Vampire Gestation


At the end of the movie a vampirized Susan appears in Ben's lodgings in Guatemala, presumably to seduce and then vamp him and bring him over to the 'dark side.'

'Ben... I've found you, I love you, you were so difficult to find... kiss me' etc.

It looks to me like Susan is heavily pregnant, which is consistent with the fact that the two had made love at 'the lake.'

That's all well and good and the viewer is left to speculate if their new offspring would eventually give rise to a new 'Master' in vampire terms, it is open to interpretation.

However, due to the chronology of the film, we know that the main part of the movie took place TWO YEARS before the subsequent events in Guatemala.

Is is simply a plot-hole or does it mean that the time required for a vampire baby to gestate and come to full term is 24 months? That's a heck of a long time for Susan to be pregnant!

Please post with any interesting thoughts you might have.

reply

Don't see an Un-dead and pregnant Susan myself. Sorry.

reply

Not sure if you were aware or not, but they were close to making this a mini-series afterwards.

reply

Hi there,

I have watched the scene again, and I have to say that Susan does indeed seem to be 'In the family way' (read: pregnant.) That is simply my take on it. Obviously it is consistent with the fact that the characters of Ben and Susan had made love, but inconsistent with the fact that there was a two year gap between the two events.

This does raise a plot hole (its pointed out in the 'goofs' section), if Susan was kidnapped by Straker and Ben staked and killed Barlow in the same evening, then there was no time for Susan to get 'vamped' by Barlow.

Having said that, technically she could have got out and away, only to be 'vamped' by a (surviving) vampire not destroyed in the Marsten House fire.

Obviously it's all open to interpretation.

Susan's story arc (in the book) getting vamped and then staked by a grieving and regretful Ben is handled much earlier in the text of the novel, but left to the end of the movie for dramatic effect.

'Be her lover... better yet be her husband' the character of Matt Burke instructs Ben in the novel before he takes decisive - and deadly - action against the now 'vamped' Susan.

In all fairness there is never any mention of Susan getting / being pregnant in the novel. However 'Stones78' you raised a good point: at the time of the release of the miniseries, there were thoughts given to a follow-on TV show, and a pregnant Susan / Vampire baby who could eventually become the new 'Master' would make for an interesting 'campaign hook' for an ongoing story / TV series.

Interesting stuff.

I, for one, dearly wish that Stephen King had written a follow-up to the novel of Salem's Lot, but I am aware - although I have not read the Dark Tower series - that the character of Fr. Donald Callahan appears as a character in the later books, which Stephen King himself says renders the thoughts of a sequel to SL a moot point.

As I said it's interesting stuff, everyone is welcome to post with any thoughts you might have.

reply

I, for one, dearly wish that Stephen King had written a follow-up to the novel of Salem's Lot, but I am aware - although I have not read the Dark Tower series - that the character of Fr. Donald Callahan appears as a character in the later books, which Stephen King himself says renders the thoughts of a sequel to SL a moot point.
Actually, there is a sequel to SL. It is in a Stephen King anthology, and is a short story called One for the Road.

reply

Hi there,

Ok, that's a fair and good point, sir! In the collection of stories featured in Stephen King's book 'Night Shift' the first story is entitled 'Jerusalem's Lot' which acts as a 'prequel' or forerunner to the novel which is Lovecraftian and suggests why the Marsten House was constructed where it was and the suggestion of how an 'evil house can attract an evil man.' Suggested in the Salem's Lot novel.

The penultimate story in Night Shift called 'One for the Road' is indeed a sequel - albeit a short story - set a couple of years after he events of Salem's Lot about a motorist (and his family) stranded in a blizzard and the attempts of two men to save them only to narrowly escape being attacked by the man's wife and daughter both of whom have been turned into vampires.

Both stories were later collected in the 2005 'Salem's Lot Illustrated Edition.

That's a good call, and an oversight on my part, as a King fan such as myself should be well equipped with the facts. To rephrase what I said earlier: 'I dearly wish there had been a novel length sequel to Salem's Lot.'

Cheers for that, it's good to know that I am to be kept on my toes on the IMDb board here!


reply

Both Gary and Stones are considered to have pretty sound judgement when it comes to this movie. I'd like to consider myself in that group as well, and I'll say there is no indication from the scene, King's words(Book and subsequent comments), or Hooper to suggest that Susan is pregnant.

It's an interesting idea that comes from watching a lot of Hollywood movies since they typically like to end movies with endings this way but there is no reason to think that Susan was pregnant. Unless you think the incubation period lasted for two years which you obviously don't.

reply

O.k., obviously from the response on the thread here, it would seem that I am certainly in the minority here with the theory of Susan being pregnant.

