-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
ROTTENWATCH: The Mist
- Thread starter Stoney Mason
- Start date
- Status
Ford Prefect
GAAAAAAAAY
Saw this today, holy shit at cold as ice ending. And that wasn't even the depressing part of the film (the religious nutsos were so believable, it's sad)...
Overall, an great little horror film, though I've never wanted to yell at the screen so much in my life (Shut the garage door! Turn off the fucking lights!! HOLY SHIT JUST PUT THE KEYS IN THE IGNITION AND DRIVE AWAY GOOD LORD).
Oh, and wow at the colossus monster
Overall, an great little horror film, though I've never wanted to yell at the screen so much in my life (Shut the garage door! Turn off the fucking lights!! HOLY SHIT JUST PUT THE KEYS IN THE IGNITION AND DRIVE AWAY GOOD LORD).
Oh, and wow at the colossus monster
Rabid Wolverine
Member
The movie was pretty damn good. The ending was a shock,
Learning this was made on such a low budget ive got nothing but respect for this movie and its director. Loved the Descent too. (edit... he never directed the descent, the two directors look alike :lol )
? What happened to
Was he on one of the trucks?
and wish they explained how they are defeating the Mist.
Learning this was made on such a low budget ive got nothing but respect for this movie and its director. Loved the Descent too. (edit... he never directed the descent, the two directors look alike :lol )
? What happened to
Brent Norton
beelzebozo
Jealous Bastard
Ford Prefect said:Oh, and wow at the colossus monster
what a tease this was. what i wouldn't give to see a whole movie set in the fucked up world where things like this just roam around.
Rabid Wolverine said:
He was in that initial group that walked out of the store early on in the story, the ones who had the rope tied around them.
BTW, the book ending was better especially with it being in my mind for 20+ years. I did not like this ending, although I can probably understand why they probably changed it to suit the movie going audiences hatred of open endedness. :::rollseyes:::
Rabid Wolverine
Member
womp said:
Yeah the biker dude got halved but they didnt show what happened to the rest of them. Do we just assume that he never made it?
Stoney Mason
Banned
I also finally saw this movie awhile back but forgot to bump the thread. Quite good. Darabont did a good job by playing it real and with sparse use of music up until the end. There were some flaws but the flaws were inherent in the book so I can't really blame him for those. Unlike the Shawshank Redemption I think this one is an improvement on the book. And the ending rocked.
Stoney Mason said:
I found the ending to be a bit of a cop out myself. It became a "happy" ending in comparison to the book's feeling of dread.
That woman who ran home to save her kids survived but everyone else who walks a few feet outside gets mauled, stung or cut in pieces? Why because she wasn't a coward for not wanting to die? Too forced IMO and I honestly rolled my eyes when she showed up on the army truck at the end. The idea doesn't pan out I don't think because Drayton later finds his wife a victim of the spiders (Something added to the movie) anyway so he wouldn't have probably been able to save her just like the woman did for her kids.
Rabid Wolverine
Member
womp said:
Damn.
Really wanted to know what happened to him.
Stoney Mason
Banned
womp said:
It depends on who your emotions are tied into. I didn't feel it was happy at all. It felt like a kick in the gut. Which was nice
Book ending:
In a nutshell: The ending in the book had them basically riding off into the neverending mist heading out of state and looking for "hope" that someone is out there alive without the reader knowing if the characters survive. Drayton is left logging in a notebook at a hotel of their ordeal and I remember them finding something on the radio that makes them think there is a possibility someone is out there to find. The movie ending pretty much kicks into gear after the giant 6 legged creature walks over the car.
Rabid Wolverine said:
The thing is though that it's a short story novella in IMO one of his best books Skeleton Crew which is a compilation of short stories, it isn't a typical Stephen King 500+ phone book novel so I don't think you were going to get too many lengthy explanations anyway.
Granted it IS one long ass 'short' story but the way it reads is you pretty much know what the main character Drayton knows.
Hell, even the movie did more to explain the actual mist origin itself than the book did. It's then you realize how many other pieces of entertainment media took inspiration from the original story as well, especially since it was written in the 70's.
Half-Life lovers will love this movie I would think.
Stoney Mason
Banned
womp said:The thing is though that it's a short story novella in IMO one of his best books Skeleton Crew which is a compilation of short stories, it isn't a typical Stephen King 500+ phone book novel so I don't think you were going to get too many lengthy explanations anyway.
