Patrick’s bed comes alive and types a terrifying message.

HELP ME. TRYING TO KILL ME. TONIGHT.

Patrick is not dead.

And only Kathy knows.

------------

What do we want from a novelization?  I mean, when it comes down to it, why do we read them in the first place?  From a historical perspective, novelizations were meant as a form of advance advertising for the film's release.  Thus, they were considered disposable and so by and large not much effort was put into them.  Granted, I am painting with a very broad brush here.  A good writer can make a very readable novelization from a poor script, just as a poor writer can make a forgettable novelization from a great script.  Historically, many writers used novelizations as a quick way to make a buck.

I started reading novelizations when I realized that sometimes they included things cut out of the final film.  Most novelizations can be counted on to at least offer a glimpse of some version of the screenplay prior to normal changes that may occur after production begins.  The novelizations that truly stand out are the ones that go the extra mile and flesh out details and fix problems with the screenplay itself.  Depending on the legal terms with the film company, this may or may not be prohibited.  I once had a brief interaction with Steven McDonald, the author of the novelization for the 1997 film Event Horizon.  He told me that he wanted to expand the story for the novelization but the film company nixed it and told him to conform to the final released film. On the flip side of that Orson Scott Card expanded James Cameron's The Abyss with Cameron's full support.

Patrick was created by a group of Australian and New Zealand filmmakers looking to get into the world market.  At this point in time the Australian film industry had not quite taken off yet, but Patrick (and Mad Max) would go a long way to proving to the world that there was money to made down under.  Patrick was intended solely as "entertainment" but the people involved--director Richard Franklin and screenwriter Everett De Roche and especially the cast--brought a high level of craftmanship to the film.  Everyone involved was trying to prove they could make a good film--it remains a very enjoyable film almost fifty years later.

But it is a low budget film that was written and made very quickly, so it is not perfect. One aspect that I never really considered until the novelization addressed it was exactly how Patrick ended up in a comatose state.  The film doesn't really offer an answer, but the novelization does. PATRICK was written by an experienced writer and is way above average as a novelization. The author fills in the considerable gaps of logic in the original screenplay while staying absolutely true to the spirit of the plot. He makes the characters more believable and the action more justified.  

Excerpt:

Patrick had decided to kill his mother. There was no other way. She had to die.

The decision had come to him with surprising ease, within minutes of his arrival at the dark and empty house in Collingwood. He had stripped half-naked in his room, turned on the electric radiator and laid down on the bed, curled up in the foetal position, briefly returning to the warmth and silence and security of the womb. A retreat.

His own bed always had that effect on him---and he had slept in everything from a humidicrib, after he had entered this life two months prematurely, through bassinettes, cots, bunks, camp stretchers, to sleeping-bags, normal beds and, once, a waterbed. Countless times in his life his bed had been the only refuge.

No one believed that he actually remembered the time he had spent in that humidicrib, monitored by tubes and wires and tiny electrodes taped to his barely-living body. They said it was post-association of images gleaned from pictures and films seen in later life of premature babies struggling for survival under plastic, tended day and night by nurses and doctors. They said he could not possibly remember that time.

He let them smile smugly in the assurance of their convictions. But Patrick knew. He remembered every detail---the fight for each tiny breath in an effort to expand minute lungs and oxygenate thin blood; the jarring of his frail frame with each concussion of the pulsing heart not much bigger than a fifty-cent piece; the traumatic terror and pain of full-sized needles violating his paper-thin skin; seeing the world as a succession of peering, expressionless faces, eyes above sterile masks, gloved fingers prodding, probing. . .

He had not gained those memories from films. He had lived the experience.

Just as he had lived that other experience ten years later, the one that had never left him, the one that had ruined his life. The one that made him decide to kill his mother.

Something had happened to her money, the monthly cheques she lived on suddenly stopped coming. He never knew the details, only that he saw her grow old in a week while she lived in hope that there had merely been some delay in the mail. Then, after the realization that there would be no more cheques, she had taken to crying a lot and drinking more. They moved from the old house in Kew to a small flat in Prahran and finally to an Abbotsford bed-sitter, where he had to sleep on a camp stretcher beside his mother's huge brass bed.

