This was Darabont's pet ending. King's original is open ended with the mist still hanging around and our protagonists ho
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — The Mist
debunkerboy — 10 years ago(January 13, 2016 02:28 PM)
This was Darabont's pet ending. King's original is open ended with the mist still hanging around and our protagonists holed up in a motel with some hope of refuge in Hartford. But if you consider the real story to be the battle against the mist of fear which spawns human monsters inside a grocery store, then the story has ended when they escape. Darabont's version does at least give us a clear conclusion to the other story, the one about an inter-dimensional invasion. It also well fits the theme of the film ("fear changes everything") as Drayton's crew is yet another casualty of 'fear itself', as opposed to the facts on the ground. Yet it struck me, viscerally, as all wrong. Even defenders of the ending will more or less admit to having this immediate WTF. A telling admission is that they usually agree the ending felt 'rushed', but after some reflection they end up deciding the rush was a minor flaw and the gut wrench was more a measure of a well crafted tragedy than it was of a cheap shot cheat.
What is wrong, I think, is more than a little rushing, it's the jarring betrayal of the character the Drayton crew have displayed so far, which has stood out in contrast to the rest who, for the most part, caused their own demise by their flawed reactions to the mist with denial, panic, misguided remedies, and then to organized religion. (I'm sorry, not to mainstream religion but to a primitive version you wouldn't likely encounter in the modern world, wait). But, our clear-minded crew have displayed something like humanity and good judgement in the face of all this. After they fight like hell for a chance to live we expect them to do more than just passively drive the car out of gas and then kill themselves without so much as a discussion. We particularly don't expect Drayton to blow out the brains of his breathing kid's head unless he absolutely has to.
Of course! to save his son a horrifying death a Dad
might
do this, if push had 'come right down to shove', as Drayton muses in King's novella, but for so many reasons we sense that we are still pretty far away from 'right down' to it. (This passage from the original is sometimes cited as inspiration and justification for the Darabont ending but it suggests a very different kind of mercy kill. Hence the 'right down' to shove. We picture a rational recognition that it's either monster or bullet.) Remember, the monsters don't invade closed structures. They might have waited for days in and around the car (it's kept them safe at a slow crawl for this long). They have the four bullets still if that time comes later, who knows, maybe the mist might dissipate or help might arrive. Not a large chance I suppose but the alternative is 100% chance of BLOWING YOUR OWN KID'S HEAD OFF. And why, as their gas got low, did they make no efforts to get off the highway to siphon gas or find shelter, or maybe find a more welcoming grocery store, something? That expected effort appears to have been left out? Did they leave this out because of time constraints? Were we supposed to assume it? These are the kinds of questions that race through your mind in this moment of utter shock and then you realize that Darabont has cruelly and crudely contrived it all just so he can say 'gotcha'!
This
is what rankles. Don't tell me I need happy Hollywood endings? Please, that is not what is going on here. I love dark horror. The ending isn't brutal because it offends soft-stomached suburbanites who wanted a happy ending. No, not at all, offend away, that would be fine by me, and if it's too much for casual moviegoers then so be it.
Darabont
cannot
show them trying harder, or else show a gradual loss of hope, and not because of time constraints either. He cannot because for the ending to have the shock he aims for they
must
take this action preemptively. The audience must mentally scream out, "no! not yet!" And indeed we do, because we know instinctively the time is not right. If there was a sweet spot where the mercy kill was both unexpected and believable then maybe he pulls off this ending but he missed it badly. Missed it enough to insult and anger his audience who are left wondering 'where are the people who, having fought off a death cult and giant lobsters for a chance to live, have made it to the relative safety of the SUV and the open road?' The problem is that Darabont simply tacks on this ending to an existing story that went very differently and, as in many such efforts, the new ending didn't seamlessly fit. In this case the gap was so huge it was stunningly out of place to the point of criminal mistreatment of our vicarious investment.
