The 1979 Salem's Lot could not be any more different than it already is from its 2004 remake - here's every major difference between the two versions of the classic Stephen King story explained. Stephen King's iconic vampire tale was made and remade into a miniseries, first by Tobe Hooper in 1979 and later by Mikael Salomon in 2004. While they both retain the primary elements of the original source, they are drastically different from one another.
Stephen King has been an essential component of the horror genre since the publication of his novel Carrie in 1974, which was later followed up by a movie adaptation in 1976 from director Brian De Palma. Following its success, several other filmmakers and screenwriters flocked to his content in hopes of making the next great King movie. This led to several set in Jerusalem's Lot, Maine, commonly referred to as 'Salem's Lot. The location is often recognized for being part of the three fictional Maine towns Stephen King has created over the years, which also include Castle Rock and Derry. Out of them all, 'Salem's Lot contains the most gothic traits with eerie graveyards, abandoned houses, and a vampire population.
Hooper's 1979 miniseries is commonly recognized for staying true to the story's gothic imagery, while Salomon's is closer to the actual source material. Despite the fact that they both contain vampires, the iconic Marsten house, the same location, and core characters, they diverge in their execution and how they navigated the source material based on the decade during which they were produced and the overall interpretation of the 1975 novel. Without further ado, here's every major difference between Tobe Hooper's Salem's Lot and Mikael Salomon's remake.
How The Miniseries Begins
The 1979 miniseries from Tobe Hooper notably begins in a way that perfectly sets up a sequel. After Ben Mears (David Soul, Starsky and Hutch) and Mark Petrie (Lance Kerwin) find that a bottle of holy water emits a greenish glow, they realize that the supernatural forces of 'Salem's Lot are still in full force. The entirety of Hooper's Salem's Lot is a flashback to when they first encountered the vampiric forces of the small Maine town. King never penned a sequel to his novel. The beginning of the miniseries was loosely based on the prologue and epilogue in order to establish that evil never leaves 'Salem's Lot, no matter how hard someone tries to defeat it.
In contrast, Salomon's Salem's Lot begins as Ben Mears (Rob Lowe, The Outsiders) attacks a priest and ends up in a hospital bed, where he tells the story of what took place when he returned to 'Salem's Lot. The beginning is a bit nonsensical, as it only serves the purpose of introducing Ben, which could've been done in the same way that the novel does. According to the original source, Ben Mears arrives at 'Salem's Lot in order to author his next novel. There's no dramatic introduction. It's likely that both miniseries created one to draw in viewers rather than slowly build up to the horrors of the story. Hooper's plays on the ancient fear of the vampire while Salomon's draws on the post-traumatic stress that comes from experiencing such terrifying events. Due to their glaring differences, the opening scenes of both Salem's Lot iterations serve their unique storylines.
Jerusalem's Lot, Maine
In Stephen King's novels, the location plays a key component in the horrors that take place there. For instance, in his 1986 novel It, the town of Derry, Maine is a core villain. Every adult in the town ignores the horrors the children face, some abuse their kids, and it was the home of Pennywise the Dancing Clown before humankind ever roamed the Earth. In a similar way, Jerusalem's Lot, Maine is a hub for evil to manifest, but they are slightly different in Hooper's miniseries than they are in Salomon's.
While 1979's Salem's Lot hones in on cheaters, child molesters, and vampires, 2004's atmosphere isn't as impactful. Instead, it tries too hard at making everything more modern. Overall, Jerusalem's Lot in Hooper's miniseries is dark and eerie with a dramatic gothic style, while Salomon's focuses on bringing the story to a contemporary setting that didn't necessarily benefit it as a whole. The 1979 Salem's Lot captured the evil atmosphere of Jerusalem's Lot, Maine a lot better than 2004's Salem's Lot.
Ben Mears
Ben Mears is relatively likeable in the 1979 miniseries. In contrast, Rob Lowe's character is flawed and far more believable. Undoubtedly, King created the character with his own image in mind, as he is an author from Maine who writes about his personal life and experiences. There are several instances in which Stephen King has used himself as inspiration. Yet, Hooper and Salomon's depiction of Ben Mears are so different that they create entirely different storylines.
Salomon's version follows a man who is so stricken with trauma that he cannot escape; it forces him to return to Jerusalem's Lot, Maine. On the other hand, Hooper's Ben Mears is much more subdued in establishing his connection with the town and the Marsten house. Lowe's character doesn't hold back, as flashbacks of his childhood experiences in the haunting Victorian home stop him in his tracks numerous times throughout the miniseries. Salomon captured an empathetic character who is also deeply flawed by his somewhat arrogant nature. In turn, this quality made him far more believable and relatable than Hooper's.
Kurt Barlow
One of the biggest differences between the original and the remake is how Kurt Barlow is represented as the main antagonist. In Hooper's Salem's Lot he is portrayed by Reggie Nalder, who appears as the iconic bluish-white faced vampire who takes up residence in the Marsten house. Salomon's Barlow is portrayed by Rutger Hauer, who presents a more true to the source vampire. Instead of taking on a ghostly appearance, he dons the traditional vampiric look of a fanged human. According to most creature features that include the blood-sucking villains, vampires are paler than most people and have fangs. They do not turn into bluish-white ghostly apparitions with glowing green eyes.
While Salomon's Barlow is truer to the traditional conceptions of vampires and the source, it does not necessarily add to the horrors of the miniseries as a whole. In fact, many fans regard Reggie Nalder's performance as the most horrific because of his eerie appearance. It's an unforgettable one, as he sweeps out from the darkness into the light with a horribly disturbing blank stare that can only read as a thirst for blood. He resembles the iconic image of Nosferatu, mutant-like with narrowed teeth. Hauer's performance is more comparable to Dracula, a handsome and wealthy man who looks questionable, but is charismatic.
Kurt Barlow is perhaps the biggest difference between Hooper's original and Salomon's remake. They aren't even the same vampire when directly compared to one another. Their only similarities are their thirst for blood and reign of terror over Jerusalem's Lot. Salem's Lot will return again soon, this time in the form of a prequel. There is little known about the project as of this writing, but it has been one of the several confirmed Stephen King projects set to release in 2021.