He knew she always had a lot of men visiting her, even vaguely understood what happened when they went into her bedroom. But, in a room of his own, lost in his imaginings, emulating Robinson Crusoe or the father who he had never known, the father who had deserted his mother even before he was born, it had not concerned Patrick.

In the bed-sitter, it was different. He couldn't help but hear---and see---what went on in the big double bed. It hadn't bothered him unduly. Normally it meant only about twenty minutes of giggling, fumbling and mild thrashing about, after which he could go back to sleep.

The Curious case of The Dark (1978) Novelization

Written by Max Franklin (aka Richard Deming). Based on the 1979 film written by Stanford Whitmore and directed by John 'Bud' Cardos. It starred William Devane, Cathy Lee Crosby, Richard Jaeckel and Keenan Wynn.

This is an odd one. The behind-the-scenes story of this film is definitely more interesting than the film itself. The film began with Tobe Hooper directing. However, Hooper was fired after only a few days, with journeyman director John 'Bud' Cardos taking over. Cardos is not a stylist and did what he was hired to do: finish the film on time, whatever it took. 

Where it becomes interesting is that the filmmakers decided to alter the story after filming was completed to inject a science fiction aspect into the story. Namely, they made the monster an alien that can shoot lasers from his eyes. Exactly what the original story was is...complicated.

There are reports that the story at that point was about an autistic person who had been locked away for most of their life, going on a murder spree when they are freed by a house fire. This info seems to originate with an interview with Cardos that was in the May 1984 issue of Cinefantasique. This was later repeated in the commentary that Cardos participated in for the 2017 Code Red Blu-Ray release.  

Which brings us to this novelization. The only screenwriter ever credited on The Dark was Stanford Whitmore. The novelization claims to be based on his screenplay, but it is NOT about an autistic person killing people. It tells the story of a 100-year-old Zombie that cuts off the heads of his victims with a scimitar and then eats them. The father of the first victim and a newscaster band together to investigate what is going on. In all ways, the novelization reads like an episode of the Night Stalker TV series, without Carl Kolchak. This is not a bad thing.  A still in the photo section includes a scene of a death BEFORE the alien was added, strengthening the case that the alien was a very late addition.

Let's try to unpack this. The final film matches the zombie plot mentioned above, save for the lasers. The characters all talk about the monster being a zombie, and never reference that the victims have been "blown up" by lasers. The monster, when finally shown, is wearing contemporary clothes and does not really match the description of the zombie in the book.  The autistic angle of the plot bears some similarity to Hooper's later THE FUNHOUSE, so perhaps he made that film to get the idea out of his head.

The changes were talked about in issue 12 of Starburst Magazine: 

"Okay, so it was a gamble," admits Larry [Fredericks], the Cinema Shares president. "But after doing our market research...we decided to shift the emphasis from conventional horror to a sci-fi image, which the plot allowed us to do. We re-thought the publicity campaign completely and really put some hours into getting the new art just right. With our experience of selling across the whole range of world markets, we figured we could make the film really work." 

Note, nowhere in the above is the idea of making the film better mentioned. I think the changes were made because the filmmakers had a film that wasn't very good. According to producer Igo Kantor in the above-mentioned 2017 Blu-ray commentary, the switch to the alien occurred after filming was complete. So switching to an alien was a last-ditch effort to salvage the investment when it became clear the film wasn't very good. 

Watching the film objectively, I think about a minute of alterations were done to support the alien plot-change:

• A prologue that explains that the alien came from the stars was added.
• The scenes of carnage stop before the zombie does anything, with lasers and explosions being overlaid on top of the original footage.
• Some insert shots showing the monster's hands as claw-like and decidedly non-human.
• The climax, which involves the alien battling a slew of police officers, appears to have some new footage to better support the laser angle.  Some full face shots of the alien shooting lasers, some pyrotechnic effects showing the effects of the laser hits.

