Book to Film Review: The Mist – Stephen King, collected in Skeleton Crew (1985)

Cover of "The Mist (Two-Disc Collector's ...

Cover via Amazon


It can be painful to see a favorite book come to the big screen. You have constructed this perfect world of the story in your mind, and it is very likely that someone else’s vision won’t match yours. This is especially likely when you are a fan of Stephen King, whose page-turners — which can be perfectly believable and terrifying in the reader’s head — all too often become silly and cringe-inducing when translated to the big screen.

There have been many exceptions, of course, most of them based on King’s earlier works and adapted by very able directors. Brian de Palma‘s Carrie comes to mind, as does David Cronenberg’s The Dead Zone and Rob Reiner’s Stand by Me and Misery. More recently, Frank Darabont has proven that he knows how to handle King material, with incredible adaptations of The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. So Darabont seemed a worthwhile choice to attempt to adapt a long-time fan favorite, The Mist, despite the fact that this would be his first outing into King’s trademarked gore-filled, over-the-top horror territory.

The Mist has been a long time coming to the screen. The novella was first published in the collection Skeleton Crew, and it remains one of the most beloved of King’s works. It is not a particularly easy choice for adaptation, since the plot involves dimensional holes and Lovecraftian creatures that may be best left to the imagination because, let’s face it, once realized, they could look pretty silly.

On the other hand, the plot is perfectly suited to film, contained and tense. Comparisons to Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds are appropriate. A group of people in a small town are trapped in a grocery store by the sudden onset of a thick mist that contains a completely unexplainable, terrifying threat. When Billy, one of the young characters, begs his father not to “let the monsters get me,” he sums up the button that is being pushed: The mist contains our worst childhood nightmares made real, and there really does seem to be no way out.

Under the strain, the small civilization inside the grocery store breaks down rapidly. The characters quickly revert to denial, petty arguments and superstition in the face of the inexplicable. A religious maniac who always seemed nutty suddenly becomes persuasive and gradually builds up a following. The number of people who manage to retain their common sense become the minority and, as a result, under threat. The ongoing human drama is interspersed with attacks from the monsters outside to keep the tension high.

For the vast majority of the film, Darabont remains faithful to the source text. The creatures in the mist are alien and a little cartoonish but not silly-looking. Scares and gore are both believable but not too much. Darabont does interject some editorial comments through his characters’ mouths, but otherwise the characters are true to form.

Until the end. Darabont has changed the ending. According to interviews, King approved of the new ending (this is the same guy who was disappointed with Stanley Kubrick’s adaptation of The Shining). Apparently, Darabont wanted something definitive, not an ambiguous ending like in the original novella. This is where I think fans of the novella will seriously balk. I know I did, but I generally love the ambiguous ending whenever it appears (including in The Birds). I like being asked to supply my ideas of what happened to the characters. Darabont’s ending is not only very different from the original and definitely not ambiguous, but it is also seriously disturbing and depressing. He has taken a risk, and I think by doing so, he has probably alienated most readers who loved the original novella and waited so long to see it come to film.

I don’t only dislike the film’s ending because it’s different, though. I dislike it because I believe it is seriously out of character, counter to everything that was established during the movie. Oh yes, I get the ironic twist, the culmination of the theme that people behave so radically differently under extreme circumstances that their actions should fall outside the bounds of their everyday behavior. But still, I didn’t buy these actions from these people. It’s hard to say more without totally giving away the ending, so I won’t. I’ll just say that this fan was extremely disappointed, especially since the rest of the film was so good and so right on.

And that’s the risk we take when we go to the movies to see someone else’s imagining of a favorite book: that we will be disappointed, and that the film version will somehow taint our memory of the beloved text. I suspect that many people who have not read the original novella will love The Mist. It is a terrific movie. But I think I won’t be the only fan to feel that the new ending ruined it.

About these ads

3 Responses to “Book to Film Review: The Mist – Stephen King, collected in Skeleton Crew (1985)”

  1. A/V Club’s column, “Book vs. Film,” has a very good, detailed and spoiler-filled comparison between the two:

  2. 2 Liz B

    I am late reading this entry (I found your blog through some random googling) but had to comment. I actually stopped going to the movies because of the ending of this film. Upon viewing the ending, I cried out a heart “WTF?!” in the theater and decided that I was no longer supporting the writer’s in their strike if they were just going to turn out stuff like this! (I have since seen many wonderful movies and retracted my comments about the writer’s strike, but it does illustrate how strongly I felt!) The entire meaning of the story was changed by that ending, and it upset me. Actually upset my heart. The story is about a different kind of faith–not Mrs. Carmody’s faith, based in superstition and violence and assumption, but faith in knowledge and determination and believing in oneself. The ending of the film basically tells us that this second kind of faith is wrong: if you believe in yourself and find inner strength, bad things will happen to you. If you stick with the quack and stay in the supermarket, probably you will live. I get riled up just thinking about it! The ending in itself was not a bad ending–it just doesn’t belong in this movie!
    I enjoyed reading your blog entry on this film and others and was glad to find someone who feels like I do about the ending of this film. It just didn’t have to happen this way!

  3. 3 Chris Y

    i am a film adict. And saw the film from a recomendation by the critic Mark Kermode.
    i thought the film was terrific.
    The ending is much to be argued about, but i peronaly thought it was a very brave and comendable move by Frank Darabont (the writer and director). An ending like the one expressed in the film is one that, i dont think , i will ever see again in my lifetime. it is shocking and horrific and very bleak.
    After watching the film i seeked out the Novella and read it within days. it was terrific in its own right and i shall be recomending it highly. But cant help thinking that the books ending raised a lot of questions about religion and humanity and simple right and wrong. The film addaptation did exactly the same thing but making a much stronger point of it.
    in conclusion i belive both the book and the film to be superb triumphs. and that the film is in no way a poor adaptation. if anythin i feel it adds to the credability of the story and its morals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 814 other followers

%d bloggers like this: