"The Mist" ** (out of ****)There was a time you could look forward to Hollywood making film adaptations of Stephen King's novels. There have been a few chestnuts in the collection. Stanley Kubrick's "The Shinning", "Misery" and "The Shawshank Redemption". Sadly those days are gone. The latest King adaptations have been very disappointing. They are almost pointless to watch. I feel as if Stephen King is wasting my time.
"The Mist" takes us to a small east coast town where a turbulent storm has brought a strong mist to the area causing a group of people to be stuck in a supermarket. It is said there is something in the mist. Something violent.
The film soon pits the locals against one another. After being trapped in the store for days it becomes every man for himself. Deep resentments are brought up between the townspeople as we start to see people's true colors.
Of the people in the store we mostly follow David Drayton (Thomas Jane, who was in King's "Dreamcatcher" and "The Punisher") his son Billy (Nathan Gamble) the local religious crusader, Mrs. Carmody (Marica Gay Harden), the Drayton's neighbor, Brent (Andre Braugher), Amanda (Laurie Holden) who works at the local school and one of the store clerks, Ollie (Toby Jones, who gave a terrific performance in "Infamous" as Truman Capote, and since then has yet to match it).
This leads to one of the problems with "The Mist". I have have never before in recent memory seen a mainstream Hollywood film which was so strongly against religion. The film presents Mrs. Carmody as the villain. The townspeople conspire against her and want nothing to do with her religious message. It is Mrs. Carmody's opinion that the mist represents the end of the world and people should start praying to God. The townspeople reaction against her is so strong, that it actually turns violent.
Religion is actually a pretty important theme in "The Mist". What happens when people turn to religion to explain the unexplainable? According to this film, you get a group of idiots!
The second problem I have with this film is, to put bluntly, the lousy acting and weak screenplay. As the townspeople start to go against each other we hear bits and pieces of background information. For example. We find out Brent sued David and lost the case. Since then Brent has felt the locals have been against him ever since. What was the lawsuit about? Why was there even a lawsuit? Why would Brent feel people are conspiring against him? All very good questions which receive no answers. Now, one might want to say, Mr. Udvary, you are missing the point. Background stories dealing with these characters are not important. The argument between David and Brent was just "filler" dialogue. Words merely said to pass the time between killings. OK. But why those words? I'm someone who believes everything in a film has meaning. A director has a character wear a certain color for a reason. Films a shot at a certain angle for a reason. Has a character say certain words for a reason. Cinema is not a random art. People prepare to make sure every shot is perfect. Every actor in place. To supply us with "filler" dialogue which has no meaning is to waste our time.
As for the acting, Thomas Jane is not a hero. He does not possess leading man qualities. Again some may argue, that was the point. OK. But does that mean he also has to read his lines in a monotone voice without any feeling? And he's not the only one. Sometimes the actors seem like zombies. You feel as if you are watching outtakes instead of the final cut.
"The Mist" marks the third collaboration between director Frank Darabont and Stephen King. Together the two worked on "The Shawshank Redemption" and "The Green Mile". "The Mist" is nowhere near the class of those films. Why Darabont would be attracted to this story is a mystery. Did he feel just because King wrote the novel the two would work magic again? When you keep going to the well, eventually you'll run out of water.
"The Mist" reminds me of a John Carpenter film, "The Fog". There too we had a film revolve around a small town as a fog sweeps over the town which also becomes violent. I hated the Carpenter film and the remake which followed. But I would rather watch that film over this movie any day.
It seems with "Dreamcatcher" and "1408" King is heavily getting into the supernatural genre. I have a problem with the way King approaches this. When you have a film where anything can happen you lose suspense. There are no guidelines for the viewer to follow so we can never clearly sense the characters are in danger because we know anything can and will happen and thus lead to their protection.
And this leads to the final compliant. How did this mist come to be? We are given a flimsy excuse, dealing with a military experiment gone wrong, but even with that explanation, I still couldn't figure out what was going on. Obviously the film is not so much about the mist as it is about what is inside of these characters. Perhaps a good film is lurking somewhere behind all of this but Darabont and King were the wrong people to tackle such a project.
Don't get me wrong. I like Darabont. He has a very interesting personal life story. He was born in France to Hungarian parents who were escaping communist Hungary. Darabont knows about inner turmoil. About saving graces. In many ways "The Shawshank Redemption" was such a story. "The Mist" isn't. I think it's time Stephen King calls it quits and Hollywood stops adapting his story. I for one, I'm done with King.
Posts