That's it. I don't see anything else that was added. Of course, based on the novelization, we can see that things were removed or changed. But it is clear, at least to me, that the book used the same screenplay for the film that was shot, at least in part. Most of the names are the same, and the basic plot follows the same beats.  The fact that the monster is wearing regular clothes in the film makes me lean toward the autistic person as explaining the monster (inasmuch as that really explains how he could take so many gunshots and still be alive) . I think the film had a rushed filming schedule that resulted in something that has a couple of good scare scenes but not much coherence.  The producers tried to jazz it up with lasers to try to get their money back. 

So where did the story in the novelization come from?  Given that the filmmakers have repeatedly stated that the monster was an autistic person, I have to conclude that either the author worked from an earlier script that was ultimately changed to what Cardos described, or he took it upon himself to improve things with a story of his own. Cardos came on board about a week into filming, so perhaps there was an earlier script without the autistic person. This could have been what was provided to the author of the book.  I am not sure we will ever know for sure. 

Which is all too bad because this is a good novelization! The author really spends time with things and makes it a satisfying read. Considering that the basic plot does not make complete sense (what is the significance of the blind guy, anyway?), the author does a very good job of trying to make it clear.  If nothing else, the book describes a movie I'd much rather watch than the actual film made.

Excerpt:

At five-thirty in the afternoon Randy Morse had just finished making love to his latest conquest for the sixth time that day. She was a lovely Eurasian girl of eighteen named Camille Quam, whom he had met at an actors' workshop a week before. Since then they had been out of each other's sight for only brief periods, even making the rounds of TV studios to read the call-boards together. A good deal of the time, both day and night, they spent in bed together, always at his apartment, because she still lived with her parents. 

Sitting up in bed, naked, Camille leaned over the side of the bed to reach into her purse on the floor. She drew out a marijuana cigarette, a marijuana clip, and a packet of matches. Lighting the joint, she took a deep drag, held it, and passed the joint over to Randy, using the clip. 

Exhaling, she said, "Get it on, lover." 

Randy took a drag and handed back the clip. The phone on a bedside stand rang. Exhaling, he lifted the phone. 

"Hello," he said. 

"Randy?" a mature female voice said. 

"Oh, hi, Marge." 

"Busy tonight?" Marge Madison asked seductively. 

He glanced at Camille. "Why?" he asked. 

"His nibs flew to New York this morning. He's flying back again late tonight, but meantime, I thought perhaps we could discuss that part." 

"Sure," he said instantly. "I'm free." 

Silent Madness 3-D

Silent Madness 3D

Directed by Simon Nuchtern.  Written by Bob Zimmerman & Bill Milling.  Additional Dialogue by Nelson DeMille.  Stars Belinda Montgomery, Viveca Lindfors, Solly Marx.  
1984, 93 minutes, Color, Rated R. 

Summary:
When a glitch in the computer system at an asylum for the criminally insane results in the release of the wrong patient - a giant-in-stature homicidal maniac named Howard Johns, who has a penchant for killing college coeds - it’s up to one of the institute’s top doctors to track him down. Unfortunately, it’s not just Howard she has to worry about, as the administration of the asylum has decided to cover up the error to avoid bad press, going as far as to hire a duo of thugs to permanently ’silence’ the good doctor. Soon enough, Howard finds his way back to the sorority house he once terrorized and sets out to murder the latest batch of nubile coeds who have taken up residence in the stately manor.

3D Rating:  **** out of *****

What makes a good 3-D film?  One could argue that the same rules that apply to 2-D films should apply to 3-D.  Good is good, right?  But that is not the case.  Any movie can be better in 3-D.   I'm not talking novelty--I mean the very nature of it's dimensionality can enhance a dramatic work in unexpected ways. This is where "real" 3-D sets itself apart from "converted" 3-D.  Real meaning either two cameras or lenses captured the spatial information real-time on a set.  Converted meaning a 2-D image was processed to artificially create the two images used to make the 3-D image.