Granted it IS one long ass 'short' story but the way it reads is you pretty much know what the main character Drayton knows.
Hell, even the movie did more to explain the actual mist origin itself than the book did. It's then you realize how many other pieces of entertainment media took inspiration from the original story as well, especially since it was written in the 70's.
Half-Life lovers will love this movie I would think.
Agreed. It's really just supposed to give you a glimpse into that world and why or what is the mist is sort of beyond the point in the terms of the book, although it's natural to be curious about it.
Stoney Mason said:It depends on who your emotions are tied into. I didn't feel it was happy at all. It felt like a kick in the gut. Which was nice
I quoted happy for a reason and it wasn't anything to do with the characters per say. It was "happy" in that
the military came in and basically saved the day and showed that the mist wasn't invincible and the world had a chance to be saved from it's menace. Everything was finished with a "Ahhh...We're safe!" feeling rather than the dread downbeat ending found in the original written story.
It just urked me. I guess if I hadn't been a fan of the book for SO damn long or if it was solely an original film it wouldn't had bothered me as much.
Stoney Mason said:
It drives you crazy because while I'd love to know the exact specifics of how it all came to be, the kind of "Well I think it was this but I'm not positive" explanation just makes you think even more and leaves more to the imagination. Which IMO is much better that way anyhow.
Stoney Mason
Banned
womp said:I quoted happy for a reason and it wasn't anything to do with the characters per say. It was "happy" in thatthe military came in and basically saved the day and showed that the mist wasn't invincible and the world had a chance to be saved from it's menace. Everything was finished with a "Ahhh...We're safe!" feeling rather than the dread downbeat ending found in the original written story.
It just urked me. I guess if I hadn't been a fan of the book for SO damn long or if it was solely an original film it wouldn't had bothered me as much.
I would feel it was a cop out if the story had an international scope with scenes from all across the world or the united states. Instead it's a very personal story with a purposeful limited scope. And the fact that the problem may be solved doesn't eliminate the horrible damage and personal havok it has created in these people's lives, especially the lead character and the crew who worked to escape. I like open ended endings also, but I don't mind a good twist also and this was one where I was genuinelly surprised. I definitely thought they were going to cut to black before he gets killed (which I would have been fine with also) and I loved the women in the truck with her kids. It was such an inspired ironic touch. I can see someone not agreeing of course but I just thought it was very clever. Something I could have actually seen King doing himself instead of something some hack just came up with.
Stoney Mason
Banned
womp said:It drives you crazy because while I'd love to know the exact specifics of how it all came to be, the kind of "Well I think it was this but I'm not positive" explanation just makes you think even more and leaves more to the imagination. Which IMO is much better that way anyhow.
I agree. And King always sides on the emotion and experience side versus the technical mechanics of how something came to be. Cell being another example (although one that is less successful as a book) Most horror generally does ala zombies and Romero.
Uncooked said:
But that isn't the point in the book and not even something eluded to as far as I can recall and going into the movie with that midset it is obvious now how I could have missed that. I mean this was obviously more of a director's touch more than anything. Of course I now realize these things after the fact but well, I found it a bit corny to say the least. But hey King liked it...Whom am I to argue. It isn't the worst ending in the universe and as I said I can totally understand WHY it was changed for the film however I still prefer the unknowing dread of the original written story.
While the movie is so damned close to the book that even the scenes are played out EXACTLY how I imagined visually, going into it having already read it dozens of times in the past and already having interpretations based on THAT makes going into the film now tends to make you obviously miss some of the director's personal interpretations.
If that makes sense? I hope I worded that OK.
Chiggs
Member
womp said:If that makes sense? I hope I worded that OK.
I think it does. I also agree with your criticism of the ending. It would have been far more effective had it just ended with him
killing everyone in the SUV and then going outside and screaming at the mist.
Chiggs said:
That is the part I REALLY didn't care for when I criticize. The other you spoiled I could handle even if it was horribly dark but at least it made sense in the context of the movie since
he DID promise his son he wouldn't let the monsters get him
And this is from someone who loves Twilight Zone type "twist" endings, when they pay off that is...
Ford Prefect
GAAAAAAAAY
I didn't like that either. Very flimsy and confused attempt at some kind of moral message.womp said:
Stoney Mason
Banned
Ford Prefect said:
As mentioned prior I didn't take away that message at all. If indeed such a message was even intended nor do I think even if it was, it's as amazingly inept as a couple of you do. Sometimes a story is just a story.