In all fairness it is a half-baked theory anyway. It is consistent with the fact that the characters of Ben and Susan had previously made love but inconsistent with the chronology of the movie which put the two events TWO YEARS apart.

Fine and good.

I have no way of putting a screen-cap on here. To my way of thinking Susan does indeed look to be pregnant and, admittedly, it is an idea which only half makes sense.

For anyone who is interested the scene in question is between 2.58:30 – 2.59:08 in the movie as Susan speaks the lines: 'I’ve found you… I love you, you were so difficult to find… but we are together now.’

Which is obviously before Ben takes some decisive action of his own just before the movie ends. Anyone is free to watch it (as we probably all have, several times by now) and draw their own conclusion.

Again in all fairness, the idea of Susan being pregnant is not alluded to in any dialogue, i.e. Ben doesn't interrupt her speech to say something like: 'Yes, my dear and I see that you are carrying our unborn child!' or anything like that, I'm just saying that that is how the scene appears to me within the time-slots listed above.

Furthermore, nowhere in the novel is there reference to Susan either getting or being pregnant, her story arc is dealt with much earlier in the book.

Anyway, that's the theory (such as it is) By all means please post with your own two cents and see if we can get a debate started.

Cheers for now.

reply

O.k., obviously from the response on the thread here, it would seem that I am certainly in the minority here with the theory of Susan being pregnant.

In all fairness it is a half-baked theory anyway. It is consistent with the fact that the characters of Ben and Susan had previously made love but inconsistent with the chronology of the movie which put the two events TWO YEARS apart.

Fine and good.

I have no way of putting a screen-cap on here. To my way of thinking Susan does indeed look to be pregnant and, admittedly, it is an idea which only half makes sense.

For anyone who is interested the scene in question is between 2.58:30 – 2.59:08 in the movie as Susan speaks the lines: 'I’ve found you… I love you, you were so difficult to find… but we are together now.’

Which is obviously before Ben takes some decisive action of his own just before the movie ends. Anyone is free to watch it (as we probably all have, several times by now) and draw their own conclusion.

Again in all fairness, the idea of Susan being pregnant is not alluded to in any dialogue, i.e. Ben doesn't interrupt her speech to say something like: 'Yes, my dear and I see that you are carrying our unborn child!' or anything like that, I'm just saying that that is how the scene appears to me within the time-slots listed above.

Furthermore, nowhere in the novel is there reference to Susan either getting or being pregnant, her story arc is dealt with much earlier in the book.

Anyway, that's the theory (such as it is) By all means please post with your own two cents and see if we can get a debate started.

Cheers for now.
It is an intriguing theory, my fine friend, and, as you concede, there are valid arguments against it.

One is, as you point out, no mention of it in the dialogue.

Also, in the book, I recall that Susan is destroyed before she can affect anyone else. The counter to this point is, of course that we are not discussing the book, but the mini-series, which is its' own story.

The third point is that the relevant folklore makes no mention (of which I'm aware) of a female vampire who was pregnant at the time of her death (or un-death) delivering.

Now, these points don't absolutely preclude a pregnant Susan such as you envision, as they are based on what is called the argument from silence, which is very often (but not necessarily always) a logical fallacy. But they do argue against it.

reply

I took two screenshots.

http://imgur.com/a/nDjsR

She doesn't look pregnant in any of them. She looks hot 😓.. but not pregnant.

reply

Hi there,

A big thank you to 'DBLurker' for taking the screencaps which I could not get!

O.k., now without getting into an extended conversation about whether or not Susan is 'Hot' - but I'm a red-blooded male, and she does look look lovely - Everyone on here is free to take a glance at the shots and make up their mind for themselves.

I'll be the first to admit that the theory is half-baked at best (for reasons that have already been outlined on the thread) but I invite everyone here to drop in their two cents (positive or negative) and see how the debate rolls.

Cheers for that, and thanks again to DBLurker for putting up the photos.

reply

There's no debate here elmadman. You are attempting to stir up a useless discussion among a group of people who have dissected every scene, line, and production detail of this movie since it was released in 1979.

I appreciate your desire to engage and discuss, but it is a waste of time trying to tell us that something in this movie exists when it is obvious to everyone, including you, that it doesn't.

reply

Hi there 'allenm-01050',

Now don't hold anything back - tell me how you really feel!

That was fantastically well said!

In fact I'm still enjoying a good giggle even as I'm typing this.