In a converted film, the visual effects technician has to manually determine what the dimensionality will entail, and how nuanced it will be.  This is not unlike what a cameraman using a 3-D rig would do on set, but the difference is every shot converted to 3-D costs money, and by and large only a certain amount of money will be spent on something as innocuous as someone walking down a corridor to get from point A to point B.  Certainly, some fine conversions are out there, but even in the best conversion there will be aspects that don't take full advantage of the third dimension.  And the reasons for that can be varied but it usually comes down to either money, or the filmmakers playing down the dimensional effects because they do not want "gimmicky" 3-D.

However, when you talk about a "real" 3-D film all of that depth and real world spatial orientation is just THERE.  True, the camera system used was adjusted to affect depth, but by and large when real 3-D is both filmed and presented correctly it's an amazing experience.  One of my film truisms is that a great presentation will always make marginal entertainment more watchable.  

Which brings us to SILENT MADNESS.

Now, this is not a great film.  I had never heard of this before seeing it for sale on Black Friday 2020, and only bought it largely due to it being released by Vinegar Syndrome and featured 3-D restoration work by the 3-D Film Archive. There would be a vigorous discussion about whether to call it a "good" film.  The acting is variable, and the story is pretty dumb, but even in 2-D it achieves some suspense and atmosphere.  

However, it is fabulous 3-D entertainment.    Truly, this is one of best 3D experiences I have had in many years.

3D disclaimer:  I have a LED TV that can display digital 3D.  My 3D reviews are based on how things look on my set. I am aware that other methods of displaying 3D may be different.

SILENT MADNESS was filmed in Arrivision 3-D, which was a single camera system that used a special lens to capture both right eye and left eye information on a single strip of 35mm.  Because only half of the 35mm frame was used, films shot in Arrivision 3-D are typically more grainy than not.  The director of photography was Gerald Feil, who had previously filmed FRIDAY THE 13th 3-D (1982).  Judging by the results on display in SILENT MADNESS he learned a few things from that experience.  

SILENT MADNESS does not have a great story.  According to the supplemental features on the disk, the film started as one kind of film but ultimately morphed into a slasher film.  As such, the film is a little clunky, characterizations are a bit thin, and the acting is a bit variable.  The film does tell a (generally) coherent story and generates suspense, so it satisfies as early 1980's horror film even without the third dimension.  

When viewed in 3-D, however, the film is an absolutely hoot.  Real care was taken to highlight the dimensionality of the different locations, and there are numerous "pop out" effects.  Additionally, the final chase sequence adopts a filmic style with colored gels that is quite different from what preceded it.  Think Mario Bava as opposed to FRIDAY THE 13TH and you get an idea of what I mean.

The Blu-ray is taken from a release print, as the original negative appears to be missing.  The print used for this release is not great.  Many of the same faults found in the other Arrivision 3-D films JAWS 3-D and FRIDAY THE 13TH 3-D are also present here--alignment issues and a general all around softness.  These faults are largely baked into the print used, so while The 3-D Archive has done a remarkable job making it look as good as it does here, there was also only so much that could be done.

Also included on the disc is a "sizzle reel" which is in better condition than main feature.  This sizzle reel includes footage not in the final film and also presents a black and white flashback sequence in full color.  It's an interesting extra.  Colors are stronger as well, which suggests that a scene in an experimental hospital wing was influenced by the body farm in COMA (1978).

Also notable is that the release includes two 3-D versions of the film.  There is the digital 3-D version, of course, but there is also an anaglyph version.  I wasn't interested in this when I bought it, but I have to admit it works far better than I expected.  My experience with anaglyph 3-D was limited to broadcast "special events" when I was growing up, which typically did not work very well due to inherent limitations of NTSC.  However, the good folks at the 3-D Film Archive have developed a proprietary anaglyph process that works really well.  Watching it in anaglyph is a very viable alternative if you are not equipped for digital 3-D.  I've included some screenshot examples of anaglyph from the sizzle reel.  If you have the appropriate glasses, the 3-D should work well on your computer monitor.  

Vinegar Syndrome also includes at least one pair of anaglyph glasses and an embossed slip cover.