Stoney Mason said:
Which is why I watched it as I did...A story. That is exactly all the book version was. A fun little scary story.
It is also why I was all thrown off by the supposed possible moral implications I've been reading about and after the movie was over and thought about it a bit I guess could have been there.
I basically took it as a more hollywood approved "trick" ending though since once again the general moviegoing public can't stand those open ended what if scenarios. They DEMAND everything tied up and/or upbeat.
But then again...What we got was a bit heavy, even if it was a bit heavy handed.
In any case, The Mist was a good flick and I am glad to see it was finally made and by someone who respected the material.
Imagine if some hack such as Akiva Goldsman had gotten his hands on it?
Stoney Mason
Banned
womp said:Which is why I watched it as I did...A story. That is exactly all the book version was. A fun little scary story.
I think that's all the film version is also.
womp said:
I'm not trying to say your interpretation is invalid. More that I just had a different one. I didn't take it necessarily as a moral statement that the women who left survived although I understand that perhaps someone else could. I simply took it as fate and damn luck versus unluck. As is most of the story when you get right down to it. A really shitty unlucky thing happens that basically screws up all these people. To steal a line from The Unforgiven: "Deserve's Got Nothing To Do With It"
womp said:
There is no doubt Darabont wanted more closure which is why he switched up the ending. I just think it works. In the same way that the shining bares almost no resemblance to the book but that also works.
womp said:
That was one of the more depressing endings for a mainstream flick I've seen in a while so for that alone I like it. I just don't agree with the heavy handed part but opinions are variable. If the lady says, stop the truck. Then gets off and precedes to tell David this is what you deserve for not helping me, that is heavy handed. I personally thought the ending was subtle. I bet most viewers had forgot that lady was even in the movie and a few may not have even recognized her.
womp said:
Agreed. I knew he had done a good job when they were able to pull off the scene where the kid gets killed early in the movie because the two hicks want him to go outside. That could have very easily been a bad scene but they nailed it which sort of set the tone. The story is really over the top and unbelievable and I was scared it would be hard to ground that in some sort of realistic reality. They fail a couple of times at it, but like I said earlier, the book has the same flaws and generally he did better than I expected. I get where you are coming from about the changes although I personally liked them. I've always had a bug up my ass about The Shawshank Redemption because the changes he made in that make it more unrealistic to me and more Hollywoodish. So I get your point.
Stoney Mason
Banned
icarus-daedelus said:
I don't mean it as an insult. I know Darabont and probably King intended some messages about how people behave when society breaks down and are scared. Perhaps some religious overtones and 9/11 aftermath stuff also but I think the story (book and film) works best with less message orientation. Sometimes King gets a little off-track when he tries too hard with the message part.
Spotless Mind
Member
I saw this a couple weeks back and i loved it. That ending seriously left me in awe. I didn't think they'd have the guts to go that far. It even may have gone a bit too far, to the point of being unintentionally funny and forced - but meh, that's a nitpick to me, because the ending stayed with me a couple days and i found the rest of the film so twisted and satisfying.
Stoney Mason
Banned
icarus-daedelus said:
The book has all that stuff. The religious stuff. The talk about how people are when society breaks down. He updates a few references but I would expect him to in a post 9/11 world. Most people's first instinct in our modern world is that terrorists are up to something when something bad happens so to not add a few modern world references there would have seemed odd especially for a story that's like over 20 years old. As with womp I'm not saying there aren't messages to the film in certain aspects (or perceived messages in some instances). I'm saying it is not necessary to pick up on them or to find them especially interesting or deep to find it to be an effective horror film. I think the movie simply works as a good version of the Fog.
Spotless Mind
Member
Haha, i'm beginning to think that as well.icarus-daedelus said:
Of course you have that whole "the real monsters here are US" message apparent I guess once Carmody takes over that is more or less a typical insight of human nature's will to survive when all things seem lost, but at the same time I looked at it also as an instrument to move the story along. It was obvious to our heroes at that point they had a better chance of survival in the mist itself than by staying in the store surrounded by the loons who could easily kill you in your sleep for all they knew.
Ultimately I think that was probably King's tiny little morality play if any apparent here, when love thy neighbor fails, but overall this isn't exactly a deep movie or story and isn't required for enjoyment of the tale. Whether the movie itself had more meat to it overall...I don't know about that since the movie was pretty much point A to point B the original story outside minor changes (Drayton sleeping around) and of course the new ending.
