That ending - fair or unfair? Spoiler warning

  • This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.

SharonC

Eternal Members
Jul 9, 2007
2,958
11,254
Canada
The book ending, unresolved as it was, left the reader with a sense of hope. At least that's my opinion. As someone said previously, it also presented an opportunity for a tv series or at least a sequel. I did enjoy the movie right up until that ending. That totally ruined it for me and I haven't watched it again.
 

Sunlight Gardener

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2013
375
1,273
The book ending, unresolved as it was, left the reader with a sense of hope. At least that's my opinion. As someone said previously, it also presented an opportunity for a tv series or at least a sequel. I did enjoy the movie right up until that ending. That totally ruined it for me and I haven't watched it again.

Exactly. The ending ruined the whole move just because it was awful, but throw into that the fact that I wanted to see the gigantic dinosaur-monster-thing at the end that was as tall as the clouds. Damn it. :mad-new:
 

Liselle

Well-Known Member
Jul 10, 2006
1,586
1,448
51
England
I was not a fan of the ending in the book, left me thinking 'oh is that it' but the ending in the film - in my opinion - was very good. Life is not always rosy and the raw gutteral emotion displayed gave me chills as he realises what he has done to his son and friends. Some other films would have gone with the tank coming into sight before the any shots were fired and that would have been lame but taking it one stage further was brave especially with the very touchy american audiences (no disrespect intended).
 

opundo

Active Member
Sep 25, 2011
38
87
Derry, Maine
I'm with the above two, and those who liked the book ending, not the movie one. I know Steve says he likes the movie ending fine, but I have two problems with it...
the first being that I felt the books ending was perfect for what the story was really saying to me, which is the idea of the horror of which mankind, in our greed and lack of recognition of certain boundaries, is capable. The movie ending didn't task advantage of this horror, but made man the victor after all, as in virtually all of the 50s fear-of-nukes scifi thrillers.To me the book suggests the possibility that mankind screwed up and ushered in a subsequent evolutionary change, resulting in mankind losing dominion over the Earth; imho, a brilliant horror concept.

The second problem I have with the ending is the failure of the suspension of disbelief for me when after they stop the SUV within a relatively short period of time they decide to commit murder and suicide. I don't believe any group of people, especially who've fought so hard to save their lives, would simply give up. They would at least argue about it, probably wait for a very long period of time after driving hopelessly 'til they ran out of gas. Or one of them would take the risk of trying to find shelter for the sake of the others.
Really, they seemed eager give up too easily.
 

Aericanwizard

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2011
218
306
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
When I first saw the movie, I really liked the ending, but the more I thought about it, the more the story ending made sense, with the movie ending being there as a talking point.

But then, I thought about it some more. In the supermarket, the fanatic (I'm terrible with names) states that a sacrifice (particularly of the son) is necessary to put an end to the mist. What if she was right?
 

Pucker

We all have it coming, kid
May 9, 2010
2,906
6,242
62
The original ending to the story works so well because the reader can believe whatever he wants. That's what "hope" is. The story can go wherever you want it to and that works very well for readers and (good) writers.

In a film adaptation, you might not want such an open-ended conclusion . . . so while I admit that you can't do the agony of such a decision justice in the limited time-frame a film gives you, if you posit the situation, our hero gets out of the car having made this impossible choice and is now defenseless, believing that he has made peace with himself and is ready for whatever comes out of the mist for him.

Except he isn't ready for what comes out of the mist, and everything he just did was for nothing and now he gets to spend the rest of his life dwelling on that.

How can you not like that?

It's a matter of personal taste, obviously, but that movie had nothing to remark it until the good guys came out of the mist.

It was perfect.
 

mal

content
Jun 23, 2007
4,714
27,243
61
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Watched it with the grandkids and was worried about it so I watched it myself first. I warned them that the dad had to kill his kid so the monsters wouldn't get them, to reduce their shock. Then I told him the dad gets out of the cars, falls to his knees and says "douche". When the end of the movie finally came , all the tension exploded in uproarious laughter when the guy killed his kid, fell to his knees, and said "douche". I've never laughed so hard in all my life.
 

Machine's Way

“Go then, there are other worlds than these.”
Jul 13, 2009
671
2,877
44
Baltimore
Torn on this one, I loved the story and the movie, Thomas Jane is a great underrated actor and the whole movie in my opinion was cast well.
Now on to that ending, I have mixed feelings about it. First as a father, I hate it. Could never see myself ever doing that in any situation, I would fight to the end, die trying to kill those things or protecting my son. But my feelings on movies with child death has drastically changed since being a father myself. I have a hard time watching The scene in Pet Semetery now when Gage is hit by the truck. When before I had kids it was an awful thing but never really "bothered" me like it does now. Same with the "accident" in Revival, I had to stop reading a moment after that. I could name some more but you get the point.
With that said, I think The Mist was filmed great, cast great, and really captured that sense of character development that we are all so familiar with when reading a SK story. The ending was shocking and a total wtf moment but like stated before it is a horror film, and that was horrifying. My problem with it is like stated above, I don't think they would of resorted to that so fast, They still had gas, wasn't currently really being attacked. I just know I would of explored more possibilities before killing everyone, I mean giving the situation I would of even used the old people as human shields or bug food to get to more secure shelter before I harmed my child. I have to believe that suicide is in the future for David Drayton.
Overall A great movie that I own on blu-ray, but wont watch to much because of that ending.
 

Steffen

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,233
12,800
It's been a while since I've read Different Seasons, but I vaguely recall the film's ending being hinted at towards the end of the novella, where David is considering the possibility of offing his son and himself rather than condemn them to the possibility of what lay out there in the Mist. I loved the ending of the story as it could go either way. Either you had some hope that they made it out, or they were condemned to drive around in that endless nightmare until some Lovecraftian creature got the better of them. I totally get why the film's ending is polarising to many viewers. However, I think Darabont's choice was a good one for the film - it was a remorseless kick in the gut (just like what King did in the climax of Revival), and it underscored a popular theme in King's books: that no matter the supernatural terrors, the horrors of what Humans Beings are capable of are much, much worse.

Overall, this was one of the better film adaptations. I think there was also a black & white version, which I have to check out. I wish Darabont would do more adaptations of King's work, as he really has a handle on them. Could somebody (a cable network) please throw a lot of money at him and fund a Talisman series, pretty please?