THE OMEN

Directed by Richard Donner.  Written by David Seltzer.
Starring Gregory Peck, Lee Remick, David Warner, Billie Whitelaw, Leo McKern
1976, 111 minutes, Color, Rated R, Panavision 2.35:1

SPOILERS BELOW- READ WITH CAUTION

A diplomat (Gregory Peck) discovers that his son was switched at birth with the spawn of Satan.  When one of the priests involved in the deception recants years later and tries to make amends by confessing his sins to the diplomat, the diplomat is initially skeptical.  When people start dying under mysterious circumstances he slowly comes around to the notion.  When his wife (Lee Remick) is killed he becomes a believer and with the help of a journalist (David Warner) decides to try and take care of the problem himself.

Like all films that deal with Satanic issues, THE OMEN offers up a vast conspiracy of people working together for evil--knowing nods, subtle glances, all but winking at each other as they effortlessly work together to complete complicated plans.  I think this encourages the viewer to lose themselves to something much bigger than themselves, or at least the idea of something much bigger.  THE OMEN is very much a story of faith, but rather than faith in something better, it instead plays upon the faith of something worse.  Evil with a big supernatural 'E' is real in the world of THE OMEN, but THE OMEN's faith in evil is stylized enough to simplify one's response to it.  Since one cannot relate the events in THE OMEN in the real world, it is easier to go along with the "what if" scenario it puts forth.

What sets THE OMEN apart from other examples of this genre is the degree of subtlety in its Satanic elements.  For the most part, this is achieved by simply avoiding the typical trappings of the Satanic film--there are no pentagrams, cloaked and hooded characters, or blood sacrifice rituals overtly on display in THE OMEN.  These symbols are largely replaced by Jerry Goldsmith's tremendous film score and the wildly inventive death scenes. Unlike most Satanic films, we only see a few people actively involved in the plot at hand. By comparison 1975's RACE WITH THE DEVIL seemingly involves the entire southwest United States.  In THE OMEN, it is almost is if the entire thing was carried out solely by the participants we see on the screen.

Shots like these work best in widescreen presentations

The story is nominally constructed so that one can take it either as a supernatural thriller or a story of a man undone by a series of coincidences.  Gregory Peck at some point, becomes convinced that his son is, in fact, the spawn of Satan, and the fact that this feels organic to the story and not unbelievable is a testament to the fine filmmaking at work.   That said, you can't truly take the film two ways.  Oh, I suppose if you weren't paying attention too hard it would stand, but if you look at it closely, the film unequivocally plays its hand as a supernatural film.  If the filmmakers really wanted to try and sell the "maybe it was all in Gregory Peck's head" angle, they needed to clearly show his point of view during the scenes of coincidence, i.e., the supernatural goings-on.  When the nanny is instructed by the hound of Hell to hang herself to make room for Mrs. Baylock, this occurs with no one else around.  The possibility that the nanny was simply having a psychotic break is not seriously entertained due to the presence of tense music during the exchange.  Maybe it's best not to think too hard about it.

While primarily about the spawn of Satan, the film touches on a few other themes.  For instance, Lee Remick grows to feel that the son is not hers and does not to want to be around him.  I'm sure every parent has had feelings of this sort at one point or another about their children, but it is usually in the heat of the moment, and once calmed down, things go back to normal.  Remick's character comes to feel this way over time with no real "reason".   This could be a symptom of depression, but the film doesn't dwell on this aspect.  Ultimately, it's too bad that Remick is not used much beyond what these few sentences set up, and in the end her role is underdeveloped.

The cast is first-rate from top to bottom, and it helps immeasurably that everyone involved takes it seriously.   Gregory Peck lends a certain aura of respectability to the proceedings, and his earnestness helps keep things in the believable range far longer than it should.  David Warner is fun as the photographer trying to piece the story together.  However, Billie Whitelaw as Ms. Baylock steals the movie.  She is so chilling that I have never been able to see her in any other role without thinking of her work here.

