From Page to Screen: 'The Mist'
Filed under: Horror, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, From Page to Screen

This is a follow-up of sorts to my piece on Mikael Hafstrøm's adaptation of Stephen King's 1408. If you're interested, you should check that out. There, I half-marveled at and half-lamented the fact that the film managed to transform 1408 from a spectacularly scary, quasi-Lovecraftian horror tale into a personal, abstract meditation on grief and loss. In effect, the movie transplanted the story from the conceptual, hard-horror half of King's ouvre (think Cell and From a Buick 8) to the character-driven half (Lisey's Story, Bag of Bones). It was still a good film, but it needed someone who understood the existential terror that King is so good at evoking: a glimpse of something so alien, so divorced from the world we know, that it is simply beyond our comprehension. That's scary. Give me a movie like that.
At the time I wrote that post, such a film already existed. I suspected that this was the case, but I hadn't read the source material, and so couldn't validly make the comparison. Now I can: Frank Darabont's The Mist understands the sort of paralyzing, staring-into-the-abyss horror that King does so well. Even more impressive: not only does it brilliantly translate that aspect of the novella to the screen, it – like 1408 – fleshes out dimensions that the author barely implied. I knew I loved the film when I saw it, but only now do I understand how accomplished it really is.
As for horror: the movie perfectly recreates the novella's collision between the ordinary and the otherworldly. The scene early in the film, when Jeffrey DeMunn barrels into the grocery store, bloodied and hysterical, yelling about "something in the mist," is one of the scariest, most iconic moments in modern horror. The creatures we eventually see aren't generic, weightless CGI concoctions – they are, convincingly, from Somewhere Else. And consider this passage late in the novella, which occurs after David Drayton and his like-minded companions make their way God-knows-where in his SUV: "Something came; again, that is all I can say for sure. It may have been the fact that the mist only allowed us to glimpse things briefly, but I think it just as likely that there are certain things that your brain simply disallows. There are things of such darkness and horror – just, I suppose, as there are things of such great beauty – that they will not fit through the puny human doors of perception." Those who've seen the film will remember the unspeakable monstrosity Dave is describing here, and I can only say that the movie brilliantly captures his sentiment. It conveys a mixture of wonder and terror that took my breath away.
As for themes: the film's exploration of faith, culminating in the conclusion that it was faith in humanity that was crucial and lacking, is deeper than King either managed or intended. In the novella, the character of Mrs. Carmody – played by Marcia Gay Harden on screen – was largely a plot device. King certainly intended some measure of commentary on the way people respond to a sanity-shaking crisis, but he doesn't spend much time on her, and she mostly serves as a way to get Drayton and his pals out of the Federal Market. In the movie, on the other hand, she's a centerpiece; a villainous siren. She starts a cult. She inspires discussions about human nature. The film makes her the story's thematic linchpin.
That brings us to the ending, which I wrote about at greater length some time ago. It's significantly different from King's hopeful, ambiguous coda. It's improbable enough that it has to be considered a 1408-like step toward abstraction, sacrificing immediacy and plausibility to make a point. And it's unforgivingly harsh –which many people, in turn, couldn't forgive. I still like it; I think it gels with the film's thematic ambition without outright violating King's intentions. After all, he too speculated that humanity might be making a stand somewhere.
The Mist flopped in theaters, and I hoped for some level of cult adulation on DVD. The more time passes, the more I resign to the fact that this isn't in the cards. The movie's probably not enough "fun" for cult status. But it's now my second-favorite King adaptation, behind only Carrie. 1408 added layers without grokking what makes King's horror so scary. The Mist finds a way to do both.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-13-2008 @ 11:19PM
doa766 said...
so by saying this is your second favorite king adaptation after Carrie then you're implying that the mist is better than shawshank?
now THAT is something that can make people lose faith in humanity
Reply
10-13-2008 @ 11:28PM
Eugene Novikov said...
Abso-freakin-lutely. I like "Shawshank" very much, and I also think it is one of the most overrated movies of all time.
10-14-2008 @ 7:57AM
Herff said...
While I would agree that The Mist ranks higher than a number of King adapations to hit the big screen I cannot give it the same consideration. I think there were some very interesting characters and some good dialogue that rang very true to King's style. But overall I was kind of disappointed. While the monsters were not crappy CG, they just felt like bigger versions of things that already exist in our world, except for the humongous thing with stilt legs. The religious woman and her cult were just overkill. I mean, maybe if they had had a previous scene establishing that 95% of the townspeople were retards. I just think they oversold it. And the ending. I wasn't depressed with the ending like a lot of people, I just thought it was poorly executed. They went to great lengths to show us how determined these characters were to survive. Then in one moment they just give up. I think the ending would have been great in a moment of true desperation. But instead it felt like they ran out of time and had to skip to the end.
The acting overall was pretty good though and if you like Tom Jane, he gave one of his better performances. Just had to put my two cents in.
Reply
10-15-2008 @ 12:36AM
jordan said...
