Thursday, March 31, 2011

The Mist (2007)

Written for the Screen and Directed by Frank Darabont

As most know, many of Stephen King's books have not translated well to the screen, and personally, I believe it is because his novels are wordy, and many of the pages are full of details of the smallest order, which draw his characters and settings in a way that is best enjoyed in the literary medium. After reading The Mist, I had come to the conclusion that this was my favorite King book, the spot that was previously held by Cell. This was due to the well drawn but not overly sentimental characters, the furious pace, and the inclusion of icky bugs and monsters that give more to the film medium than they did to the literary medium. At the same time, King's prose and storytelling ability often shines the best in his books, and this is another thing that changes the face of the stories as they are adapted to the visual medium.

As for the plot, if you don't know by now, here's a quick rundown: David Drayton (Thomas Jane) and his son (Nathan Gamble) go to the local supermarket in search of supplies to aid their cleanup of their house after a terrible storm. Their sometimes-civil neighbor Norton (Andre Braugher) tags along as they find solace in their predicament and are able to separate their differences for the moment at hand. Once in the store, a strange mist overtakes their small Maine town, and something comes out of the mist, a supernatural force that will blow their minds, instigate insanity, and put them in a predicament of supreme cabin fever.

The story is a throwback to 50's style monster movies, with all the quaint details of a Stephen King story, sentiment included. David Drayton only cares about surviving and saving his son, and in the meantime, trying to keep order amongst the people he is trapped in the supermarket with, which becomes gradually harder as the mania of the Mist sets in on the inhabitants. This is not helped by the raving religious fanatic Mrs. Carmody (Marica Gay Harden) who stirs up the mood in the store constantly.

Once the mood and the mania is set, the film turns into a monster fest, with all the strange creatures attacking out of the mist and playing on the worst fears of the people inside. The breakdown of their mini-society is complete as they all have to come to terms with facts they can't begin to comprehend, such as prehistoric-style bugs and dinosaur-like winged creatures.

King's original story is for the most part told faithfully in this adaptation, but the changes that were made for the most part perplexed me. They were not major tonal changes, they were often small, seemingly meaningless changes, which ended up leading to big twisting leaps from the novel. The first of these changes is an explanation of what the Mist is, where the monsters are coming from, and why they are here. The explanation is skirted in the novel, and at first I was slightly disappointed at the fact that Darabont felt the need to include these explanations. In retrospect though, I understand these changes, and accept them as the filmed version of the story. I understand these were implimented to make a "Hollywood" version of the story, meaning more ready for mass consumption. This means that movies audiences don't like open-ended stories, they want an explanation for everything, and they would probably be upset if the lack of explanation was left in the movie. The other major change is the ending, which I'm sure anyone who has heard about the movie has heard was a major shocker. It is, and I felt unneccessarily so at first, but now, looking back, I understand again Darabont's need to differentiate his story from the one told in the novel. King even writes, into the prose of his book, that the ending is an anti-ending, it is as open-ended as possible, leaving the reader to draw any conclusion they like. I understand this would not work in a movie, it would be a major slap in the face to a mainstream audience, or really, any audience. It is one of the things I enjoyed about the book, telling the reader there is not always an ending, that sometimes you're only getting a chunk of a story, and in that respect, I think it worked. In the film though, the ending heightens the emotion, and pumps up the impact of the entire film. I'm not upset with this, it works in a way, but at the same time, its unexpected nature makes you uncomfortable in another way entirely.

The performances are as good as they could of been, which is to say they are not the best possible, but they fit the story, and I especially liked Andre Braugher as the abrasive nature. This film cements Thomas Jane's leading man status, his charisma alone carries the weight of the story, and while I could imagine other people in the role, he was just as good as anyone else could have been. The direction is solid, the story, even with alterations, reflects the original theme of King's work. I believe it was also Darabont's superb direction that brought these performances out, in the hands of a less capable director, the film would lack a lot of the impact it has. The cinematography is not great, but at the same time, it works for the film, the lighting adds to the claustrophobic atmosphere and sets the tone for the story to unfold as it should.

On the other hand, I believe the film is accurately geared toward our modern predisposition to panic, and is a good depiction of the human nature to internally combust in times of crisis. The special effects are passable at best, but I understand there was a really limited budget for the type of film it was, and I don't believe a higher quality of CGI would really add anything to the film. Which is to say, I don't care that the quality isn't great, as I assume most viewers won't. This is not the best adaptation possible, but as it stands, it is an adaptation nonetheless. It is the original story, but as interpreted and retold by a different artist. Sometimes this doesn't work (as in I Am Legend), but in this case, it is better than some of the detrimental choices that could have been made, and for the most part, the thematic elements of the story are well retained.
 

8.8/10

No comments:

Post a Comment