Richard Donner had primarily done television work before this, and one feels he was trying to impress with his work here.   He displays a deft hand in mixing the patently absurd with the realistic, disguising the absurd behind a sheen of style.  THE OMEN features strong compositional choices throughout, and Donner does a great job of using close-ups for maximum effect.   The film remains tense and scary even after multiple viewings, thanks to the craftsmanship of the British crew and Richard Donner's direction.  Have I mentioned Jerry Goldsmith's music yet?  I'm not sure there has ever been creepier music in a horror film.  It takes all the opening credits to set the viewer in the mood for the dark tidings to come.   There is an isolated score included on some of the DVD versions and the latest Blu-Ray version that includes some tracks not used in the final movie, and it's fun to listen to it.

This was not the first movie that ever scared me silly*, but it was one of the first, and it scared me silly without my actually having seen it.  When I was quite young, someone told me the story of the film, and it gave me nightmares that night.  I woke up convinced that there was a line on my pillow and that my head was going to be cut off.   I was six so I am going to cut myself some slack.

When I did see the movie proper several years later, it was on a crappy Beta rental.  I greatly enjoyed that first viewing and have consciously or unconsciously spent the rest of my life collecting it on home video.  I think I've bought this movie more than any other: I bought it on VHS, I bought it on laserdisc, letterboxed for the first time, though the print was beat up and featured distracting splice marks**. I bought it again on laserdisc, this time remastered with Jerry Goldsmith's score isolated in stereo on the analog channels.   There was extra music that was mixed out of the final mix and the splice marks were reduced.  Then I bought the four-disc DVD box set from a number of years ago.  I was pretty sure the DVD box set was going to be it, but it was reissued with a new transfer and extras, so I got it again.  At that point surely I was old enough to be able resist buying the movie yet again, right?  What could they possibly add to make me want to buy it again?

I bought THE OMEN again on Blu-Ray in 2008.  It was on sale and, well, I am weak.  The Blu-ray came with the two theatrical sequels and the truly awful 2006 remake.  It also gathered almost every special feature that has ever graced a home video release for this title.  That isolated score on laserdisc?  It's there.  The "The Omen Legacy" documentary from the last DVD release?  It's there.  The "666: The Omen Revealed" documentary that was on the original DVD release--but not the last release?  It's there.  There are a couple two-three new things as well.  Really, it was a no-brainer.  The splice marks are gone, though they are still visible in some of the older "making-of" features.

The film features a predominance of earth tones and a filtered look that has always kept it from sparkling on home video.  When there are lush greens at the end of the film it is borderline startling.  It looks the best it ever has on this Blu-Ray. 

Update:  In 2019 Shout Factory released the films again in their THE OMEN COLLECTION: DELUXE EDITION.  This has all three of the original films, the awful 2006 remake and the 1991 TV Movie OMEN IV: THE AWAKENING, which while nice to have is not at all essential.  The original film has been remastered again, this time from a 4K master, and it looks better than ever on home video.  It probably looks better than theatrical prints at this point as well.  The earth tones are still there, but whites are a lot better balanced.  The original mono mix is included again, this time in lossless sound.  I believe all of the extras from the 2008 set is here, save for a trivia track.  There are new extras as well.  Not sorry I got it.  Screen captures are from the 2019 version.

* I believe the first movie to scare me silly was FRANKENSTEIN: THE TRUE STORY (1973).  I had fallen asleep in front of the TV and woke up not knowing what it was.  I would have been 5 or 6.  That said, the first movie to scare me past the point of silly was Tobe Hooper's SALEM'S LOT (1979).  I was visiting family and, unhappy with the noise in the main gathering room, took up watching TV in a back room that was very, very dark.  When the little Glick boy sat up in the coffin, I almost wet myself.   To this day I have never been as scared watching anything as I was that night watching SALEM'S LOT.

** I know the damage I'm talking about is not truly a splice mark.  It's just what it looks like.  What I think the damage is a result of the film (negative?) being pulled too hard which left stress damage.  Mind you this is just a guess.  Here's an example.  I had to pull it from one of the older SD special features.  I added the arrows.