I absolutely loved "The Mist" when I caught it on DVD. It was just so refreshing to see something so bleak. I loved it. Must buy 2 Disc Edition.
Reply
10-14-2008 @ 2:27AM
doa766 said...
you probably love deamcatcher too, and while we're at it, on the mist why don't they take the black guy with them to the the piece of tentacle?
no need to answer, because the answer is bad writting, bad adaptation, bad movie, bad ending (the people that stayed at the supermarket probably got out OK)
Reply
10-14-2008 @ 6:39AM
Josh said...
Yeah, they probably got out fine. How does that have anything to do with the quality of the ending?
10-14-2008 @ 9:30AM
larry said...
I saw the movie and really. I had to go back and read the book as it was so much more optimistic. Plus, as a father to a young boy. the Movies ending frankly disturbed me.
If your looking for Good King adaptation, I dont think that any of them surpass Shawshank. But more from a point of getting it right. Theres not much "fantastical" about Shawshank and thats why its ... well.. easy to do.
If you take most of his other works, getting the reality of the movie to match the visions of your imagination is hard to accomplish
Reply
10-14-2008 @ 9:57AM
laura said...
I was floored by the ending.....and it made me love the movie even more!! to heck with hollywoods obsession with happy endings i say!
Reply
10-14-2008 @ 11:25AM
Dan said...
I love this article. The Mist is probably one of my favorite horror movies of all time....I read the novella and saw the movie and this is one of those rare cases where I actually enjoyed the movie a whole hell of a lot more (not that the novella wasn't great too). Frank Darabont is simply put, the man.
Reply
10-14-2008 @ 12:51PM
Tunneler said...
That fucking bitch religious nut made me want to kill myself. Her overacting was soooooo bad. There is no way at all that in that short amount of time people would become that fucking chaotic and retarded. Overall I thought the movie sucked, the ending sucked and it was horribly overacted. Never read the book and after that drivel I never will... even if it is better.
Reply
10-14-2008 @ 3:18PM
Dave said...
"There is no way at all that in that short amount of time people would become that fucking chaotic and retarded."
So...how would you know exactly? I wonder how many times you have been stuck in a small town grocery store with a mist covering all access to the outside world...
Seriously, that is why this is fiction. It is one person's vision as to how someone would react in this situation, because it would never happen in real life. Not very many of us have ever been in situations even remotely close to most types of fiction, so we have to make it up if we want people to pay attention to the story.
Was she over the top? Yep. Was the situation seriously screwed up? Yep. Will we ever know how someone will react in a situation like that? Nope.
I thought the movie was great. I wondered before going in how Darabont was going to end it, as I am a big fan of the novella. I thought the ending was one of the most ballsy pieces of cinema I had ever seen, and I loved the movie so much more because of the risk it was willing to take with the unconventional ending.
10-14-2008 @ 2:59PM
AJ MacReady said...
I don't think anyone in the store had to be a "retard" for what happened to occur. The point that the movie is making - and some people seem to miss, apparently - is that faced with something so catastrophic, so frightening, and (most important) so hard to understand, people react rather badly, for the most part. As a character says "scare someone enough, they'll do whatever you say" and that's very true. Terrorize somebody so thoroughly for days, with no real comprehension of what's going on and no idea of how to stop it, and you'll see normally forward thinking people do some truly crazy things. Things they normally wouldn't do if they were thinking clearly, but again, they're not. Fear can turn a rational human being into someone begging to be led and taken care of, to be told "if we just do THIS then everything will be fine." Trying to apply logic - even bad logic - to a stiuation that rejects it is simply human nature. If you could say that the store is a microcosm of society breaking down, then falling back into needing things such as religion and order is a way of trying to make sense of things that can't be explained or understood. Which is what people do - to a lesser extent - every day, in a sense.
Reply
10-14-2008 @ 5:06PM
Herff said...
While I can't speak for the rest, I can clarify for myself. I didn't dislike the movie for the plot. I disliked the movie for the poor execution and lack of pacing. The movie IS better than the average horror movie and it IS better than the average King adaptation. That's why I even gave it the time of day. But given that you have to judge it on a higher level than a crappy horror movie. So while calling the people retarded may have been a poor choice of words, for them to go along with such an over the top character in just a couple of days is just completely unbelievable in my opinion. I mean, it took much longer in Lord of the Flies, and they were just kids.
I felt the same thing about the ending. It would have been a great ending had it had the right pacing. But the whole thing just felt incredibly rushed and poorly thought out. I love a movie that leaves me depressed or pissed off, if it's done a good job. Instead I just felt cheated. I can respect the concept, but not the finished product. And that is what most people are judging.
To say people are missing the point of this film is inaccurate. People get the point because it is shoved in their face the whole movie. A little subtlety would have gone a long way to fix things, at least for me.
10-15-2008 @ 7:52AM
dubqnp said...
The Mist is great. It was nice to see a horror movie that actually scared me.
Reply