Editorials
The Puny Human Doors of Perception: Revisiting The Mist‘s Horrific Twist Ending, And The Clashing Philosophies Between Source and Adaptation
Major spoilers ahead for The Mist. It’s a masterpiece, so if you haven’t seen it, watch it, then come back.
If you were to ask horror fans to call on a twist ending more harrowing than the ending of Frank Darabont’s The Mist, I would bet hand over fist that they would be hard-pressed to find one.
Watching it alone at night, I remember it clear as day. The car running on empty finally peters out. It’s just the slate grey fog of death outside, and all too clearly on the inside our survivors. As the horrors whisper outside, the car’s occupants all carefully exchange looks, practically looking back at you as you watch, forcing you to become part of this horrible exit strategy. David shows the revolver, then counts out the bullets. Four. It’s not a scene of many words, but the ones Amanda says are louder than any screams could be.
“But there’s five of us.”
The last shot we get is of Billy looking up at his father. Eyes wide, before—
A low-to-the-ground exterior shot of the car. Staggered muzzle flares and muffled gunshot noises. And the silence after is only broken by staggered wails of pain from the surviving David. Back inside, he tries to finish himself off, spinning the empty chamber with the quiet clicks of the gun aimed at his own. When I first saw this scene, I almost got nauseous seeing that shot. Which is why it only gets worse; with no other way to die, he exits the car and calls for the mist’s denizens to take him…only to be greeted by the military, driving caravans of heavily armed soldiers and rescued civilians.
After the second wave of jaw-dropping shock washed over me, I felt David’s collapse to his knees in my legs, and as the credits rolled, I was left mulling over the experience in abject horror for the next few days. And so began a long-running entanglement with the story. The Mist is my favorite Stephen King adaptation of all time, and it’s in no small part for how its final scene is so brilliantly orchestrated by both the cast, Rohn Schmidt, and director Frank Darabont. And the way my love of The Mist originally spurred me to learn more about Stephen King’s expanded universe and got me into The Dark Tower series, a rewatch of the film spurred me into finally reading the novella.
So, I came to discover that the ending of The Mist is drastically different from its source material.
Those who have read the novella know it ends in a way that outright rejects the film’s conclusion. As David writes his final journal entries in a motel with his son, and the other survivors who escaped, things look just as bleak. Navigation in the mist means gambling on infrastructure still being intact, with a close call on a possibly collapsing bridge having already been evaded. The supplies are running low, and with their car out of gas, it means venturing out to refuel. He notes:
“But you mustn’t expect some neat conclusion. There is no And they escaped from the mist into the good sunshine of a new day; or When we awoke the National Guard had finally arrived; […] It is, I suppose, what my father always frowningly called “an Alfred Hitchcock ending,” by which he meant a conclusion in ambiguity that allowed the reader or viewer to make up his own mind about how things ended.”
Technically both things happen in the film’s finale, to a much bleaker extent in the wake of what David has done to spare his son and friends. But book David ends up sitting by a crackling radio awaiting some sign of life as he’s all out of options. The only things he hears are two words, which he whispers into the ears of his dreaming son: ‘Hartford’, and ‘hope.’
Truly, for a film that is so accurate up until that point, with so many scenes lifted whole cloth and recreated perfectly from the text (the spider-silk scene still makes me shiver in both film and on the page), it begs the question: Why change the ending?
Well, there’s the obvious answer of it simply being the best choice on a technical level. Darabont has mentioned in previous interviews that the movies many alternate endings didn’t resonate on an emotional level (even King thinks it hits harder than his penning). And the fact that one of them involved a cut to black and a gunshot after Billy says “Daddy?” makes me thankful the iron hand of studio interference didn’t force them to choose one. The Mist is one of those movies of a perfect length, no dragging, no rushing, and the delicate balancing act of editing the rest of the film sets you up on makes for the greatest gut punch when it all comes tumbling down in that final scene.
The movie is the most memorable version because its ending shows the primary horror of the mist is what happens when the fog is lifted, and you’re forced to confront the reality of the things. The question then is what happens once you get what you’re craving? Can you go back to life as usual having seen what you’ve seen? Can those “puny doors of human perception,” as David puts it, tolerate it having seen what they’ve seen?
In the book however, we never see that Mist lift. There’s the very Lovecraftian possibility that the time of man came and went without much ceremony from the powers that destroyed it. It might never come back. So, what do you have when it doesn’t pass, and the monsters aren’t killed? The only thing that’s left when Pandora’s box has been emptied: hope. And how much is hope worth?
So beyond the practical difference, I would posit a philosophical difference in the endings, or at the very least an inversion of the theme. Both iterations of The Mist are fundamentally about hope, but in two very different regards: hope is given up in the film, and the cosmic irony almost immediately punishes David for only needing to stay hopeful for a few more moments. In the other, David’s hopefulness, though uncertain, still stands up to the insurmountable odds ahead, possibly leading to doom.
