I started Stephen King's novella but didn't finish it, so I can't say how faithful Darabont was to King's original material. What I'd read was recreated well on screen. However, the film lagged at times, especially the scenes with the religious nut, played annoying well by Marsha Gay Harden. Also, there were several unintentionally funny scenes. Given what was happening in those scenes, I doubt the director was going for laughs.

So, we have a horror movie that dragged in places, was laughable when it shouldn't have been, and wasn't as scary as it should have been. In spite of all that, I found the film disturbing.

I don't want to give anything away, so I'll just say I enjoyed what was in the mist and was majorly creeped out by it. I also liked the brief explanation of it.

I didn't hate THE MIST, but I won't tell you to run out and see it.

Hollywood has a pretty good track record (with a few exceptions) of botching Stephen King. But to be fair, even some of King's novels are rehashing of things we have seen/read BEFORE (best example: 'Tommyknockers is a virtual remake of Nigel Kneale's "QUATERMASS AND THE PIT" set in Maine instead of London).

Most reviews I've seen from critics and filmgoers seem to be enjoying it. I'll probably check it out on Monday.

I am surprised that I have continued to think about THE MIST. I had nightmares last night, so clearly the film affected me more than I thought. It plays better in my mind than it did in the theater.

I am surprised that I have continued to think about THE MIST. I had nightmares last night, so clearly the film affected me more than I thought. It plays better in my mind than it did in the theater.

The movie was pretty faithful to the novella. There are differences but nothing major with the exception of the ending. The ending is completely different then the book.


Possible spoiler alert............................









The ending in the book is different in two ways, first and pretty minor is that you never get to see what happened to Draytons wife. They are unable to get back to the house due to deadfall and creatures all around.

The MAJOR difference is that in Stephen Kings book he leaves it open and allows a small glimmer of hope. They have reached a hotel they are holed up in and Drayton is putting everything down on paper, he has been scanning the radio and thinks through all the static he heard one word "Hartford" so the Mist is still there with no end in sight and they are going to try to get to Hartford. End of story.

The movie ending hit me like only one other movie ending I can think of,
Se7en. It couldn't have been any more of a gut punch (even if a bit contrived) to me. I always tend to imagine myself in the situations of the characters and that ending about took my breath away in a horrible way.

So, like Se7en I really enjoyed this movie but doubt I would watch it again.

Was I the only one who thought it was reminiscent of Nightworld?

Was I the only one who thought it was reminiscent of Nightworld?

No, Paige, I thought the same thing.


Mad American, thanks for the information and the comparison.

SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!























Here is the L.A. Times review of the movie, edited down, of course:

"People get torn apart and beset by monsters in "The Mist" but not enough, I'm guessing, for the "Saw" folk, who prefer grinding realism to the supernatural. On the other hand, "1408" exceeded box office expectations. It would be heartening if this one does too, though the bleakest ending this side of "The Vanishing" may well curtail the masses.

As for that ending (very different from King's), well, it's certainly brave. It's probably braver than it is dramatically effective. But the film is absorbing, and by the time the ending arrives, you may be willing to cut it a break, as I was, even if Darabont's nervy resolution cuts the audience no break whatever.

"The Mist." MPAA rating: R for violence, terror and gore, and language.Running time: 2 hours, 7 minutes. In wide release."

For the full review, see: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-...&cset=true


AC

Yeah, this made me think of Nightworld.


That ending would've been better as an "alternative end" on the DVD, IMO. In the movie itself, it just came off as stupid. They had done it well up until that point so that the impossible seemed believable, but that was so over the top that I was instantly transported out of the story back into the movie theater where it was all fake.

Horror is stronger with hope, too, and that hope was--in an ironic way--destroyed, thus horror became meaningless and was simply madness. Though in the unlikely event should he recover to become functional after that, he should be a most interesting artist.

Someone told me that Hitchcock was like that with his endings. If so, I'm glad I missed out on his stuff.

I read the short story (novella) a couple of decades ago, but
memory tells me it is a pretty faithful adaption...albeit a very
shocking ending.

Per the short report on my blog, I give this ultimately perverse
horror thriller and psychological drama THREE out of five cans
of diet cherry vanilla Dr. Pepper.

Mike out