good back-story, and good acting

An Exercise In Nonsense

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

I only found out this movie even existed yesterday when I ran into it on the shelves of my local library, which has a quite good DVD section where one can borrow DVD's for free. Thank goodness for that, free, I mean, because I'd really be embarrassed to admit I paid actual money to watch this abomination of a movie. It is bad, really really bad. So bad in fact, I'm thinking of writing to the production company and requesting they pay me for watching it!

I knew it was going to be bad but i had no idea. I tried to keep an open mind and view it without comparing it to Salem's Lot but it was still sh't.The main character kept making some stupid stupid decisions that just didn't make sense. He had such a hard on to write a history/bible for this community of vampires that he just about lets them vampirize his son? I know its implied that he has experience with different cultures but who stumbles across a town of vampires and then lets their teenage son talk him out of leaving?I'm trying to think of something nice to say about it and all i can come up with is that there was a pretty decent pair of vampire bewbs (not Tara Reid) that were shown on two occasions and the Nazi hunter guy was partially interesting.In conclusion, i believe that if RTSL was a dinosaur it would be a lameasaurus Rex.3/10

My Take: One of the worst movies I have ever seen in a life. Definitely the worst horror movie I have ever seen. I bought this movie because I'm a horror movie buff, and it had a good cover art, but that's just a perfect example of the phrase "never judge the book by its cover.", and "Return to Salem's Lot" was, not just truly horrible, but also a is a real joke of a horror movie. The acting is weak, the script is pale, the make-up lacks realism and the scares aren't even scary. Doesn't that sound like a joke? Michael Moriarty is like the father figure in the movie who takes his son back to his hometown, the vampire-infested Salem's Lot. His acting was way too over-the-top... and just plain ridiculous. Andrew Duggan as a lead vampire is weak, and poor Samuel Fuller, reduced to a silly role of a Nazi hunter. And much worse, as if the bad acting wasn't enough, the script never fared better.Silly horror move, I wouldn't even recommend it to a camp buffs. That's how awful it is. Rating: 0 out of 5.

Joe Weber an anthropologist returns from South America to be with his son Jeremy and they travel to a small, quiet New England town, know as Salem's Lot, where he grew up as a child and that he has inherited a house, which he plans to fix up and live. But soon he discovers the town's horrific secret, it's populated by vampires who live a normal life and the town's judge Axel, wants Joe to write a bible for their kind. Drum roll please… shock, horror! What do you know? I liked it, quite a bit. Okay, okay it doesn't come close to Hooper's superior 'Salem's Lot', but I found this cheap looking quickie to be hugely enjoyable and I liked that it was ridiculously quirky. Cohen's touch is evident here with the comedic black humour that underlined the story, which translated into plenty of his films that featured Michael Moriarity. Those two just seem to click when they come together. Cohan's got his own sort of style that distinguishes his films from the rest of the genre and that's why he's a cult b-grade filmmaker. For lot of people I can see why it's a big disappointment and why it was put down, but this is really only a sequel by name, as there weren't any real connections from what I grasp between the two films. If you think you are going to get something in the same vein as the classier Hooper film, you'll be sorely mistaken. It's just unfavourable to compare it to "Salem's lot", as it hasn't got a real chance. They should have had a different movie poster that didn't feature Barlow (from the first film), because he is nowhere to be seen, I guess that was one the other disappointments for people. But that's just advertisement for ya. From watching the 'Island of the Alive: It's Alive 3' (1987) commentary not too long ago, which was shot-back-to-back with 'Salem's Lot'. Cohen originally went to Warner Brothers in the interest of getting the rights for 'House of Wax', but instead they suggested that they would back him for a 'Salem's Lot' and 'It's Alive' sequel. Where Larco production took control and many of the same cast and crew were involved in both products. Both films actually shared the same intro, with its multi-coloured lava effect. Is that saying something about the budget, or did Cohen just liked it and wanted to reuse it again? These double features were intended to be release on Warner Brother video, but they got a small cinema release. Just a bit of trivia for you. The production is pretty rough, which goes for disjointed editing and the shabby makeup and tacky effects. They might not be up to scratch, but in all, those certain aspects don't destroy the fun and heart of this flick. But one thing did stand out and that it was a well-shot picture. Daniel Pearl's (Texas Chainsaw Massacre) camera work ups the ante and a touch of professionalism. Sadly the score didn't have that approach, it was at times just a bit too much. Cohen might have executed some of the action scenes sluggishly, but that didn't dampen the reasonable thrills that flowed with some nice bloody moments and grubby make-up effects. Slow to get going, but when it kicks in, everything picks up with a sudden burst. What's a Cohen film without the trademark offbeat dialog and campy performances. The script was light on material, but the biting wit and maniac language shined through. The outrageous humour seems to be there to counter-punch the corny horror side of things. The flawed plot has some virtually impossible actions taken or done. But my attention was held throughout and I just went with things. I thought it had some incredibly intriguing ideas in the mix and bizarre aspects that pull you in. I was even thinking of 'The Howling', which the same idea is covered in this film. At least it wasn't a retread. Fine performances are heralded from the cast. Moriarity's versatility shows, and there's fun to be had when he's on screen. Also Samuel Fueller hams it up as a grisly old Nazi hunter and Andrew Duggan plays the Judge Axel with a touch of class and hidden menace. Ricky Addison Reed was painful as a foul mouth brat, Jeremy Weber. There's a notable performance from a very young Tara Reid too. What we get here is a dreary atmosphere that adds a nice pinch of satiric macabre, which kept me in a trance.Addictively off the wall horror from Cohen, which might be too much for those who aren't into very cheap, campy b-grade horror.