A Return to Salem’s Lotis an essentially forgotten sequel that would kick off one of the weirdest subgenres of Stephen King movies.Stephen King’s bookshave proven fertile ground for Hollywood, resulting in classics likeThe ShiningandThe Shawshank Redemption. Of course, there have been some middling to terrible films based on his work too, withthe King-directedMaximum Overdrivebeing (arguably) the worst. One of the most adapted of his works isSalem’s Lot, a novel where a vampire slowly takes over a small American town and quite literally bleeds it dry.
It was first adapted as a miniseries by the late, great Tobe Hooper (The Texas Chain Saw Massacre) in 1979, which gave younger viewers nightmares for years to come. The nextSalem’s Lotadaptationcame with a Rob Lowe-fronted miniseries from 2004, and the most recent version was the poorly received 2024 movie starring Lewis Pullman.Tucked between the 1979 and 2004 miniseries isA Return to Salem’s Lot, a sequel written and directed by B-movie legend Larry Cohen; it also marked the first Stephen King movie that he didn’t actually write.
No, Stephen King did not pen the script for The Mangler: Reborn
Cohen had actually written a script for theSalem’s Lotminiseries that wasn’t used, and years later proposed a sequel to it as a straight-to-video project for Warner Bros.A Return to Salem’s Lotfeatures no returning characters, and instead of being a horror movie, its more of a dark satire on Americawhere any scary scenes feel perfunctory. King has never commented on the sequel, which had no issue promoting itself using his name. It received largely bad reviews and while there are interesting concepts in it,A Return to Salem’s Lotis obscure for good reason.
A movie Kingdidcomment on wasThe Lawnmower Man, which, despite using the title of a short story the author penned, was virtually unrecognizable from his work. After a lawsuit,King’s name was taken off the 1992 cyber thriller, and that same year he did the same withPet Sematary Two. This was another sequel that wasn’t based directly on any King book, even though it reused themes from his original novel. 1992 was a busy year for King movies he didn’t write, with the firstChildren of the CornsequelThe Final Sacrificealso hitting theaters that year.
Sadly, most of these Stephen King-less sequels are pretty bad.
In the years that passed, there has been a glut of these King-less movies. These include countlessChildren of the Cornsequels,The Rage: Carrie 2andThe Diary of Ellen Rimbauer, a prequel to the author’s miniseriesRose Red. The common thread is that they are all prequels or sequels to previous King adaptations where producers saw franchise potential - even if there were no source books by the author to work with. Sadly, most of these follow-ups are pretty bad.
How Stephen King Feels About “Adaptations” He Didn’t Write
Like most of us, he could “live without” the Children of the Corn follow-ups
King has mellowed in his later years when it comes to sharing his thoughts on adaptations of his novels. Whereas in the past he slammed movies likeFirestarteror Stanley Kubrick’sThe Shining, he’s not so forthright nowadays. For instance,he politely toldDeadlinein 2016 that “I could do without all of the Children of the Corn sequels,“while admitting to liking the 1984 original. Conversely, he was even harsher onPet Sematary Twowhen asked about the sequel byFangoriain 1992.
I read the script - or as much of it as I could stand - and I read enough to realize that it was exactly like the first Pet Sematary with different characters.I don’t approve of [Pet Sematary 2] and I didn’t want it made. I hope the people who read FANGORIA, the people who read my books and anyone who likes my stuff will stay away from this picture. And this is one that I will not see myself.
21%
30%
18%
14%
0%
23%
17%
Lindsey Anderson Beer
24%
The author goes on to explain he would never sell sequel rights to his books again, and if studios insisted on them, he just wouldn’t sell the book. He doesn’t appear to have commented on the likes of theSometimes They Come Backsequels orCreepshow 3, butKing was much kinder to the 2023 prequelPet Sematary: Bloodlineswhen it arrived on Paramount+.King took to Twitter/X (viaVariety) to write a mini review:
In the book, this is the story Jud Crandall tells Louis Creed to try and dissuade him from using the Pet Sematary. The screenplay takes a few liberties, but it’s a fine story. David Duchovny is excellent. The secret, as always, is caring about the characters.
Pet Sematary: Bloodlineswasn’t very well received, but the reason King may have been nicer to it than other derivative sequels is thatBloodlinespulled from a passage featured in the original book. Still,there don’t appear to be any more Stephen King derivatives on the horizon, so this wild little subgenre may finally be dead- unless it’s buried in the Pet Sematary, that is.
Source:Deadline,Fangoria,Rotten Tomatoes,Variety
Stephen King
Discover the latest news and filmography for Stephen King, known for The Dark Tower series, The Stand, IT, The Shining, Carrie, Cujo, Misery, the Bill Hodges trilogy, and more.
A Return to Salem’s Lot
Cast
A sequel to Salem’s Lot, the film follows Joe Weber and his son as they visit a town secretly inhabited by vampires. Upon discovering the truth, the vampires ask Joe to write a bible for them.
