Why Stephen King Adaptation The Mist Makes Guys Cry

Why Stephen King Adaptation The Mist Makes Guys Cry

You may think horror movies can't be tearjerkers, but The Mist proves otherwise.

Read Full Article

You mean cry from laughter, right? Cuz this movie is bad and that ending is the most hilarious scene I have ever before seen in my life.

Ronack:
You mean cry from laughter, right? Cuz this movie is bad and that ending is the most hilarious scene I have ever before seen in my life.

I really liked this movie and at the end the people I was watching it with just sat in stunned silence. Not many films get that reaction.

Do you have kids? I thought the end was heart rending.

bjj hero:

Ronack:
You mean cry from laughter, right? Cuz this movie is bad and that ending is the most hilarious scene I have ever before seen in my life.

I really liked this movie and at the end the people I was watching it with just sat in stunned silence. Not many films get that reaction.

Do you have kids? I thought the end was heart rending.

I don't have kids and it was still awful to see. I don't know if horror is the right genre for it, but "creepy existential dread" doesn't have a category on Netflix, so...

Not a bad movie. Horrendously stupid ending. "Dad, don't let the monsters eat me." "Okay, I'll shoot you instead." Bad comedy. Look on Youtube for an alternative ending.

Most of Stephen King's books tend to destroy Archetypes

Think about it.

Dark Tower Series. Roland is the "Hero" yet, he fails to protect pretty much everyone and is doomed to repeat the entire story over and over again.

The Mist. Dad is supposed to be the Hero Type, and basically at the end has destroyed his entire life by following the Hero path. Tries to save family, Boom, they all die. Tries to protect his son, boom shoots him in the head to protect him from the monsters, which is noble, but flawed. He follows the Hero path until the bitter end, preparing to face death that would be horrible, until the military shows up and cleans up their mess.

Stephen King writes books that rip at your heartstrings, giving you hope, and then laughing at you while you pick up the pieces.

That being said...

I like some of his stuff

This is one of the few movies that hit me right in the feels. Game over man, GAME OVER!

bjj hero:

Ronack:
You mean cry from laughter, right? Cuz this movie is bad and that ending is the most hilarious scene I have ever before seen in my life.

I really liked this movie and at the end the people I was watching it with just sat in stunned silence. Not many films get that reaction.

Do you have kids? I thought the end was heart rending.

That was pretty much the reaction the couple times I've seen this movie, with each different group. Just... sat around quietly for a few minutes, even after the painfully emotional ending credits music was over.

Thunderous Cacophony:

I don't have kids and it was still awful to see. I don't know if horror is the right genre for it, but "creepy existential dread" doesn't have a category on Netflix, so...

It probably does, but it's impossible to find due to their random category display, and if found it probably contains this, Event Horizon, and Carebears (my mistake, Carebears is in Sci-Fi & Fantasy between Terminator and The Crow, seriously)

I love the novella, and I was really looking forward to the movie. And nine-tenths of the movie is good and faithful. But that ending?

That ending...

It was too much. It turned a harrowing story of survival and the darkness of the human heart into a "screw you, the universe sucks" moment. It was too much. It was not the ending in the novella, and I honestly don't care that even Stephen King thought it was balsy. It was too much, and it made the movie unpleasant to rewatch. I bought the movie after seeing it in the theaters, and I just can't watch it again. I WANT to like this film, but that damn damn ending is TOO MUCH.

It's one thing to have things end badly in horror. It's another thing to end it in a way that makes you want to slit your wrists at the utter unfairness of it all. That was this ending, and it ruined the movie.

Sgt. Sykes:
Not a bad movie. Horrendously stupid ending. "Dad, don't let the monsters eat me." "Okay, I'll shoot you instead." Bad comedy. Look on Youtube for an alternative ending.

The worst part is that the military shows up 2 seconds later. It's filmed in a way so it almost seems like they walked around for an hour or two until deciding that suicide is a better solution, only to be rescued minutes later. I really hated that ending, just didn't work for me, almost expected a "Wah wah waaah" sound.

As a reader of the short story, I was very impressed with how true they kept to the original story until........the end. It was so far removed the original that it was almost laughable. My personal feeling is that the original stories ending which involved the father writing the story in a diary and leaving it in the motel they were in, would have had much more impact as you never find out what happens (and i normally hate those endings but it felt right for the mist).

Kyr Knightbane:
Most of Stephen King's books tend to destroy Archetypes

Think about it.

Dark Tower Series. Roland is the "Hero" yet, he fails to protect pretty much everyone and is doomed to repeat the entire story over and over again.

The Mist. Dad is supposed to be the Hero Type, and basically at the end has destroyed his entire life by following the Hero path. Tries to save family, Boom, they all die. Tries to protect his son, boom shoots him in the head to protect him from the monsters, which is noble, but flawed. He follows the Hero path until the bitter end, preparing to face death that would be horrible, until the military shows up and cleans up their mess.

Stephen King writes books that rip at your heartstrings, giving you hope, and then laughing at you while you pick up the pieces.

That being said...

I like some of his stuff

The ending wasn't Stephen King though. The ending in the book was a fair bit less dark, they changed it for the movie. That being said, Stephen King loved the new ending, and wished he'd wrote it for the book.

It doesn't surprise me that the opinions on the ending are so polarized. I thought it was great, but they went all in with it so it could very easily swing the other way for somebody else.

The Almighty Aardvark:

Kyr Knightbane:
Most of Stephen King's books tend to destroy Archetypes

Think about it.

Dark Tower Series. Roland is the "Hero" yet, he fails to protect pretty much everyone and is doomed to repeat the entire story over and over again.

The Mist. Dad is supposed to be the Hero Type, and basically at the end has destroyed his entire life by following the Hero path. Tries to save family, Boom, they all die. Tries to protect his son, boom shoots him in the head to protect him from the monsters, which is noble, but flawed. He follows the Hero path until the bitter end, preparing to face death that would be horrible, until the military shows up and cleans up their mess.

Stephen King writes books that rip at your heartstrings, giving you hope, and then laughing at you while you pick up the pieces.

That being said...

I like some of his stuff

The ending wasn't Stephen King though. The ending in the book was a fair bit less dark, they changed it for the movie. That being said, Stephen King loved the new ending, and wished he'd wrote it for the book.

It doesn't surprise me that the opinions on the ending are so polarized. I thought it was great, but they went all in with it so it could very easily swing the other way for somebody else.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the book and the movie, and the movie ending seemed to go more inline with what the book was heading towards.

I was just notating that Stephen King tends to like toying with Hero Archetypes

The ending to the original novella ends on a fairly bleak tone as they continue to travel, unsure of whether or not the Mist has spread across the world, it also mentions receiving a radio signal from a neighboring town (if memory serves.)

The changed ending for the movie adaptation work better for film, not because the ending to the original story was bad but because in a movie it would feel like cheap sequel baiting.

Yeah, the changes made to the ending are harsh, and it's a kick in the gut for most of the folks I've known who have watched it, but I like the finality of it. I like a horror movie that's not afraid to let the heroes lose.

Enjoyed the movie. Hated the ending. Wasn't even a father at the time, but knew I'd never shoot my son over keep trying to save him. As a father now, the ending only seems that much more stupid.

The Mist doesnt make guys cry... It rapes them emotionally.

I cried at the time I will never get back in my life. Poorly written, preposterously over-acted toss, and a ridiculous ending that renders the entire film pointless.

I know suspension of disbelief is a big thing, especially in horror, but just like the dumbass ending of Cloverfield, how am I supposed to believe an entire battalion of tanks moving through the mist wouldn't make a single sound to be overheard by Thomas Jane or his band of miserable men?

The Mist is one of the few films I've seen that made me genuinely angry for wasting my time. (See also: the aforementioned Cloverfield, Paranormal Activity.)

Wow, pretty mixed reaction to the ending. I guess fatalism isn't something a lot of people subscribe to.

It made perfect sense to me. The world seemed to be ending, they were stranded in a nightmare with only a car to protect them from unnatural monsters, and they had no supplies. It's implied they've been driving for hours. Hundreds of miles and no end to it. Their prospects at that point were either slow starvation/dehydration, or they'd be found by some horrible creature that would be able to crack open their car. Judging by the variously painful ways those creatures killed people, I can't say which way to go is worse.

Yeah, the editing made it seem like they were a bit hasty with the whole killing themselves, but given the situation I can totally see myself doing the same. I always hate how some people are all "pah, those characters are idiots, if that were me I'd be a total badass and survive!" I doubt they've never had to deal with an actual crisis and feel actual despair and helplessness.

The only reason I was able to accept the ending was that it seemed the whole movie had a theme of misanthropy and thus the ending seemed appropriate. I didn't see the protagonists decision to shoot everyone as a hard but justified act, I saw it as a tragic mistake being made by a flawed character who was loosing it. Ultimately, despite all the horrors outside, it was a man, the protagonist no less, that did them in.

The ending may seem cruel and unfair, but it wouldn't have been if he had held out longer and not given up all hope.

