MovieChat Forums > The Mist (2007) Discussion > Darbont's comment

Darbont's comment

posted 9 years ago by seaphil-87-260699
10 replies | jump to latest

Below is a comment darabont made in regard to the Mist ending:

“I was really getting something off my chest here,” Darabont said. “So if you hated the ending, I apologize for the two hours of your life I took. … This is an angry cry from the heart from a humanist who is really pretty pissed off about the fact that all the reasonable people seem to be marginalized, ground under the heel of the extremists.”

What the heck does this mean? He sounds like some of the athiests and humanists I've read when critisizing religion. What does that have to do with the Mist ending?

[–] debunkerboy 9 years ago

". . . ground under the heel of the extremists" applies well enough to the frustrating inability of the rational ones to control events inside the store, I guess, but not to the ending, no extremists there, just the "reasonable" people. In my opinion Darabont hasn't directly addressed the ending-haters. We would not mind if our protagonists die, even die by their own hand, if we felt this action followed from their character observed so far, but we do not. We feel it as a contrived departure from character so as to force in the ironic twist. This particular betrayal of the character of those people feels terribly wrong and unfair to them and to our vicarious investment.

Maybe Darabont includes in this idea of "extermeists" the cruel twist of inhuman fate that seems to conspire to put them in this position and then send the rescue moments too late but if so he is expecting us to accept that they have believably been driven by events to do what they do and that is exactly what we don't accept. In short, Darabont can make a movie where the dad needlessly blows his own kid's head off but don't make your hero do that JUST so you can work in your twist - not if it didn't feel like something he would have done otherwise. That's a huge cheat, an insult. Darabont was writing "angry" I think. "Getting something off his chest" indeed.

[–] taran-rod 9 years ago

What is wrong with people??? Are you so used to all the walt disney movies with their cliches happy endings that you can't take it when it goes in the opposite direction? This ending was brilliant and powerful. Darabont really nailed it with his decision to go his own way and not follow the novel. He creates hope for the characters, just to crush it instantly! That was genious, and really rarely do we see it in Hollywood. Honestly, people, stop overthinking it, jist enjoy the *beep* kick in the nuts that this ending gives!

[–] ret_cpo 8 years ago

I think a reason with some of the negative feedback, is not just the outcome but how it arrives to that point. After all these people had been thru, it seemed like everyone gave up way too quickly, opting for suicide. Maybe the movie's editing could have been done differently, as to not make it seem so rushed.

I wished the director had spent more time having the group discuss their options, while outside the car, grotesque creatures could have crawled or flown by during the night. Maybe the windshield gets hit and cracked, heightening the need for a decision to be made. Then the following day, the movie proceeds with the passengers agreeing to bring things to an end (except for David).

[–] ErgonomicSpliff 8 years ago

Maybe the windshield gets hit and cracked, heightening the need for a decision to be made.

The Jeep's windshield was already severely damaged. This happened prior to Drayton and company leaving the Food House parking lot, when the large arachnoid slammed its head into the glass.

How much more discussion was really necessary for the survivors to come to the realization that they were likely done for once the Jeep ran out of gas? Who would have thought, after driving through a landscape covered by mist and utter destruction, that there was any hope of survival?

[–] andrewpi7 8 years ago

How much more discussion was really necessary for the survivors to come to the realization that they were likely done for once the Jeep ran out of gas?

As others have pointed out, they weren't surprised that the jeep ran out of gas yet they made no effort or plans to siphon gas or find another vehicle or find a new place or anything. A plan of "lets drive until we run out of gas" is so silly it's even an old Seinfeld joke.

These individuals were never portrayed as defeatist or suicidal in the movie, but rather the opposite. There's also a big difference between "realizing that they were likely done for" and 4 adults all agreeing to mass suicide and child murder at the same time with no real discussion about it.

Who would have thought, after driving through a landscape covered by mist and utter destruction, that there was any hope of survival?

