“People are basically good, decent. My god, David, we’re a civilized society.”
“Sure, as long as the machines are working and you can dial 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, you scare the shit out of them – no more rules.”
So goes a conversation late in The Mist between two of the main characters, David and Amanda, and it is this dialogue that highlights what writer–director Frank Darabont is trying to say.
Darabont, known for his adaptations of Stephen King’s novels (The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile), turns away from King’s more low key, non-horror works for his third King adaptation in favor of a gory, horrifying film in which small-town locals are besieged in a supermarket surrounded by a strange mist outside that harbors giant bugs and other monsters that would love nothing than to make a meal out of them all. However, Darabont proves not only that his directorial skills are well suited to horror as well as drama, but that he is in fact uniquely qualified to tell this kind of story – by capturing the complexity of the characters, as well as how their stories all tie to the central theme, The Mist succeeds where most other adaptations of King’s horror novels fail miserably.
Behind the blood and guts of Stephen King’s work lie rich, flawed, human characters – this is what makes his work compelling, and it is also what made Darabont’s previous adaptations so engrossing. However, Shawshank and The Green Mile were classically made films, composed of tightly structured photography, unobtrusive editing, and careful, deliberate staging. For The Mist, Darabont brings his eye for story and characters to the material, but also radically reinvents his own directorial style to better suit the film. He trades in elegant tracking shots for rough, documentary-style hand held cinematography, employs fast paced shock cutting, and relies on heavily improvised action. This is not to say The Mist is a Blair Witch Project knock-off. The camera work does not suggest a first person viewpoint, and audience members will not feel nauseous upon watching the film (well, not because of the camera work anyway). According to Darabont, due to the film’s low budget, the actors would improvise, staying within the basic structure of the script, and the cameramen would, in turn, improvise their shots around the actors. This both allowed The Mist to be made on a limited budget and provides it with a heightened sense of realism, which becomes critical to its success.
Another element crucial to the effectiveness of The Mist is the effects. Any film featuring ravenous, man-eating creatures needs convincing creatures. These monsters are rendered entirely by computer-generated effects, and for the most part, they are very convincing. Because the film’s special effects team created crude models for the actors to interact with, as well as using various methods to blend the CGI monsters in seamlessly with the physical set and actors (for example, when the bugs are supposed to be breaking down a store window, a pitching machine was hurling softballs at the store window on-set, and was replaced later with the creatures) the monsters actually seem to occupy the same space as the actors. It is an enormous downfall of many visual effects heavy films (Star Wars episodes I-III come to mind) that when characters are supposed to be confronted with a creature or landscape that is created by computer, the actors have nothing to interact with, and as a result often seem as involved with the onscreen action as if they’re phoning in a carry order out to Pizza Hut. Not so with The Mist, which has a director and technical crew too invested in the material to let that happen, and an acting ensemble too skilled to give lackluster performances. However, if the film’s low budget does any harm, it is that the computer-generated monsters occasionally lack the believability that a larger special effects budget could have afforded. It should be said, though, that in Frank Darabont’s original black and white version of the film, the visual effects blend in with the film much better, and never seem substandard for a moment.
In fact, the black and white version of The Mist is superior on several levels to the color version that the studio forced Darabont to release to theaters. The black and white version, which can be found on the DVD, not only suits the visual effects far better, but also adds a sense of claustrophobia to the film by de-emphasizing the backgrounds and scenery (black and white film is well known for this quality), and instead forcing the audience to focus on the characters. In terms of character, effective horror films typically use one of two strategies: either create detailed, three dimensional, flesh and blood characters that the audience learns about and empathizes with, or, create characters without any kind of dynamic personality traits, background, or depth whatsoever so that audience members can easily place themselves into the situations unfolding onscreen – creating a psychological state of mind that is both personal and unnerving. The Mist uses the former technique, employing a first rate cast of character actors and unknowns to portray characters that act not as devices of the plot (in order to arbitrarily increase the amount of suspense), but who behave as their own personalities dictate. The lack of stars in The Mist only adds further to the realism. No one in the film attempts to steal scenes or create a demo reel for the Academy – instead, they simply exist as frightened people trapped in a horrifying situation.
And the film is based on situation, not plot. The main characters do not develop special weapons to battle the monsters or establish contact with the army in order to form a resistance. People are trapped in a supermarket, and they have no idea what’s going on. That’s it. The only time even a partial explanation is given is in an ill-advised scene in which a soldier on leave rambles about scientific experiments being conducted at a nearby military base. Stephen King’s original story offered no explanation whatsoever, because none was needed. Apparently Darabont thought movie audiences wouldn’t stand for that kind of ambiguity, so he falls back on the old horror film standard of scientists meddling with inter-dimensional gateways. Besides this unnecessary bit of pseudoscience, The Mist simply consists of scenes of quiet character interaction and development, contrasted with quick bursts of violence. With the exception of one pointless scene involving two characters who are barely seen again, the dialogue scenes develop characters we come to care about not by having them discuss their pasts and emotions in great detail, but by showing their reactions to the situation at hand. By the time the blood and guts fly, we are invested in what happens onscreen.
Early in the film, the giant bugs are the main source of terror. However, as the film progresses, and the initially skeptical supermarket inhabitants come to embrace the preaching of Mrs. Carmody, a religious zealot who believes judgment day has arrived, some of the film’s more rational characters seem to prefer taking their chances out in the mist. Indeed, the two most horrifying scenes of the film don’t involve the giant bugs at all, just people and what they can do to each other. As frightening as giant monsters are, it is easy for audience members to distance themselves from giant bugs. When people degenerate into horrifying monsters, it seems less like a movie, because things like this can and do happen all over the world. And that’s what The Mist is all about.
8.5/10