I guess you could say the movie's meatier part WAS the new ending though...But I also don't know if it really necessarily made it more fulfilling story wise.
To each his own. Both are good either way and I think it comes down to preference in how the individual watching or reading interprets things, specifically the ending of course. Hence the core of this discussion in the first place.
Ultimately I think that was probably King's tiny little morality play if any apparent here, when love thy neighbor fails, but overall this isn't exactly a deep movie or story and isn't required for enjoyment of the tale. Whether the movie itself had more meat to it overall...I don't know about that since the movie was pretty much point A to point B the original story outside minor changes (Drayton sleeping around) and of course the new ending.
I guess you could say the movie's meatier part WAS the new ending though...But I also don't know if it really necessarily made it more fulfilling story wise.
To each his own. Both are good either way and I think it comes down to preference in how the individual watching or reading interprets things, specifically the ending of course. Hence the core of this discussion in the first place.
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
:lol :lol
WHO-MONGOUS OPENING FOR THIS WEEKENDS #1 MOVIE!!11
WickedAngel
Banned
I'd like to first say that I don't know how in the Hell I managed to miss this but I need to make a formal apology to all those responsible because that was easily the most incredible horror/sci-fi movie I've seen in years. I hear people constantly talk about atrocious, hackneyed abortions of budgets like Meet the Spartans but I've never heard a single person comment on this movie.
I'm afraid that I must agree with the idea that the ending was a bit off...as soon as the number of bullets came into play, I knew what was going to happen for the duration of the movie. I was hoping that they would continue on into the endless mist but I had a feeling that such a thing was simply way too open for a film like this.
I'm still speechless. I expected nothing of this movie and had, in fact, thought it was a remake of the remake of a similarly titled movie (The Fog, which was fucking awful). I can't wait to watch this on the projector with full surround sound.
Live in the Bible Belt for a few years; you'll believe in a completely different type of crazy than you ever imagined. The scary part is that I've actually heard similar things on real life (A fanatically Christian woman claiming to be a conduit to God). Fortunately, that level of insanity is relatively rare but it certainly exists.
What was said in the store about human nature was spot-on; when facing death, most people will do anything to stay alive. They'll believe any promise, no matter how irrational or how much it conflicts with their moral compass, if they are pushed long and hard enough.
I'm afraid that I must agree with the idea that the ending was a bit off...as soon as the number of bullets came into play, I knew what was going to happen for the duration of the movie. I was hoping that they would continue on into the endless mist but I had a feeling that such a thing was simply way too open for a film like this.
I'm still speechless. I expected nothing of this movie and had, in fact, thought it was a remake of the remake of a similarly titled movie (The Fog, which was fucking awful). I can't wait to watch this on the projector with full surround sound.
Gattsu25 said:
Live in the Bible Belt for a few years; you'll believe in a completely different type of crazy than you ever imagined. The scary part is that I've actually heard similar things on real life (A fanatically Christian woman claiming to be a conduit to God). Fortunately, that level of insanity is relatively rare but it certainly exists.
What was said in the store about human nature was spot-on; when facing death, most people will do anything to stay alive. They'll believe any promise, no matter how irrational or how much it conflicts with their moral compass, if they are pushed long and hard enough.
Steppenwolf
Member
Saw the movie yesterday. I thought it was pretty terrible and cheap. Not scary at all. Found it rather funny actualy. It was on the borderline to be so bad that it gets good again. However i liked the big walker creature and the end, even tho the religious message pissed me off.
beelzebozo
Jealous Bastard
i enjoyed the film--i said so already in the thread--but to look at an opinion like that and scold it that harshly is crazy. the film is far from beyond reproach, and i could easily see how someone could find it hokey and maybe even a little funny and stupid. the end is probably the most unfunny, unstupid thing about it.
Finally saw it. WOW. Fucking loved every frame of it. Throw this one up there alongside Jesse James and Zodiac as my favorites of 2007. There is just so much going on in this, be it on the superficial monster movie level, or be it on the more down-low (and infinetely more engaging) fragility-of-the-human-race level. Everything Darabont was serving I was eating up. Great, ballsy little movie, and something that will become a favorite of mine in years to come.
The only thing I didnt like was Thomas Jane's acting in the final scene. He rocked the whole movie up until that, but I dont know what the fuck he was going for in the final scene.