Perhaps the fact that their long drive through the mist was relatively safe/peaceful without any attacks despite the jeep's 10 giant bright warm lights which they knew attracted some of the creatures earlier? These are 5 mere civilians (including 2 fragile old people and 1 child) so it would be quite pretentious of them to think no one except them could have survived. Mere unarmed civilians were defeating several of the creatures throughout the movie so it's really not a stretch to think the strongest military in the world might do far better than them and save them at some point.

[–] ErgonomicSpliff 8 years ago

As others have pointed out, they weren't surprised that the jeep ran out of gas yet they made no effort or plans to siphon gas or find another vehicle or find a new place or anything. A plan of "lets drive until we run out of gas" is so silly it's even an old Seinfeld joke.

After seeing the entire film multiple times, I agree that the "plan," such as it was, wasn't well conceived. However, the film had established that, most of the time, if you go out into the mist you die. Finding a new vehicle also requires finding the keys, hotwiring the car, or whatever. That is time consuming and time is exactly what they believed they didn't have. Siphoning gas isn't as easy as all that, either. It takes a bit of time to do it and in reality, most modern gas tanks have screens at the end of the filler necks before the reservoir. You can't get a hose in there so easily. And you have to have a hose. It's a silly argument because it only happens in the movies and TV anyway but it is what it is. The "reality" of their situation is that they were surrounded by a blanket of mist that contained deadly creatures from dimension X. Complex plans weren't on the table.

These individuals were never portrayed as defeatist or suicidal in the movie, but rather the opposite. There's also a big difference between "realizing that they were likely done for" and 4 adults all agreeing to mass suicide and child murder at the same time with no real discussion about it.

No, but they were also not portrayed as superheroes, either. That, I believe, is one of the films strong points. They left what they thought was certain death at the grocery store to try and get clear of the mist.

Drayton was obviously the alpha and the folks left alive who didn't succumb to religious hysteria naturally followed him out. The adults in Drayton's Jeep were all educated, reasonable people. However, they were also all on the ragged edge emotionally and who wouldn't be after experiencing the kind of death and general mayhem caused by things that none of them had ever seen prior to the previous day?

You are equating "child murder" with mercy killing and that is just not correct. This is where the movie's "twist" skews people's opinions. Of course, had they any inkling that the Army were just behind them laying waste to the interdimensional weirdness, they wouldn't have just given up. After seeing nothing but death and then the impossibly large Cthulhu strolling by unmolested, they gave up. It's really not as pretentious an act as you make it seem.

Mere unarmed civilians were defeating several of the creatures throughout the movie so it's really not a stretch to think the strongest military in the world might do far better than them and save them at some point.

How long would you wait for rescue in the middle of all that with no way to escape but on foot? Obviously, waiting a few more minutes would have made all the difference to Drayton and company but that's why the ending is so effective. They had no way of knowing.

[–] andrewpi7 8 years ago

However, the film had established that, most of the time, if you go out into the mist you die.

Most of the time wasn't all the time. More importantly, most of the time by the store doesn't mean most of the time everywhere. Wild animals can kill you in forests, but that doesn't mean every inch of every forest has wild animals waiting to kill you. That's paranoia. These 4 adults were never shown to be pessimistic, defeatist, or negative so there's no reason to believe all 4 would suddenly flip to that mentality, much less unrealistically all at the same time.

After seeing nothing but death and then the impossibly large Cthulhu strolling by unmolested, they gave up.

The key word there is the word "nothing". After driving for miles and miles with their 10 bright headlights and warm loud vehicle they didn't see any creatures or people, except 1 who was so stupid it couldn't even hear/see/smell them. Perhaps it was the Brontosaurus of Dimension X? Even if the Cthulhu elephant was at the top of the food chain for Dimension X that doesn't mean it would be here... in a few months it could be served on the plate in some expensive restaurant.  I found it impressive, but not scary or morally crushing... unlike if it started talking English to them about how it would destroy them later... but that didn't happen. Not only was their drive safe, but even when they stopped their vehicle to watch the giant Cthulhu elephant there was nothing. Nothing flying attacking the headlights, nothing was waiting for their vehicle to stop before attacking, nothing tried to get inside, nothing eating victims, nothing ever blocking their long drive, just nothing. In the end, they became scared of the dark & committed suicide over monsters that weren't there.