SALEM'S LOT (1979)

Directed by Tobe Hooper.  Written by Paul Monash
Starring David Soul, James Mason, Lance Kerwin, Bonnie Bedelia, Reggie Nalder, Geoffrey Lewis, Lew Ayres
1979, 183 minutes, Color, Unrated, 1.33:1
Warner Archives, released 2016

Summary:
Novelist Ben Mears returns to his hometown of Salem's Lot, ostensibly to write his next book but also to work through a traumatic experience from his youth where he thinks he saw the ghost of the owner of the Marsten House.  Now an adult, he wants to explore the nature of evil and whether material things--such as a house--can be inherently evil.  He tried to rent the house but discovers that it's already been rented by two new businessmen, Mr. Barlow and Mr. Straker.  People start to die and Ben comes to think that Barlow and Straker are at fault.  In fact, he comes to think that the supernatural might be involved as some of the victims show evidence of bite marks and missing blood.

Salem's Lot by Stephen King was originally published in 1975 as his second novel.  King had considerable success with his first novel, Carrie, and Lot also sold like gangbusters in paperback.  From a literary standpoint, Lot represented a large jump in quality from Carrie, in that it is a real densely plotted story instead of the pastiche of styles that Carrie used*.  Taking clear influence from Bram Stoker's Dracula, King infuses that gothic base with melodrama worthy of any soap opera.  This is not meant as a criticism.  It's been a few years since I've read the book, but I've always thought it was absolutely fabulous, so at least for me King's approach worked.

SALEM'S LOT was originally broadcast over two nights in 1979.  I missed Part 1 but was scared silly by Part 2.   After those initial TV runs, it was only available on video in the 112-minute theatrical version released outside the U.S.  Besides being 70+ minutes shorter, this theatrical version also had at least two censorship differences from the original broadcast version, which will be discussed below.  I recall trying to watch the shorter version on VHS but not liking it—I kept missing parts in the longer version.  

The cast of SALEM'S LOT is above average for a television production, and by this I mean that James Mason is great.  Outstanding even.  He brings a fair amount of class to the proceedings and digs into his first true horror role with true aplomb.  The rest of the cast is a mixture of familiar TV faces with some out of the ordinary faces, at least for a television horror production.  David Soul, Bonnie Bedelia, and Lance Kerwin were all well-known TV staples at the time of filming, while Mason, Nalder, Ayres, and Lewis were perhaps better known at this time for their movie work.   Soul is not bad in the lead, and does not seem out of his league portraying an intellectual.  Bedelia is somewhat better, though she ultimately has little to do.  Kerwin is even better yet, playing an awkward teenager believable.  Reggie Nalder, as Barlow, is an imposing sight but does not really have much to do.  Lewis especially shines, being one of the few actors to attempt a New England accent and brings a real strength to his scenes as a vampire.

The film's structure largely follows the book's, except for a wraparound section that frames the entire story as a flashback.  In this prologue and epilogue, Soul and Kerwin travel the world and encounter a vampire they must kill.  It is not clear exactly what they are doing — whether they are in hiding or hot on the trail of more vampires.  One could argue that they were looking for Bedelia's character, but again, it not's made clear.  Reportedly, the wraparounds were done to facilitate a weekly series, or at least a sequel.  It is easily the film's weakest part.

The film generally handles the narrative smoothly, with subtle character shading and a clear, linear flow.  The buildup to Mr. Barlow's arrival from Europe is well handled, and although the last third feels a bit rushed, it is still very effective.  The film occasionally betrays its television origins with some variable set designs, such as Kerwin's bedroom.  Yet at other times the production design is outstanding, such as the interior of the Marsten house.  In his first television assignment, director Hooper generates real suspense in several scenes and includes some great, story-motivated jumps.

As mentioned previously, when the film was shortened for its theatrical release several alternate shots were used.  The differences are:

• When Cully Sawyer (George Dzundza) finds Larry Crockett (Fred Willard) with his wife, he holds a shotgun on him.  In the theatrical version, he makes Larry put the barrels of the gun in his mouth.  In the TV version, Larry holds the gun up to his face.
• When Bill Norton (Ed Flanders) is killed, we see him actually be impaled on the antlers.  The aftermath is also shown longer.
• The staking of Barlow (Reggie Nalder) at the end is somewhat gorier.
• The entire sequence in the basement at the end was reportedly darkened for television.  I have never seen this confirmed officially anywhere, so take this one with a grain of salt.

