Salem’s Lot (2004)

Director: Mikael Salomon

Cast: Rob Lowe, Andre Braugher, Donald Sutherland, Rutger Hauer

Have I Seen it Before: Never. Had it not been included with a DVD set along with IT (1990) and The Shining (1997) (no, not that one) I likely never would seen it. If I wasn’t trying to do my level-headed best to get through my pile of unwatched DVDs, I may still have never seen it.

Did I Like It: Let’s put it simply: I was half-considering not writing a review of this at all, seeing as it was a television miniseries that aired on TNT. Since I already reviewed those other two films in the set, consistency alone has brought me to this low point.

One can’t imagine that the film’s failing are entirely its own fault. The prospect of a two-part television movie based on a Stephen King novel is not exactly the stuff of high quality. The only exception is the aforementioned IT, and that is a four hour journey through mostly dullsville, punctuated by a legitimately terrifying performance from Tim Curry. It also helped that I first saw fleeting images of that one when I was five.

There is not much to recommend the proceedings here, then, aside from the always welcome presence of Andre Braugher. It’s interesting to note that this is another vampire film starring Sutherland and Hauer, but this barely about vampires, and it wasn’t exactly like their first team-up worked out so hot. The production value is embarrassingly cheap when it isn’t spectacularly boring. Seriously, Rob Lowe left The West Wing for stuff like this? Even the fifth season of that show is more memorable than this. It actually inspires me to actively avoid the novel on which it is based. It’s a real shame.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1992)

Director: Fran Rubel Kuzui

Cast: Kristy Swanson, Donald Sutherland, Rutger Hauer, Luke Perry

Have I Seen it Before: Yes…

Did I Like It: Here’s the thing. I’ve increasingly been of the opinion that some media properties have one form where they work best. Ultimately, Star Trek works at its best when it is a TV show, although there are some exceptions. Batman is best served, most consistently by comic books. Why anyone thought Transformers work beyond action figures will be beyond me, and yes, I am including cartoons there.

So, too, that it is impossible to view this movie as anything other than a good idea still waiting for its format. It’s easy to say that, as we did get this story in a far more dynamic format as a television series. The mythology (which at first blush is pretty silly) can be explored deeper. We can come to like the characters. We can tell stories different than the flimsy one involving Lothos (Hauer).

Here, things seem incomplete. Some of the wit that Whedon brought to the TV series is here, but it’s ancillary to the desperate need of the studio to force this idea into the package of an innocuous teen comedy of the early 90s. Almost none of the feminism* that becomes the core of the series is here, content instead to make the “this blonde valley girl is going to save us all” joke prop up the whole affair.

Ultimately, the idea works better as a TV show.

But, to be fair, there is that scene (really a litany of them, including a post-credit tag) where Amilyn (Paul Reubens) keeps reacting to getting staked. Over the years, it is honestly the only part of the film I truly remember, and I’m fairly certain it will only be a matter of time before that’s the only thing rattling around in my brain after this screening fades. It’s that memorable of a movie.

Also: what happened to Pike (Perry)? Does anyone know? Whedon?

*Much can be said about Whedon’s feminist bona fides now, and for that matter his credentials as a decent human being. However, judging the work on its own merits, I’m still content to label the TV show as legitimately feminist, even if the primary author’s intent is suspect.

Blade Runner (1982)

Director: Ridley Scott

Cast: Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer, Sean Young, Edward James Olmos

Have I Seen it Before: Yeah…

Did I Like It: …I was really hoping you weren’t going to ask me that.

Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner is just one of those movies… People love it, and they’re not wrong. To have the special effects for any movie still work past six months the initial release of the film in question is something of a small miracle*. The cast is pretty great, and this is prime pre-sleepwalking Harrison Ford. I can see the fusion between postmodern sci-fi and film noir is very particularly designed.

And yet, it’s never all come together in my eyes. It might be that it’s too slow for me—or for that matter, modern audiences—but I’ve enjoyed slower films before. It could also be that the film may still come from that heralded era where films were truly meant to be enjoyed on the big screen, and the home video market was a faded afterthought. Ultimately, though, I think that—even though the special effects are obviously well-crafted—the film’s aesthetic can’t quite reach for any degree of timelessness, and every frame and every sound within the movie screams “THIS MOVIE WAS MADE IN THE 1980s.” Even Ridley Scott’s other great science fiction film of the era—Alien (1979)— can more often than not avoid any sort of fashionable quality and maybe look for a few seconds as if it might have been made any year.

Maybe things will change on this new screening of the film…

And—upon further review—I’m just not that into it, and beyond the reasons I noted above, I’m having a hard time quantifying my apathy. Maybe it’s the music? Maybe it’s the pacing. Maybe all of those elements fuse together and introduce in me some pervasive feeling of unease. I don’t necessarily dislike a movie that wants me to feel ill-at-ease, but I would like to be able to point to something particular that’s making me feel that way. This film just doesn’t do it.

*What’s more, I just can’t buy George Lucas’ argument that he couldn’t have made the prequels until CGI technology reached the “Jurassic Park” phase. All of his Coruscant scenes have been pretty much worked out on Scott’s canvas.