The Mist

This film has some intentional B-movie elements and, at the same time, deals with religious themes, reaching a mystical dimension beyond that of a traditionally conceived fantasy. Frank Darabont combines serious existential topics and Greengrass-like image authenticity with digital tentacles and attacking spiders. And with a budget of just 26 million, it beats Spielberg’s War of the Worlds. The Mist is a remarkable, impressive, somewhat intellectual and non-mainstream film with a reverse version of The Shawshank Redemption’s message about hope. In short, it is a small work that deserves great praise. (09/16/2008)

I like that Stephen King's unpredictability and uncompromising nature can be felt every second in the story, that the common (outdoor) enemy is sufficiently straightforward and "evil", and that it is clear from the beginning that no nonsense can emerge from the events outside. But what knocked the breath right out of me in the worst way was that in the crucial passages the story always relies on the aggressively religious motive of punishment for sins. Instead of carefully measured fear, Frank Darabont tries to crawl under your skin with mass psychoses and hits a wall. If such a gallery of bloodthirsty monsters is lurking outside, I really have no desire to listen to a threatening fanatic. Moreover, the whole film is somewhat undermined by an ending in the style of brutal finishes that change the original tone. Despair thus clashes with an unexpected twist, and the desperate mood is tainted by a sense of futility. (05/16/2008)

Hm... the blonde was terribly unappealing... come to think of it, I didn’t actually like anyone in this... The best part was stirring up the mob, how easy it is, right? And that ending? I kind of expected it, exactly like that. Mr. King always tries to end with that bit of a shock, but this one seemed transparent to me; oh well, it's dawn now and the mist is rolling over the tree tops. And I'm not scared at all. Such a pity. (04/11/2009)

This adaptation is faithful to the original and yet it will take your breath away at the end. Darabont has a knack for storytelling, and the actors under his leadership give the performances of their lifetimes. Plus, Thomas Jane is suited to the role of David like no-one else. The special effects are amazing (mainly the fog, because they leave room for the imagination), in the style of Faun's Labyrinth and Hellboy. In the end, you can say what Stephen King said at the press conference: "Whoever gives it away should hang by the balls in a draft." It’ll take your breath away. (03/10/2008)

In a thick mist that could be cut with a knife, there is a supermarket, and in it... Darabont and King’s short story fourth time round (if we count The Woman in the Room). It’s a mystery to me why, after a six-year rest, Darabont returns to the screen with an adaptation of this only slightly above-average story by King. Arguments suggesting answers like “an enclosed, group of heterogeneous people in extreme conditions, holding up a mirror to society" or “in the best spirit of classic sci-fi B-movies from the early fifties" just don’t hold water. Stephen King approaches this frequently and usually better. This adaptation is a good movie with an exceptionally powerful ending (although I prefer how the book ends). But in between we get a good two hours that could have been expediently cut down in length. Because what works in the written text, narrated in the first person, won’t necessarily work as a depersonalized movie record of events. Almost nothing is expressed here by images, but just by chatting away. Remove the visuals and you have a fully-fledged radio play. And that’s never good for a movie. However, the last half hour which is exceptional and the best part of The Mist. Is this just a coincidence? Unfortunately it looks like the narrative genius Darabont has become a routineer over the last few years since his last “big" movie. And if this were too little, the nice idea with the pseudo-documentary camerawork (and entire atmosphere) worked seriously badly here and reliably trampled any hints of atmosphere that were to be found. However, the sound and design of the Monster are great positives (the CGI mist is a little unconvincing, but the problem doesn’t lie there). The curse of adaptations of King’s horror stories endures, despite this being a solid movie in essence. (03/18/2008)