There’s certainly room for the ending to mean the death of David and his crew. Depending on how you interpret the novella, David is shaded as having already gone mad. He emits loud, uncontrollable laughter in moments of crisis, such as the death of the bagboy, sometimes seeming to have already succumbed to the mist and its unreality.
This makes him a stronger parallel to Miss Carmody. One of Stephen King’s quintessential villains, Carmody’s madness is uncontained and outwardly hysterical, harassing and assailing whomever she sees as being due for judgment by the wrath of God. But as composed as David is, there are cracks in his composure that suggest the mist could equally pollute his mind; after all, nobody is immune. By the end of the book, is David just as deluded as Miss Carmody? Were their chances ever any better on their own? Does his misplaced hope let him walk off into the mist to risk it all?
The book’s ending is scary in its own right, simply because of the common ground the two versions share. Both share themes of hope, more specifically, the danger of hope and either losing it, or losing yourself to it. Which fate is more painful is still up for debate.
Editorials
50 Years Later, ‘Black Christmas’ (1974) Is Just as Relevant and Frustrating as Ever
The film opens with Jess Bradford (Olivia Hussey) confronting her boyfriend Peter (Keir Dullea) with the news of her pregnancy, and her plans to have an abortion in light of her career. Let me remind you again, it’s 1974, and even on a 2024 rewatch, no viewer should be surprised when Jess is met with a gaslighting attack. Peter’s attempts were dismissed, but the message and accompanying rage couldn’t be more relevant. Every line of weaponized dialogue from Peter’s mouth is written so well that it’s impossible to ignore even 50 years later.
Horror is the most undoubtable mirror that fictional entertainment has ever seen- I’ll stand on that. It’s known for giving a broad snapshot of what our greatest fears might’ve been at any given time. From climate change to the social and systemic issues in between- it all comes out through fictional stories of horror.
Women across the United States are teetering on the line of a life-threatening regression. Repetition is something that history will always whip around, but when creative minds grab on, we can use their memorialized messages to paint a bigger picture for further education. For the fandom, the time is ripe to look for scholars at the intersection of activism and genre history to guide us through. Take Chris Love, for example; reproductive justice advocate, Arizona lawyer, and “repro horror” scholar.
“We’re so used to seeing abortion being treated as difficult or heart-wrenching. Black Christmas stands out because Jess was so clear and unbothered about her decision to choose herself and her future. That’s how it should be and frankly, how it actually is most of the time”
Bob Clark’s holiday massacre of 74’ is invaluable to horror history. On the side of the genre, it’s the most responsible for our treasured ‘slasher’ sub-genre while pumping the gas on true fears of home and personal invasion. On the side of U.S. history, the film was released only one year after the ruling of Roe V. Wade.
The film opens with Jess Bradford (Olivia Hussey) confronting her boyfriend Peter (Keir Dullea) with the news of her pregnancy, and her plans to have an abortion in light of her career. Let me remind you again, it’s 1974, and even on a 2024 rewatch, no viewer should be surprised when Jess is met with a gaslighting attack. Peter’s attempts were dismissed, but the message and accompanying rage couldn’t be more relevant. Every line of weaponized dialogue from Peter’s mouth is written so well that it’s impossible to ignore even 50 years later.
It’s here, before the fantasy fear kicks in where fans and genre scholars alike can recognize a crossing of an ethical line- a single decision that could greatly impact a woman’s life, career, and comfort. The great thing is women today are more likely to be like Jess, and challenge ideas of patriarchy for their right to decide. Opening our greater horror story with an additional personal one makes Jess’s fight relatable, and even more important- for her survival, and the shot at life she has a right to. Queue the telephone.
I could go on forever about the film’s first act, but the conflict driving Black Christmas is the creep on the other end of those perverted phone calls. Even though this is a separate issue from Jess’s plan for her body, my recent rewatch opened my eyes to the idea that these two conflicts are two sides of the same coin. I’m a woman, and a citizen of the United States. Now that I’ve lost some of my confidence in the protection of reproductive rights, I’ve digested this whole scenario in a different, more infuriating light.
Through the calls, the killer causes panic, and threatens the security of the sorority sisters inside. His remarks are disturbing and sex-obsessed, and the girls react with fear and disgust like any person would. Imagine making all the right decisions to ensure a future of comfort and success, just to have your right to it stripped under the guise of gross misogynistic mental gymnastics. That’s how I feel right now, and I almost can’t believe how smudge-free the mirror is.
In the film’s opening, we witness what an intimate conflict over women’s reproductive rights might look like. Most of the horror community has given the scene their highest praise, but my damage this month was experiencing that those themes don’t actually stop once the calls start. Those themes end up getting stronger by switching from seeing the problem with patriarchal power, to understanding what it feels like to exist trapped underneath it.