Like I say it's a half-baked theory anyway and inconsistent with the movie's two-year chronology.

But... on a slightly different note I would just like to say it was absolutely worth starting the thread for your last post there! It is pure comedy gold!

Were you on the debate team in school?

I want to genuinely thank you so much for your response above, it has caused me such a good laugh that I have had to wipe tears from my eyes and given me a pain in the side, in the time it has taken to type this.

By all means let's debate, I am so glad that you are in the world, you are both priceless and hilarious and my hat is off to you for such a marvelous post!

Cheers and respect.

reply

😊

reply

I took two screenshots.

http://imgur.com/a/nDjsR

She doesn't look pregnant in any of them. She looks hot 😓.. but not pregnant.
Agreed. She is turned partly onto her side and what we are seeing in those vidcaps is the side of her hip.

reply

Susan looks very hot & sexy but NOT pregnant! Her being pregnant doesn't jive with the book either although I suspect Barlow had his way with her (yummy).

reply

I think you mistook her hip for her belly.

reply

[deleted]

Hi All,

OK, obviously having reviewed the posts on the thread here, there does not seem to be a lot of time or in fact love for my idea that a vampirized Susan is pregnant at the end of the movie, before being staked by a grieving and regretful Ben.

The general consensus of opinion is that I have mistaken the curve of Susan's hip and interpreted it as her 'being with child'.

Well and good.

However 'Stones78' raised a good point: at the time of the release of the miniseries, there were thoughts given to a follow-on TV show, and a pregnant Susan / Vampire baby who could eventually become the new 'Master' would make for an interesting 'campaign hook' for an ongoing story / TV series.

That's all well and good and the viewer is left to speculate if their new offspring would eventually give rise to a new 'Master' in vampire terms, it is open to interpretation.

Again, to be fair, the idea of Susan being pregnant is not alluded to in any dialogue, i.e. Ben doesn't interrupt her speech to say something like: 'Yes, my dear and I see that you are carrying our unborn child!' or anything like that,

Furthermore, nowhere in the novel is there reference to Susan either getting or being pregnant, her story arc is dealt with much earlier in the book.

However I am still glad that I started the thread (out of left-field and half baked as it was) and I want to give a special mention to 'allenm-01050' for a post that was hilarious on here and pure comedy gold indeed. It really brightened my day, and I hope a lot more people read it!

That's it for now, suffice to say that I would dearly love to see - as I am sure others would - a novel length prequel or sequel to Salem's Lot.

Both the novel and the 1979 production are held in high esteem, by both myself and other frequent posters on the IMDb board here.

Thanks for reading.

Cheers for now.





reply

It was an interesting thread, wasn't it? 

reply

It's just as well that Ben Mears didn't bring up the subject of Susan being pregnant. Women are very uncomfortable when someone (a man, usually) asks "when are you expecting?" when the woman isn't pregnant. 😳

reply

It's just as well that Ben Mears didn't bring up the subject of Susan being pregnant. Women are very uncomfortable when someone (a man, usually) asks "when are you expecting?" when the woman isn't pregnant.
Good point. I suspect they hate it when another female does it as well.

reply

I know of a two female friends in my home town who haven't spoken in years because her ex-friend asked her if she was pregnant after she had gained some weight.

reply

Memo to women: don't ask men how you look in a dress if you don't REALLY want the truth. Many girls have basically let themselves go these days, and have gotten chubby and lazy.

reply

Can't live with them, can't live without them.

reply

maybe a bit of prequel will be mentioned in the 2022 remake? Let's hope for a teaser trailer sooner than later.

reply

That is a 'female hip' - turned toward the camera, she is lying on her back with her lower body sideways on the cot. Sinking a little the hip looks much higher than it normally would I guess.

Absolutely great makeup in the eyes I must admit - never since has any vampire movie been as equally unique imo.

Anyhow, yep female hips - ya gotta love 'em ;)

reply

We have to be fair here. If its a plot hole because of the time required it takes a vampire baby to gestate, then it also has to be a plot hole about the existence of vampires. Barlows character is a plot hole

reply

Pregnant LOL. I and countless others are hardcore fans of this story and have been discussing it for years and years and years and years and this is the very first time anybody has ever mentioned Susan being pregnant. Just thought I'd share that. 😂😂😂😂

reply

When I first saw this film I was very young and I asked my mom why she was pregnant. My mom responded "She's not. That's her hip". Mom was right, and yes, Susan is ridiculously hot at the end of this film. I wish they would have made a proper sequel to this film as I think that it's one of the best horror films ever made.

reply