All this being said, it was a ridiculously dark ending, and I can't say anyone's wrong for disliking it.

The end angered me for multiple reasons.

First off, I'm an atheist, and the whole theme of the movie up to the end seemed to be a of a reasonable man attempt to maintain composure in a situation devoid of all reason. An ending where a hysterical woman ran off into the mist alone at the height of an outbreak, when organized groups failed, and came out alive enraged me.

Second of all, even if I understand the feeling the director was going for for the ending. It could have been done way better. Seriously, protagonist couldn't hear a motorcade and flamethrowers burning shit a few yards away before murdering his friends and family?

Gennadios:
First off, I'm an atheist, and the whole theme of the movie up to the end seemed to be a of a reasonable man attempt to maintain composure in a situation devoid of all reason. An ending where a hysterical woman ran off into the mist alone at the height of an outbreak, when organized groups failed, and came out alive enraged me.

I'm an atheist too, and I don't see what that has to do with anything. It was a messed up situation, and reason and composure doesn't always get you through messed up situations. Sometimes what seems like a bad idea works out, and what seems like a good idea ends up failing. It's not the typical Hollywood ending where everything just works out for the protagonist, and that's refreshing.

I'll agree with your other point, but again, that was a problem with editing, not writing or directing.

JMac85:

Gennadios:
First off, I'm an atheist, and the whole theme of the movie up to the end seemed to be a of a reasonable man attempt to maintain composure in a situation devoid of all reason. An ending where a hysterical woman ran off into the mist alone at the height of an outbreak, when organized groups failed, and came out alive enraged me.

I'm an atheist too, and I don't see what that has to do with anything. It was a messed up situation, and reason and composure doesn't always get you through messed up situations. Sometimes what seems like a bad idea works out, and what seems like a good idea ends up failing. It's not the typical Hollywood ending where everything just works out for the protagonist, and that's refreshing.

I'll agree with your other point, but again, that was a problem with editing, not writing or directing.

It *was* a typical Hollywood ending. Seems like at least twice a year some ateur decides to release a movie that would have been much improved if the last 5 minutes of it were cut out.

The movie spent it's entire running time establishing that nobody is safe. Homes were filled with mummified corpses, unidentifiable creatures were stalking the shadows, how did that one woman manage to make it through the fog at the height of disorder and confusion??

The editing was bad, but the original Stephen King story ends at the point where the group initially drives into the fog. The movie would have been better if it ended just 3 minutes before it did instead of trying to go for the gut punch.

Gennadios:
*snip*

It'd be the typical Hollywood ending if that woman was the protagonist, sure. But we don't know what set of circumstances lead to her rescue. For all we know when she ran off she could have happened on some Army guys in a Humvee right away. A bit anti-climatic, if shown.

Basically, The Mist is: Shit happens, the end! It's cynical, it's depressing, and it's senseless. That's why I feel it works so well. We're experiencing a horror movie through the POV of one of the poor bastards who doesn't make it. Imagine if there were a version of Pan's Labyrinth where those two farmers were the main characters. It's fascist Spain, you're poor, you're out hunting rabbits with your son. Some point earlier a young man handed you a pamphlet of communist literature. You're illiterate, but you accept it to be polite and nonchalantly stuff it into your bag. You and your son then get picks up by some high ranking twat of Franco's douchebag patrol and everything goes to hell. He smashes your son's face in with a bottle and shoots you in the head. The End.

I liked the film, I liked the ending. Wasn't aware there was a b/w version, so I'll have to see if I can find that.

MrBaskerville:

Sgt. Sykes:
Not a bad movie. Horrendously stupid ending. "Dad, don't let the monsters eat me." "Okay, I'll shoot you instead." Bad comedy. Look on Youtube for an alternative ending.

The worst part is that the military shows up 2 seconds later. It's filmed in a way so it almost seems like they walked around for an hour or two until deciding that suicide is a better solution, only to be rescued minutes later. I really hated that ending, just didn't work for me, almost expected a "Wah wah waaah" sound.

Also considering the military was like 2 minutes away from them at the time, how come Tomas Jane didn't drive past them when the car was still running? I mean, the military comes up from behind the car, right? What were they like hiding all those armored vehicles in the bushes, and then suddenly jumped out once they rode by?

Yeah, it's a dumb ending, but then a lot about the movie is dumb. People seemed to get emotional and crazy at random just to add tension. Like that one mechanic guy, who suddenly turns homicidal zealot just because he sees a big demonic spider, eventhough he saw big demonic flies and birds not too long ago and it didn't phase him at all.