History is repeating itself again, and the deja-vu in Black Christmas is tough enough to hand out complimentary whiplash. It’s still disturbing, but as consumers of horror, we know how to trust the final girl. Through just about any period commentary you can find in horror, there’s a final girl who’s survived it- maybe two or three. The truth in that statement holds the most weight at a time like this, though. Cheers to Jess Bradford, and everyone she represents.
Editorials
‘Black Christmas’ (2019): More Hollow Feminism From Hollywood
Black Christmas (2019) opens with so much promise but immediately gets in its own way. What seemed like an attempted indictment of rape culture led to confusion and resentment for me as an audience member. Whatever the original goal is gets buried in black goo at the modernized version of the He-Man Woman-Haters Club.
My entryway to the Black Christmas universe was accidentally watching the 2006 film at an Alamo Drafthouse. My friend and I thought it was the original and wanted to finally see the classic. In our haste, we did not investigate which movie the chain had pulled from the vaults. So, a few years later, when I saw a new Black Christmas in theaters, I asked more questions. I went into the 2019 film knowing it was not the original and with the expectation that it had to be better than the version I had previously seen. I got a wildly confusing take on feminism and a giant red flag planted in the Blumhouse Productions column instead.
The film has an engaging opening that utilizes the winter Christmas atmosphere while giving us a fun enough first kill. There is some cool cinematography (Mark Schwartzbard) and direction (Sophia Takal) on display that make you want to root for this entry so much. There are also glimmers of a movie that understands how ahead of its time the original Black Christmas was and seemingly wants to ride that feminist wave. Sadly, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and this movie takes the express bus to Satan’s doorstep.
Black Christmas (2019) follows a group of sorority sisters stalked during their Christmas break. They soon discover the cloaked figures slashing their way through sorority girls are part of an underground college conspiracy to “put women back in their place.” This all comes out in a messy third-act battle where it sounds like dialogue was pulled directly from Joe Rogan’s podcast. There is a lot of black goo coming out of the misogynists as Professor Gelson (Cary Elwes) gives the monologue that tries to explain what is happening. I am firmly in the camp of “Yes, all men” and am usually an easy person to win over when a movie wants to talk about toxic masculinity. Yet, this movie had so many problems and fell into what often feels like Blumhouse projects following a checklist that I could not get on board. Especially because long before men try to destroy the squad, we find out the calls are coming from inside the house.
We watch Riley (Imogen Poots) as she is constantly bombarded by her supposed friends who remind her she was sexually assaulted. They follow her to her job and throw it in her face if she hesitates to sign a petition. They have choreographed a Mean Girlsesque Christmas number where they sing about it to supposedly clap back at her rapist. The plan is to perform it in the frat house where Riley was assaulted. When one of the members of this weird choir has to step out, Riley is bullied into performing it by again reminding her she was attacked. On stage, when Riley locks eyes with the guy who assaulted her and freezes. Her bestie whispers, “Rebuild yourself, bitch” before they start the misguided jingle in earnest. When they started singing about “S-E-X” before describing something that was, in fact, rape, it felt like the culmination of this remake’s problems.
While I have no doubt Black Christmas (2019) started with great intentions, its impact undoes all that goodwill. It seems like a muddled brand of feminism wrapped around a bunch of tweets from people who learned about gender studies from broadcast TV. I know many people might have the impulse to write this off and blame the PG-13 rating. However, I am not sure we should be arming tweens with the idea that throwing your friend’s trauma in their face hourly is friendship or feminism. We see Riley have nightmares about this attack that happened three years ago. We know she’s still in the same school with her rapist, and their Greek societies seemingly still host shindigs they both attend. So, seeing how shitty her support system is while yelling about their sisterhood and talking about how they’re all an extension of each other seems hollow.
I questioned Riley’s squad the whole movie, so Helena’s (Madeleine Adams) reveal that she was working for the man was not a gag. If anything, it was refreshing to see at least one of the girls was aware that she was a bad feminist. This twist might have worked if we had not spent the entire run time watching Riley’s best friends treat her like a prop instead of a person. Or, maybe if the male characters had not said all the quiet parts aloud the whole movie. The lack of subtlety and nuance worked against this story. It wore everything on its sleeve, and while on paper, I agree with the sentiments…the result is a confusingly awful time.
I have watched this film three times in my life. Each viewing, I try to figure out who this movie is for. Is it for audiences who are just learning that women are real people? Or is it for execs wanting to make a quick buck off the #MeToo movement without actually doing the work? Each time, I wonder what the original script looked like because I cannot imagine this is the finished product anyone involved wanted. Black Christmas (2019) opens with so much promise but immediately gets in its own way. What seemed like an attempted indictment of rape culture led to confusion and resentment for me as an audience member. Whatever the original goal is gets buried in black goo at the modernized version of the He-Man Woman-Haters Club.