How
could
you have used this ending? Well, you might have a story where Drayton all along had been a dark character who lacked any faith in life and might, when things got tough, be willing to play god, and then when he does this thing he learns his lesson. The intended lesson Darabont wants to give I suppose, about keeping your head in a crisis. But this -
DBLurker — 9 years ago(May 02, 2016 06:36 PM)
Every person has a breaking point, no matter how rational he/she seems.
They all reached theirs after driving for hours and seeing only alien life, especially the last huge monster. They realized that there was no help coming, and they decided to take a less painful way out.
Of course they were wrong about no help coming, but they didn't know. Army showing up a min later after Punisher was done shooting his kid, was a coincidence. It doesn't change the fact that most people in real life would also end up doing stupid things no matter how rational/smart they pretend to be.
Basically, the ending was fine. Slightly rushed, but it works just fine. -
taran-rod — 9 years ago(May 11, 2016 07:14 PM)
Yeah, I read everything and I get your point, but really, don't share it. Of course, it was kinda rushed (but the movie was already lasting over 2 hours if I'm not mistaking), but worked just fine for me! You have great argument, and your point is 100% valid, but in my opinion, this is by far the best ending they could have thought of!
-
shinji-ikari-1 — 9 years ago(May 12, 2016 01:47 PM)
I also get your point and don't share it at all. You're just wrong. Ending felt right for a horror film.
Also, you seem to be kinda belittling those who like the ending. Not cool.
You're mentioning "artistic blindness" but seem like the blind one yourself, not able to see any other points of view than yours. A narrow view.
I laughed after reading the "worst ending of all time" line from you.
Those phrases we're used to hear from "the young and foolish" that you're mentioning, don't we? You lost me completely with that line.
It's fine you don't like it, of course. Your reasoning and your dismissal of other opinions is not though. -
evolution_500_2 — 9 years ago(May 25, 2016 02:08 AM)
"But, our clear-minded crew have displayed something like humanity and good judgement in the face of all this."
"Clear-minded" isn't a term I'd use for Drayton's group. I get what you're saying - in comparison to Mrs. Carmody's followers they're more rational, but they're still fear-driven people who, upon getting out of the store and losing one of their own in the process, drove off to see where the mist would end. The giant creature was one of the big tipping points which suggested that things weren't going to get better.
"But, our clear-minded crew have displayed something like humanity and good judgement in the face of all this"
I disagree HEAVILY on this. Remember the beginning where a woman was weeping and was begging for someone to help her get to her children? No one aided her, not even Drayton, who declined out of self-interested concern for his son. -
debunkerboy — 9 years ago(May 25, 2016 01:18 PM)
It was, to all appearances, suicide to walk out of that store for any distance. Look at what happened to the others who had left! Kids at home or not you would not be doing them any good to die. I fully understand that the lady felt she had to try. I probably would have gone after my own kids too but damn if I would expect other parents to leave their kids and come with me. I cannot fault others for not going with her, particularly not Drayton who had his own kid to protect. You would have left your own kid behind on a suicide mission like that? I'm not buying that. You actually do something like that and then we can talk. You can argue the pros and cons I suppose of going with this lady but in any event this was far, far from any sign of a major loss of judgement or humanity. Your argument doesn't move me at all.
I am not saying Drayton and his crew are models of courage. I am saying they were RELATIVELY sane in the face of all of this and fought hard for a chance to live. Thus their action at the end was a sudden departure from what we had come to expect. -
evolution_500_2 — 9 years ago(May 25, 2016 02:22 PM)
"You would have left your own kid behind on a suicide mission like that? I'm not buying that."
I didn't say that he should have left his kid, I was just pointing out that Drayton wasn't exactly a saint. His intentions for not going are understandable, but they're also self-serving. -
evolution_500_2 — 9 years ago(May 30, 2016 04:01 PM)
"It just makes no sense and no amount of artistic leeway is enough to make it right unless you fight your own feelings. I honestly believe those who like the ending are just snowed by the idea of it - of the killer twist, the cool irony - but are willingly ignoring the context in which this ending simply DOES NOT FIT. Trust your gut on this one! You can rationalize your way into thinking it's great it but I think you will find that you, like Darabont, have talked yourself into ignoring the obvious flaw which invalidates it. This facile and ill-fitting Twilight Zone twist may well go down in history as the worst ending of all time. LOW HANGING ROTTEN FRUIT."