The only thing I didnt like was Thomas Jane's acting in the final scene. He rocked the whole movie up until that, but I dont know what the fuck he was going for in the final scene.
Count Dookkake
Member
Solo said:
I think he was trying to evoke
Vadernooooo!
beelzebozo said:
The Lost guys supposedly have the rights to the Dark Tower series which the movie poster that was being painted in the beginning
I'm late but I enjoyed the moive. Some of the leaps they made while in the store seemed forced and almost idiotic but the ending really justified the whole movie
Just finished it. I loved the novella, and I'm surprised how faithful it was to the source material. A lot of the duologue and scenes were yanked right out of the book.
The lead was very good, as were most of the supporting roles (Ollie in particular). I think the crazy lady was miscast - I could see her as the insane old lady in the book, but something about this one didn't gel. Not sure if it was her age, voice or mannerisms, but I didn't buy her as a scary character the way she was in the book. She went from bit part to preaching phycho too fast; in the book she slowly ramped up to become a threat. Here she starts preaching in her first real scene. And they let her go on far too long.
I liked the creature design a great deal. The details on them were appropriately creepy and mean. The CG, as everyone noted, was terrible (I saw it in color). I hadn't seen CG this bad in a good six years or so (the tentacles in particular). But I forgive that, as it was pretty well used. Monsters galore.
I agree with Stinkles' comment that the film felt rushed. Scenes seem to end a few moments too early, the early character work seemed perfunctory. I wish they spent a touch more time building up the arrival of the mist; the book built a lot of tension and dread by the time it sunk in. Here it feels like ten minutes and we're there. Overall it felt like it was in a bit too much of a hurry.
I also didn't like the film having to spell everything out; what was implied in the book was made explicit here. The cause of the mist, the role of the military, the fate of the wife, the fate of the main characters, the lady that left in the beginning. Leaving some stuff to the imagination is part of why the book is so haunting. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter why the mist showed up - it did, and they're pretty much fucked as a result. The book realized this, the movie doesn't.
And yeah, the ending was terrible. That kind of ending can work, but here I thought it was just badly done and didn't fit the movie well. Too much of a "shock" ending. I liked the book's ambiguous conclusion a great deal more. It was haunting. Here it was jarring and oddly comical.
Overall I enjoyed it - mostly good acting, great monsters. The pacing and CG were a bit off, and the ending was poor.
The lead was very good, as were most of the supporting roles (Ollie in particular). I think the crazy lady was miscast - I could see her as the insane old lady in the book, but something about this one didn't gel. Not sure if it was her age, voice or mannerisms, but I didn't buy her as a scary character the way she was in the book. She went from bit part to preaching phycho too fast; in the book she slowly ramped up to become a threat. Here she starts preaching in her first real scene. And they let her go on far too long.
I liked the creature design a great deal. The details on them were appropriately creepy and mean. The CG, as everyone noted, was terrible (I saw it in color). I hadn't seen CG this bad in a good six years or so (the tentacles in particular). But I forgive that, as it was pretty well used. Monsters galore.
I agree with Stinkles' comment that the film felt rushed. Scenes seem to end a few moments too early, the early character work seemed perfunctory. I wish they spent a touch more time building up the arrival of the mist; the book built a lot of tension and dread by the time it sunk in. Here it feels like ten minutes and we're there. Overall it felt like it was in a bit too much of a hurry.
I also didn't like the film having to spell everything out; what was implied in the book was made explicit here. The cause of the mist, the role of the military, the fate of the wife, the fate of the main characters, the lady that left in the beginning. Leaving some stuff to the imagination is part of why the book is so haunting. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter why the mist showed up - it did, and they're pretty much fucked as a result. The book realized this, the movie doesn't.
And yeah, the ending was terrible. That kind of ending can work, but here I thought it was just badly done and didn't fit the movie well. Too much of a "shock" ending. I liked the book's ambiguous conclusion a great deal more. It was haunting. Here it was jarring and oddly comical.
Overall I enjoyed it - mostly good acting, great monsters. The pacing and CG were a bit off, and the ending was poor.
WickedAngel
Banned
I thought it would have been more interesting to allow him to continue on into the ruined world alone and to have went in the direction that implied that the mist truly was worldwide. That would've made the end infinitely more tolerable and would've created an interesting dynamic (A man who wants to die but is surrounded by terrifying creatures that kill everyone but him due to his lack of fear/will to live).
- Status