Finding a new vehicle also requires finding the keys, hotwiring the car, or whatever. That is time consuming and time is exactly what they believed they didn't have. Siphoning gas isn't as easy as all that, either.
The "reality" of their situation is that they were surrounded by a blanket of mist that contained deadly creatures from dimension X. Complex plans weren't on the table.

They didn't need a complex plan. Throughout the movie the dad was constantly leading and planning without being MacGyver or James Bond about it. Even if the dad's creativity uncharacteristically suddenly flat-lined because he went crazy then I find it hard to believe 3 other adults would think "drive until we're out of gas" was a good plan without question. If anything I might expect some to laugh and say, "yeah I saw that Seinfeld episode, that would be funny but let's be serious." Yes, Drayton was the leader but the others in that group proved earlier they weren't mindless drones and this is their life at stake here not something trivial like choosing who gets to drive.

Siphoning was the original idea from the book & it's not that improbable. Even if you find siphoning or hotwiring too complex and all 4 adults are clueless about a 2nd vehicle that wouldn't require siphoning/hotwiring then finding another building is not complex. Mere unarmed civilians were able to keep quite safe in a grocery store that had giant windows for a wall & an internal power conflict so it is not unreasonable to think some other closed building/house (without a crazy cult) might be better off & safer than the store, but definitely better than driving on Empty. Even *if* all 4 adults had no other family or friends or ideas, if you passed by a house with a car sitting in front isn't it possible car keys might be in the house? If not you're still likely safer in the house even if you don't try another car/house. The creatures proved quite inept at getting into buildings that weren't already open to them. The "reality" of their situation is that they should expect the strongest military in the world to save them from creatures that are no smarter than wild animals at best.

How long would you wait for rescue in the middle of all that with no way to escape but on foot? Obviously, waiting a few more minutes would have made all the difference to Drayton and company but that's why the ending is so effective. They had no way of knowing.

Why risk waiting until they run out of gas? They had no way of knowing if they would be attacked & killed while driving. Why risk going out into the parking lot as they have no way of knowing if they would survive? Regardless, it seems we agree their gas plan was poorly conceived. Therefore, they should have never done their silly Kramer "drive until out of gas" plan then they would have never been in that fake forced situation by the director. Now that all 4 adults had foolishly put themselves there their immediate rush to suicide was extremely hasty to say the least on more than one level.

No way of knowing what will happen next... so quick mass suicide & child murder? That's a big leap. Google can list many survival stories of people in situations that looked completely hopeless, but mass suicides & child murder are not the go to plans unless it's some crazy religious cult with brainwashing. Yes, *some* people give up when faced with the unknown (and perhaps some even immediately) and *some* people are pro assisted-suicide even for anyone/anytime and *some* people are even suicidal. I more likely would have believed seeing 1 adult suddenly snap and go into this crazy pessimistic paranoid suicidal mode for an unexpected horrific ending, but for all 4 sane adults to flip so drastically all sooo conveniently at the same time that it just changes it from unexpected into outrageously unrealistic, forced, and fake.

To answer your question, no one knows for sure until they're actually there. However, I would hope I would wait & I described in another thread what I would do as I wouldn't be only "just waiting". However, even if I finally felt to give up then wouldn't the best thing I could do for my son & the group be to have an adult (possibly me) to eventually step outside the vehicle? Regardless of whether I die, I now provided the other adults in the vehicle knowledge they didn't have before of the situation so they can now make a more informed decision. The same was true for all the people who bravely went into the parking lot mist as their deaths provided others in the store knowledge to make a more informed decision to help their survival. The dad & 3 other adults had a long time to think about this during the drive & his/their best idea was to immediately fatally shoot his son while the boy was awake looking at his dad in fear... then kill the others... and then before he knew soldiers were outside he eventually stepped outside the vehicle anyways! He had to be crazy as the whole ending scene is absurd.