It is not inconceivable for something like what Drayton did to occur in the face of disaster. You have some interesting thoughts with regards to the ending, but I'm not as bothered by those omissions that you have issues with, just because thematically it was all consistent with what the entire movie was about, which was people making some of the most dangerous, compromising and even downright stupid decisions in the face of disasters/stressful situations. Could they have gone off and siphoned gas from cars or from a gas station? Maybe, but wouldn't that drag the movie on longer than it should? How are we to know what every person can/cannot do when faced with extreme circumstances such as what they've been through? You talk about character consistency, but people are extremely unpredictable, even when faced in seemingly dire situations. -
debunkerboy — 9 years ago(August 04, 2016 09:19 AM)
"extreme unpredictability" is no excuse for such a massive violation of character- the audience needs to feel it or else you screwed up as a storyteller. There is no issue with movie length here, Darabont can't show them gradually come to a point where their action feels somewhat believable, that would ruin his shock and awe twist, the twist was a cheat, maybe a better writer could have pulled this off someway, Darabont stuffs it down our throats.
-
evolution_500_2 — 9 years ago(August 05, 2016 08:02 AM)
""extreme unpredictability" is no excuse for such a massive violation of character- the audience needs to feel it or else you screwed up as a storyteller."
There is some truth to that. To an extent, anyway, but not always.
"Darabont can't show them gradually come to a point where their action feels somewhat believable, that would ruin his shock and awe twist, the twist was a cheat, maybe a better writer could have pulled this off someway, Darabont stuffs it down our throats."
Compared to the novella's ending, which was an even bigger cheat, the film's ending is fine, if not much more thematically and poetically fitting. I mean, how ironic is it that in a moment of weakness, lantern-jawed Drayton, the seemingly self-assured and morally "right" man, is revealed to be both a hypocrite and as bad if not an even worse monster than the townspeople? -
debunkerboy — 9 years ago(August 05, 2016 08:21 AM)
Well it wasn't just Drayton, everyone in the car (except the kid of course) nodded their assent, so I really don't think we can see this as an unexpected crackup of Drayton. I think we are supposed to assume there was a "reasonable" limit to their hope and they simply ran out of it. I guess the message is that you need fight until you are well and truly done and not give up just because things look really, really bad.
The novella's ending would not have worked for a feature film. Moviegoers want a satisfying conclusion. That I agree, and I'm sure King and Darabont knew it too, but I think it did work OK for the novella. If you understand that the real monster was shot dead on the supermarket floor and that once they have escaped her and her minions the story is basically over. Now if you made the grocery store drama just a chapter in a real epic adventure, ala Walking Dead, then yes, you could carry the story forward, but that was not possible here.
I do see Darabont's dilemma. If nothing else the ending generated buzz and a lot of discussion. From that angle it 'worked', I guess. It felt like a cheap shot and a cruel mistreatment of our vicarious investment to me.
And thanks for reading and commenting on my 'pet thread', LOL. -
debunkerboy — 9 years ago(August 28, 2016 03:37 PM)
King has used some other bleak endings too, as in "thinner" where a guy accidentally gives a cursed cake to his beloved daughter, intending to transfer his curse to his wife instead. It was poetic justice and it even involved killing an innocent child. I have no problems at all with these bleak outcomes. Call me cruel but I actually savor them, and King's delicious mean streak.
But it's this idea of a sensible result that I find missing in this version of The Myst. It wasn't King's ending that they used BTW. That was all Darabont, if that makes any difference. I was so sure King himself would never write this clumsy ending I came rushing here to find out who did, and lo and behold it was the director. I'd go over why I feel this way but since I already did that there is no point. Where were their efforts to avoid being stuck out there? Why didn't they look for shelter or gas? And would you really blow your own kid's head off if you had reason to believe you could wait longer and still do that later if the entities actually approached? They had driven for hours with no such approach, the monsters didn't invade your closed structures.