Stephen King's The Mist

[SlipperyLilSuckers]

Sounds interesting, will put it on my list.

[kennermike]

one of dumbest endings in film history!!! if I am asked to elaborate I will if not will leave it at that!

[ctc]

Hmmmm....

I know a LOT of people who have a problem with the ending.... got me thinking.... why WOULDN'T they have done what they did?

Don C.

[Goblin19]

SPOILER.









They were in no imminent danger, having survived ordeal after ordeal, then the father looks at the back seat, the old guy gives his approval to shoot everybody and he kills everyone in the car. After all their struggles, why wouldn't he wait until he was sure there was no chance of survival instead of wasting everybody, including his son, within seconds of running out of gas. It doesn't make sense.

[GaryPlaysWithDolls]

I was ****ed after that movie that I wanted to complain to someone. I loved the original (not so) short story! I've spent years...years wanting King to turn it into a full blown novel.

Hope. the last word is hope.

The ending crapped on the rest of the movie.

[ctc]

>After all their struggles, why wouldn't he wait until he was sure there was no chance of survival instead of wasting everybody, including his son, within seconds of running out of gas.

See.... I thought that's exactly what happened. They ran out of gas, had limited ammo left, we don't know about food and water, had seen no signs that anyone else had survived, the ONE group of survivours had resorted to barbarism pretty quick.... After all that to have no sign of hope I could see wanting to use your last few rounds for a relatively peaceful death; as opposed to being torn apart by monsters. And doing it now as opposed to during an attack, when you might not get the chance.

So I ask; what would make them want to go on? What could they hope to achieve? For all they knew that WAS the end of the world. I thought of this 'cos I was watching a doccumentary on the Great Depression; and they showed how many people killed themselves over that. One story in particular where a family had lost their house, and killed themselves; husband, wife and 5 year old son, in their car. And these people weren't in imminent danger like the folks in the movie. (It'd been shown that anyone leaving the protection of a building or vehicle was generally chow within minutes.)

Now, I took the end to be a WARNING; that a person SHOULDN'T give up, 'cos as long as you're alive you've got a chance. But that doesn't mean I found the characters' actions unreasonable or illogical.

>I was ****ed after that movie that I wanted to complain to someone.

You're not alone; and I think being angry at the end was kinda the point. But it doesn't mean it was a BAD story, just an unappealing one. Most of the critiques I've seen chalk it up to poor writing; which I don't think is the case. It seems like people WANT it to be bad writing 'cos it made them feel poopy come the finish. Which is why I've taken to ask why these characters WOULDN'T finish themselves off.

It kinda goes back to something I've been mulling over for a bit, and has worked it's way into a few of my discussions: to what extent do people allow a story to happen and why do they infer the things they do? Like in this example: a lot of people say "they wouldn't do that!" But they did. So why is it that the characters actions are attributed to unskilled authorship and not to some trait within the characters themselves? Why is it so many people will step out of the story rather than accept what they've seen?

Sometimes I think we've been spoiled. So many other stories have pandered to us that our hackles raise whenever something inspires a negative emotion. (Focus groups are meant to prevent that sort of thing....) Even if it's appropriate for the situation. Which is a shame 'cos it adds yet another limit on the kind of stories we're likely to see. Which is bad 'cos it makes everything a little more alike.

Don C.

[Gorn Captain]

I'd hold my kid close, wait until the top of the car is torn of by monsters, and then, maybe, I could force myself to pull the trigger.

But then again, how many of us have been attacked by alien monsters, intent on devouring us?

I think the closest I ever got to that was at the release of Phantom Menace, I was a dealer at a convention, and I got out a MOC Darth Maul.....

PS: this is now the perfect weapon to drive away those same monsters.....

[Goblin19]

I have no issue with what he did. I just think the story did a disservice to how he did it. They were in way more immediate danger earlier in the movie and he fights as hard as humanly possible. Then, he seems to give up quickly at the end. To put it best, I thought the ending was very rushed and forced. An ambiguous ending would have been better or the same ending with better execution.

[ctc]

>They were in way more immediate danger earlier in the movie and he fights as hard as humanly possible.

Hmmmm.... I agree, but for me it was the idea that they DID fight so hard, and got nowhere that supported their final decision. What ultimately got them was a loss of hope, brought on by not seeing any measure of real success despite their best efforts.

A person in real life could go either way: it's entirely possible to have your spirit broken by a lot less, and it's equally possible that cognitive dissonance would steel your resolve beyond all sensibilities. Which is why I think it's more descriptive of the characters that they chose what they did, instead of any sort of beef with the writers.

>Then, he seems to give up quickly at the end.

I can kinda see that. I understood what happened; but it does feel like we're missing a lot between them leaving and the car running out of gas. A few hours at least. For me, that added to their giving up. "x" number of hours seeing nothing, being tired, worn down....

>An ambiguous ending would have been better or the same ending with better execution.

I think it'd be more palatable for folks, but I don't know if I'd call it better. Some stories just don't have happy endings, and this was supposed to be one.

Don C.

[Goblin19]

I don't want happy, but I think it actually would have been a bolder choice to leave them in the car, gun in hand, and then roll credits.

[ctc]

>I think it actually would have been a bolder choice to leave them in the car, gun in hand, and then roll credits.

That's an interesting take. I can see people complaining about that too, though. But I wonder if it'd be more, or less. There's a trick tv news uses: they always end on an upbeat story. The idea is to draw you in with the fear and hate at the beginning 'cos it gets your attention, but leave you on a positive 'cos it makes you want to come back. While this isn't exactly the same; it's similar 'cos it lets the viewer fill in whatever blank they want. (Although it doesn't provide any real sense of closure.... and people seem to dislike that almost as much as they don't like dead kids.)

Don C.

[Goblin19]

I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't have liked that ending, either. I'm only speaking for myself. I think most people would have only been satisfied with a happy ending.

[Megospidey]

SPOILER





but...without the deaths in the car, the last scene makes no sense. That's what makes you go...OH CRAP! IF HE HAD JUST WAITED!

They could have ended it several different ways, but I'm content with the ending they chose.

[EMCEtoys]

I love the black-and-white version of this film on the DVD. Intended to resemble old films like "The Crawling Eye", which it does, in my opinion.

[wolfie]

I just watched this on YouTube and then read this thread. I think everyone has good points about this film.

I enjoyed it and thought it was one of the better films to be made from a King story. I agree the ending in the car seemed a bit rushed, they could have really cranked the scenes in the car up until the audience was going crazy and then with the sounds getting closer do what he did, i think it would have been better.

Still well worth watching though, the monsters are great.