Rating: 
Summary: Hated the vampires.....
Review: Many years after a local serial killer commits a heinous murder/suicide, some creepy new residents move into his abandoned house, sparking rumor and speculation. When a little boy disappears residents begin to wonder whether the hero Ben (a writer who has just moved back into town) might be involved in some way. Can Ben Mears discover the true killer before the town of Jerusalem's lot is overrun?I listened to the unabridged audio version of Salem's Lot, and I found it a bit cluttered. There were too many characters, each with his/her own back story, and I found it annoying to 'headhop' between them at a moments notice. Dozens of minor characters are written about in this manner, and I found it tedious. I found the lengthy dedication at the beginning somewhat boring (especially read aloud), and the prologue in my opinion told in flashback form from the main character's point of view was filled with spoilers and was rather pointless. I absolutely HATE hearing how main characters will survive or can survive before an actually takes place. This is a main wall-banger for me. Plus, I didn't care for King's vampires. I prefer the sexy mysterious type not the devil-worshipping I'm soooo evil satanic variety. The vamps were no different from serial killers. Boring. Fans of horror novels will like the references and the evil 'Marston' house. Fans of vampire novels, might find the vampires in this novel unsophisticated and too cheesy for words. I know I did. 3 stars for some good characters and solid worldbuilding.
Rating: 
Summary: A good bok
Review: Stephen King's Salem's Lot, turned out to be a good book. This is the first Stephen King book that I have read and was a good book. When I first picked it up, I wasn't sure if I was going to like and I wasn't sure if I was going to be able to read the whole book. But After the first pages the story starts to get more interesting. IF you just read the first pages, you would never know that this was a story about vampires. One thing that Stephen king did that made the book better was to bring in the vampires about half way through the book. After the vampires come in, you cannot put the book down. The plot of this book gets developed pretty well. The book takes place in a small Town in Maine, Jerusalem's Lot. Setting the story here makes the book better than if it would have been set in a big city. If it were to be set in a big city, you know that the vampires are going to be stopped by some force. But in Jerusalem's Lot, the whole town gets turned into vampires. The way that Stephen king develops the plot is very good. The main characters in this book get described pretty well. One of them is Ben Mears, he is the one that kills the main vampire. The other character is Barlow, he is the main vampire. The other characters in the book are town people. They don't get developed very good because they don't play a big role in the book. Overall Salem's Lot is a good book, and I liked reading it.
Rating: 
Summary: A different kind of vampire
Review: After close to three decades of Anne Rice and Blade-style vampires, reading this book was quite a breath of fresh air for me. Don't get me wrong, I have no intrinsic problem with Rice's works, although to be honest I didn't much care for them. However, I think it is fascinating that while both Salem's Lot and Interview with the Vampire came out around the same time, they both point in almost opposite directions. While King's version of the Vampire is extremely taditional (some might even happen to say old fashioned), it provides distinct relief from legions of goth fans who think Vampire: The Masquerade is the old legitimate modern foray into the world of vampires (or "vampyres" if you prefer).
Unlike so many modern vampire tales, the vampires in Salem's Lot are not melancholy, embittered, glamourous aristocrats who (despite their obviously "refined" tastes) are just your average joe with some cool superpowers. No, in Salem's Lot the vampires are painted as what they were always meant to be: Evil with a capital "E." They must sleep during the day (not just hang out in a dark place while discussing theology); crosses, holy water, and the consecrated host burn them, they have the power to hypnotize people with their steely gaze and they cannot just feed in any random stranger's house, they must be invited into the dwelling. They have no real superpowers, and are more like sadistic, egomaniacal world dictators than 18th century French aristocrats. And yet, somehow, they're infinately more frightening. While so many other novels of recent memory have been from the point of view of the vampires themselves and their constant whining, Salem's Lot eschews this first-person close up and leaves the vampires in the shadows, thus making them far more menacing and frightening.
Rating:
Summary: Better than Dracula
Review: Yes, it is unbelievable but better. King portays a terrific, mind-boggling picture. While Dracula and his dwelling on the mountains of Romania seem a distant fairy tale, this vivid, depressing chef-d'oeuvre makes me think that vampires are everywhere, not isolated on the top of a ominious cottage. When I wake up past midnight, I can't help but still shiver looking at the window, fearing that one of my best friends will be suspended on air, knocking at the glass and calling me to let him in, while blood is drooling out of his mouth.
Yes it is that effective. Dracula teaches you about Vampire myth. Salem's Lot makes you believe there are actual vampires on earth. hands down a masterpiece!
Rating: 
Summary: Eh
Review: I admit, I was put off immediately by King's author's note, in which he insulted the Lord of the Rings, saying it was a 'slightly sunnier version of dracula' or some book like that. Pfft. You could do worse than the brilliant Mr. Tolkien, King.
That said, the book was lackluster. King was trying to rewrite his favorite book, Dracula. It didn't work.
The characters. I just didn't care about them. Like the one-note Robert Langdon in the da Vinci Code, Ben Mears is bland, one note, and boring. I didn't much care for the people in the town, either. King did not give them enough depth for me to care.
However, King writes suspense well. I'll give him props for that.
Rating:
Summary: King's near classic vampire novel
Review: Ben Mears returns to his home town of Jerusalem's Lot, Maine (also known as the Lot). He is obssesed with a local haunted house, and is determined to conquer his fear. At the same time, Kurt Barlow and Mr. Straker move into town to set up an antique shop. Soon afterward people start coming up sick, disappering, and then dead of a strange anemia problem. Before you know it, the dead aren't staying dead. Mears comes up with the solution pretty quick, and with the help of a monster movie obssesed teenager, the local doctor, and Mears' old high school drama teacher, they start out to fight the vampires. Stephen King's "'Salem's Lot" is a modern retelling of Bram Stoker's "Dracula", but it is also much more than that. Stephen King examins small town life and moral corruption. Barlow is really kind of a let down, that is my only complaint with the book. He is not in it long, and when he is he really dosn't seem all that threatening. I would have also liked to know more about where he came from. In my opinion Straker was much more menacing, charming as Cassenova and as slimy as a snake. Straker's evil presence is pretty mean, especially toward Mark Petrie. Ben Mears and his girl friend Susan Norton are alright, I guess, nothing too special about them. Stephen King didn't give many of the heros any sprecial or really engadging quilities. So that is really how "'Salem's Lot" boils down to; characters is nothing special, while the story is very cool.
Rating:
Summary: Exquisite
Review: Having watched Gary Oldman in 'Dracula' i believed at the age of ten that vampires were just misunderstood bloodsuckers. Then i saw John Carpenter's Vampires and i realised they were just a joke. But then i read this and finally saw what has been known for hundreds of years - that vampires are actually evil. And scary. Even the children. They're the worst.
There isn't a boring bit in this book. The short length gives it a compact air, like 'Heart of Darkness.' It seems real, too - King puts in fictional headlines from papers. The book seems based upon some traveller's notes. And it's set in an average town! There are so many great set pieces in it, my favourite being Mark Petrie's journey into the house on the hill. Oh yeah, and....
etc. You have to read this. Now. That is all.
Rating:
Summary: Amazing Story!
Review: I don't know about others, but I was very dissipointed with Carrie, Stephen King's first published story. I could tell it was only a short story blown up into a full length, 200 page novel. I actually liked the movie a LOT more (it's actually my favorite movie of all time). Salem's Lot is about the complete opposite. Stephen King's second novel is frightening, realistic, gory, sad, and, again, frightening. Stephen King spends a good portion of the novel just describing the town, and how everyone has their dark secrets, and he does a great job at it. The second half is where the book gets really scary, with bloodsucking vampires going through town, and the next morning, a few more people are gone, and nobody questions where they are. Brrr. Stephen King is a master storyteller (ever read The Stand, Gerald's Game, The Shining, It? You should), and his talent truly shines her in Salem's Lot. This is a high recommendation. PS the critically acclaimed film version from Tobe Hooper (Texas Chainsaw Massacre's 1 and 2) I found really boring and stupid.
Rating:
Summary: Truly creepy, terrifying book!
Review: I picked this book up one day because I thought it sounded cool. Boy was I glad I did! This is one of the best novels I have ever read. It truly scares you, and makes you beleive that this stuff is happening. It doesn't tell you about Jerusalems Lot, it SHOWS you Jerusalems Lot. Definately read this book if you have not read it yet! Best vampire novel ever!
Rating:
Summary: pretty darn spooky [no spoilers]
Review: I am pleased with this novel. I'm not a large fan of his works or the horror genre but vampires do attract my curiosity. The story takes place in modern times with believable characters. The build up of dreaded anticipation to the vampire myth is exciting as it arrives in Jerusalem's Lot and spreads is evil across the town. Different authors have created other variations to the traditional undead legend but Stephen King follows the established version as portrayed over the centuries. The reader isn't overwhelmed by vampires but is kept in touch with residents of 'Salem's Lot and how the evil presence affects the town. There are rambling moments with some characters in the story and I started losing my train of thought. With a writing of this magnitude and age, I found a couple obvious grammatical and spelling errors a concern yet it is still an incredible novel for any fan of vampires. Thank you.
|