You are equating "child murder" with mercy killing and that is just not correct.

On the contrary, you are equating "mercy killing" with child murder. That is not correct. Mercy killing is when someone directly ends another person’s life, because they believe it is in their best interest in order to relieve pain and suffering. The boy was not in any pain or suffering (mental or physical, he was even comfortable enough to fall asleep) and the boy never even agreed to be killed which then at least the dad could claim it was assisted suicide, like he could with the 3 suddenly mindless drone adults. Person A killing a perfectly healthy Person B because Person A is afraid of what might be in the dark is not mercy killing... it's only paranoia and murder. Drayton could probably plead temporary insanity.

At best, the director wanted an unexpected horrific ending by turning the movie's hero who the audience likely grew to like into a monster & give some kind of "never give up" end theme via the military arriving & seeing the pushy obnoxious lady who left the store earlier alive in the truck passing with some poetic justice to the crazy dad for his hasty rash "not well conceived" plans.

[–] ErgonomicSpliff 8 years ago

Wow. OK.

On the contrary, you are equating "mercy killing" with child murder. That is not correct. Mercy killing is when someone directly ends another person’s life, because they believe it is in their best interest in order to relieve pain and suffering.

Based on everything that the film showed the characters going through, Drayton's desperate act wasn't "child murder." Period. It was a mercy killing and it's really, really obvious that's what Drayton's intent was. Sorry, it just isn't murder no matter what you think. The military showing up moments later only served to heighten the tragedy of the moment. Of course Drayton didn't have to kill everyone in the jeep, but neither he nor the audience knew it at the point where the decision was made. It's a big twist. That's all it is.

Your last post is nit-picking taken to a ridiculous extreme and I refuse to engage in it any further. Agree to disagree.

[–] andrewpi7 8 years ago

Wow indeed. It's not about what you or I think a word means, it's the definition of the word.

http://www.dignityindying.org.uk/assisted-dying/the-law-and-mercy-killing/
"Mercy killing (sometimes referred to as euthanasia) is when someone directly ends another person’s life, because they believe it is in their best interest in order to relieve pain and suffering from an incurable or terminal condition."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mercy%20killing
"the killing of someone who is very sick or injured in order to prevent any further suffering."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia
"Euthanasia (from Greek: εὐθανασία; "good death": εὖ, eu; "well" or "good" – θάνατος, thanatos; "death") is the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering.[1]"

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mercy-killing
"the act of killing someone who is very ill or very old so that they do not suffer any more."

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/mercy_killing
"The killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease."

The boy was not in any pain or suffering to qualify as a mercy killing. Drayton's intent was horribly misguided because of his sudden insanity. If they ran out of gas next to an immobile school bus with healthy kids then would Drayton shooting all the kids in the bus (also without their permission) be just mercy killings too if he found ammo? A well meaning intent from paranoia of the unknown does not give anyone the right to start killing kids. Temporary insanity would be his best defense when he's in front of a judge.

There is a definition for mercy killing less often used that defines it as only a "painless death", but under that definition any murder is a mercy killing as long as it's painless. If that's what you meant then yes the murder was also a mercy killing.

Yes, I looked at details in the movie to form my opinion, details you just discard as nit-picking. Of course, you might also conveniently claim this post is just nit-picking the definitions of words and that only your definition is the right one, just like your opinion. So let's agree to disagree.

[–] jrregan 9 years ago

Sounds like a statement from someone who showed King the script. King said he liked it. And that person didn't have the guts to go back and change it after he recognized it was crap.

King has said he liked all his conversion works with NO criticisms at all. How realistic is that? He gets he money and goes 100% into support mode. Can't and won't tolerate the possibility it's crap. Which, most are. B or C grade.