And then there's the utterly ridiculous scene where they see a giant tentacle rip a clerk apart, the first reveal that monsters hide in the mist... and the very next thing that's spoken is 'Hey man, sorry I didn't believe you, but you should've just explained better'. O_o

The movie doesn't make me cry; more stare wide eyed in something akin to horror for the duration.

I loved the ending (especially the rendition of Host of Seraphim as they were driving through the Mist.

I will acknowledge that they jumped to 'blast our brains out' a little *too* quickly. Maybe if they could establish that some particularly horrific death was barreling down at them; that the 'easy way out' was clearly the better option would have made it more effective (I mean the military does show up literally seconds later, maybe all the noise and stuff from that would sell that impression).

I love this movie, and I love the ending. Didn't cry at it, but I think it's a conclusion with real punch.

I haven't seen the movie, but I have read just about all of Lovecraft, and the allusions in the article definitely strike the right chord with me. The "existential dread" is a universal constant in Lovecraft's world and it is only our ignorance of the universe that allows us a normal life.

He writes "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age"

If the synopsis is accurate, it begins in the ignorance of normal life, has the characters confront a new terrifying reality, and either go mad or devolve to primitive instincts.

What makes Lovecraft's take on existential dread so chilling is that his universe is one that is entirely uncaring towards us, who sees us as motes of nothing in a dark and dangerous world.

That's why (it seems) like that ending has such a gut punch. All that effort and terror for no reason. The universe goes on, uncaring in the face of personal tragedy and that's the real horror: our meaning and importance and all the associated actions are not recognized by the universe and the horrors will keep happening no matter how many well wishes, good feelings and senses of poetic justice we throw at it.

Meh it was ok, it was good at building atmosphere and tension, and it almost made it the whole way way without loosing that claustrophobic 'oh no where's the monster...is it going to attack?!...we are so boned' feel but then once they get out of the store it just turned into half life 2. (think strides and bullsquid)

IMO the ending was the worst part, which by the way I totally called. Just after he shoots everyone in the car and is sat there looking all angsty and guilt ridden I remember saying to my friend who i was watching it with 'I bet someone comes and knocks on the window and asks him if he's ok in a minut or something, and it'll turn out that he shot everyone for no reason' when the army showed up I laughed so hard that the other people in the cinema gave me funny looks.

The Almighty Aardvark:

Kyr Knightbane:
Most of Stephen King's books tend to destroy Archetypes

Think about it.

Dark Tower Series. Roland is the "Hero" yet, he fails to protect pretty much everyone and is doomed to repeat the entire story over and over again.

The Mist. Dad is supposed to be the Hero Type, and basically at the end has destroyed his entire life by following the Hero path. Tries to save family, Boom, they all die. Tries to protect his son, boom shoots him in the head to protect him from the monsters, which is noble, but flawed. He follows the Hero path until the bitter end, preparing to face death that would be horrible, until the military shows up and cleans up their mess.

Stephen King writes books that rip at your heartstrings, giving you hope, and then laughing at you while you pick up the pieces.

That being said...

I like some of his stuff

The ending wasn't Stephen King though. The ending in the book was a fair bit less dark, they changed it for the movie. That being said, Stephen King loved the new ending, and wished he'd wrote it for the book.

It doesn't surprise me that the opinions on the ending are so polarized. I thought it was great, but they went all in with it so it could very easily swing the other way for somebody else.

From IMDB Trivia:

Frank Darabont's "controversial" ending actually comes directly from Stephen King's source material. Written in first-person, David entertains this notion in his mind as a distant possibility, noting there are three bullets and four people (Dan Miller doesn't make it to the car in the novella), but he ends his journal and leaves it in a restaurant the survivors have sought refuge in before the car runs out of gas. Darabont felt this ending was too ambiguous and wrote the story to its finite climax, and ending that Darabont says in the DVD commentary was endorsed by King as the ending King wished he would have thought of.

So although not directly King, it was definitely something he alluded to in the book. And it does fit with the usual levels of sick humour found elsewhere in the multiverse!

It definitely left me stunned. I like how Steven King writes. He comes up with an absurd, yet well written scenario, but then focuses on the people involved. Their interactions, the best and worst of their personalities and their inherant flaws. Addicting stuff!

This is one of my favorite movies of all time, and that jaw-dropping ending is part of the reason why. I've never felt more satisfied to have a movie kick my ass.

"He doesn't want to live, neigh, he CAN'T live with what he's just done."

So he became a horse?

Probably meant, 'nay'.

Also, watching that trailer - not only made by Frank D, but did I just see Andrea from the Walking Dead? (*checks imdb*) Yep! ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0390229/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t13 )

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here