According to Producer Richard Kobritz these alternate shots were created for the European theatrical release and not intended for the television version***.  That said, every home video release after the VHS release of the movie version has used some or all of these shots.   At least some subsequent releases included the Larry Crockett scene but not the Flanders scene.  These variations were probably not intentional.   The full version was released on laserdisc and DVD in the 1990's.   The laserdisc version included the censored shots in the European cut, but I am not sure if the DVD did as well.  More recently, Warner Archives released the full version on Blu-Ray.   I put off rewatching the full miniseries for years, hoping to find a high-quality version.  Prior to this Blu-Ray the best version I had seen was an HD version available for streaming on the now-defunct Warner Archive site.  The Blu-Ray bests that HD version by a fair margin, offering a strong colorful image with almost no print damage on view.   

Cover of the Blu-Ray:

The excellent Tobe Hooper's Salem's Lot: Studies in the Horror Film edited by Tony Earnshaw collects all previous literature of note on this film, and adds a fair amount of new work.  Long out of print, this is worth picking up if you can find it.

* I'm not implying that Carrie is a worse work mind you, but it's easier to put a story together that way than to write it all in one style and point of view.  I may, of course, be full of shit on this.

** Curiously, now that it's all but impossible to see the shorter cut I find I have a compelling urge to watch it again.

***Cinefantastique, Vol. 9, number 2.

They Came Back

Directed by Robin Campillo.  Written by Robin Campillo and Brigitte Tijou.  Stars Géraldine Pailhas, Jonathan Zaccaï and Frédéric Pierrot.
2004, 102 minutes, Color, not rated.

Upon reading the back of the DVD  one might get the impression that this is a zombie movie, but it isn't.  It is actually a film about mourning that uses the dead coming back to life as a metaphor.  (The dead come back, but they are not the same.  Slowly, this makes the dead's relatives come fully to grips--some for the first time--that their loved ones really are never coming back.)  Well made and acted, and I liked it.  Lots of people on IMDB did not, however, due to its not having a clearly explained resolution. As I see it, the plot point of having the dead come back to life isn't important aspect of the story, however, so it didn't bother me.   The important aspect of the story is in how the relatives respond and react to the dead coming back to life. 

LIFEFORCE

Directed by Tobe Hooper.  Written by  Dan O'Bannon and Don Jakoby.  Stars Steve Railsback, Peter Firth, Mathilda May.
1985, 116 minutes, Color, Not rated.

Ah, what a mess of a movie, yet very watchable throughout thanks to the varied special effects and nudity.  The movie plays like a long-lost Quatermass story, and if it occasionally does not make sense it is more than made up for by the aforementioned nudity and special effects.  Even in the full-length 116-minute version of the film, it moves along briskly, so if you hit something that doesn't work particularly well you are moving onto the next thing soon enough.

The plot deals with ancient space vampires and is part science fiction, part mystery, and part horror film.  These elements do not always mesh together well with the horror elements feeling the most forced.  The movie has a great concept and this carries the day for quite a while into the running time, but ultimately it degenerates into little more than a zombie movie.  I used to think I didn't like Steve Railsback in the film because I thought he was miscast, but I've changed my mind.  All things considered, I think he did quite a good job, and that many a different actor would have completely embarrassed themselves. 

The DVD was among the earliest releases and is not 16:9 enhanced.  As a result, the image is grainy and somewhat fuzzy, though the 5.1 sound is a definite improvement over the LD.   More recently, MGMHD has shown a truly beautiful Hi-Def version of the longer European cut several times.   For that matter, they've also shown the shorter R-rated 101 minute version in Hi-Def. The full version offers more explanation, doesn't plaster credits over the alien ship's approach and penetration at the beginning, and is the preferred version.  The image is crisp and colorful and greatly enhances the viewing experience.  Truly, a quality presentation will almost always make a mediocre movie enjoyable.  Screen captures are from the HD version.