The Mist
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 2:29 pm
It's been an extraordinarily lousy year for horror, business-wise. I can count the successful genre releases on one hand. Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN, SAW IV... and, oh yes, 1408. I don't know if it was John Cusack, Stephen King or the PG-13 rating, but something about that little number clicked and clicked big.
So if we're going to try for just ONE more horror hit this year--at the onset of the holiday season against ENCHANTED, even--it may as well be another Stephen King project. And it can't hurt to have Frank Darabont, who helmed two of the most critically-lauded King films of them all (never mind that they were NOT horror films) in charge.
Ladies and gentlemen, THE MIST is officially a box-office disaster.
It's also the best horror film of the year, and I'm surprised to hear myself say that--I was sure I was going to be handing it to BUG.
It's been TWENTY-SEVEN YEARS since King wrote the novella, if you can believe that. And yet the story has proven to be utterly contemporary. Timeless, even.
Because it's not really about the shadowy military project that let in creatures from another dimension. It's not really about the monsters that viciously attack people and lay siege to survivors trapped in a supermarket.
It's about humanity, and it's about how relatively easy it is to bring it down from its best to its worst. Cue Rod Serling, Ray Bradbury... and yes, John Carpenter's THE THING (one of the first things we see in the film is the famous poster art, here offered up as the work of the protagonist).
Oh, and it's also one of the nastiest, grisliest and most genuinely FRIGHTENING monster thrillers of recent years. Pretty much everything a horror film would want to be, I'd say.
Thomas Jane (the guy who looks like Christopher Lambert who starred in the PUNISHER remake) is the hero--trying to maintain order and protect his young son during the inexplicable siege. And Marcia Gay Harden? Her Bible-thumper act is almost amusing at first--then it gets annoying (we cheer when somebody bonks her on the head with a can of peas)--and then you realize that she isn't going anywhere and that she's going to be at least as much a threat as the monsters. (And the monsters are plenty threatening, believe you me--every time you think you've seen it all?) By the way, she's excellent--the ladies are really shining this year.
Those who've read the story know that King wrote it with what he specifically identified as a "Hitchcock ending." That is to say, the ending of THE BIRDS. Some scream at that and consider it a "copout," others engage their imaginations.
Frank Darabont had another idea. An extremely nasty idea that's going to stick with anyone who sees THE MIST. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to hear that vicious word of mouth regarding the fadeout is every bit as much to blame for the box-office demise of the film as ENCHANTED was (by the way, I'm in no way knocking ENCHANTED and plan to see it with my family soon). It's disturbing, all right--and yet Darabont's ending really does grow from the material as he interpreted it. (We'll talk more after everybody's seen it--it will suffice to say that King's novella is faithfully translated from beginning to NEAR-end.)
Open question to Roger Ebert: You praise P2 and give it three stars simply for being a technically well-mounted formula slasher. Then you dismiss Darabont's film (notice I'm not using the "dis-MIST" pun) with two and a half stars, saying that it will do for those seeking a "tentacle" movie??? I really need a better explanation than that, as it doesn't seem remotely possible that we actually watched the same films, similar plot descriptions or not.
People will either love or hate THE MIST... on the other hand, most of them have already decided not to even see it.
You want a horror film that dares to be truly horrifying?
Go.
So if we're going to try for just ONE more horror hit this year--at the onset of the holiday season against ENCHANTED, even--it may as well be another Stephen King project. And it can't hurt to have Frank Darabont, who helmed two of the most critically-lauded King films of them all (never mind that they were NOT horror films) in charge.
Ladies and gentlemen, THE MIST is officially a box-office disaster.
It's also the best horror film of the year, and I'm surprised to hear myself say that--I was sure I was going to be handing it to BUG.
It's been TWENTY-SEVEN YEARS since King wrote the novella, if you can believe that. And yet the story has proven to be utterly contemporary. Timeless, even.
Because it's not really about the shadowy military project that let in creatures from another dimension. It's not really about the monsters that viciously attack people and lay siege to survivors trapped in a supermarket.
It's about humanity, and it's about how relatively easy it is to bring it down from its best to its worst. Cue Rod Serling, Ray Bradbury... and yes, John Carpenter's THE THING (one of the first things we see in the film is the famous poster art, here offered up as the work of the protagonist).
Oh, and it's also one of the nastiest, grisliest and most genuinely FRIGHTENING monster thrillers of recent years. Pretty much everything a horror film would want to be, I'd say.
Thomas Jane (the guy who looks like Christopher Lambert who starred in the PUNISHER remake) is the hero--trying to maintain order and protect his young son during the inexplicable siege. And Marcia Gay Harden? Her Bible-thumper act is almost amusing at first--then it gets annoying (we cheer when somebody bonks her on the head with a can of peas)--and then you realize that she isn't going anywhere and that she's going to be at least as much a threat as the monsters. (And the monsters are plenty threatening, believe you me--every time you think you've seen it all?) By the way, she's excellent--the ladies are really shining this year.
Those who've read the story know that King wrote it with what he specifically identified as a "Hitchcock ending." That is to say, the ending of THE BIRDS. Some scream at that and consider it a "copout," others engage their imaginations.
Frank Darabont had another idea. An extremely nasty idea that's going to stick with anyone who sees THE MIST. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to hear that vicious word of mouth regarding the fadeout is every bit as much to blame for the box-office demise of the film as ENCHANTED was (by the way, I'm in no way knocking ENCHANTED and plan to see it with my family soon). It's disturbing, all right--and yet Darabont's ending really does grow from the material as he interpreted it. (We'll talk more after everybody's seen it--it will suffice to say that King's novella is faithfully translated from beginning to NEAR-end.)
Open question to Roger Ebert: You praise P2 and give it three stars simply for being a technically well-mounted formula slasher. Then you dismiss Darabont's film (notice I'm not using the "dis-MIST" pun) with two and a half stars, saying that it will do for those seeking a "tentacle" movie??? I really need a better explanation than that, as it doesn't seem remotely possible that we actually watched the same films, similar plot descriptions or not.
People will either love or hate THE MIST... on the other hand, most of them have already decided not to even see it.
You want a horror film that dares to be truly horrifying?
Go.
