I genuinely liked the movie, but hated the ending enough that it was years before I watched it again.
Anyone who hasn’t, go read the book. The ending is soooo much better and really had me hoping King would explore that whole world more… Easily one of my top five stories of his.
The book ending is super lazy. The “I was actually writing this story this whole time and now I’m leaving it here for someone to find” trope was used sooo many times before (“Handmade’s tale” to name one). Movie ending was at least original.
For reference: handmaids tail was published in 1985, the mist was published in 1980. There are probably examples of that trope prior to the mist, but the handmaids tale isn’t one.
The Handmaid’s Tale (it’s kinda funny how both you and a commenter replying to you misspell the name in two different ways) is going for a “The Lady or the Tiger” ending. Do you believe that Nick is actually part of the Resistance, or is he part of the state secret police? The narrative tricked us a little with the “relationship” between Offred and the Commander - can we trust anyone at all?
The epilogue also gives the narrative some verisimilitude. It’s pretending to be a historical document - how would the world post-Gilead react to accounts of what happened to women during Gilead? How would you interact with the Diary of Anne Frank if you didn’t know that she was killed in the camps?
I fail to see how it’s similar to “The Mist” here.
If I remember correctly “The Mist” also ends by pretending it was a “historical document”. That’s the similarity I was referring to. In my opinion it’s a bit silly. Are we really to believe someone had time to write entire book while running for their lives? With dialogs and detailed description of all events? It’s also totally unnecessary. You can have an open ending without pretending it’s a historic document. It’s also crazy old. Don Quijote does he same thing, pretending it’s actually a real story being translated from old, Arabic sources. It doesn’t mean the books are bad. It just a trope ending.
I strongly disagree… It was deus ex machina trash with a twist. Using the original ending would have left the audience wanting closure and not getting it. Instead, they wrapped it up nice and tight and King got to murder another kid.
I completely agree with you. I’ve left very similar comments whenever this movie’s come up in the past, and someone always shows up to say “Even King agrees the movie ending’s better!” Well, it’s bullshit.
Maybe the first time I read a comment disliking the movie ending! Yeah, the story leaves the ending open, maybe scarier? But the movie ending is a sledgehammer to the face.
Either way, can we agree the religious-nut lady was one of the most hateful characters of all time? I’d have shot her just to keep the situation from spiraling out of control any further. Seriously! You’re in a fight for your very survival and this bitch is riling up the crowd, the very people you need to work with so you all survive, and against your child?!
I can totally agree with that. I found her to be one of the most humanly believable villains in any story I’ve seen or read. She’d fit in to so many real world situations as that exact person. Absolutely the kind of nut job you’d see having a meltdown tantrum as someone recorded her on their phone.
Ooof.
I refuse to watch this movie again because of this ending.
I genuinely liked the movie, but hated the ending enough that it was years before I watched it again.
Anyone who hasn’t, go read the book. The ending is soooo much better and really had me hoping King would explore that whole world more… Easily one of my top five stories of his.
King himself said he liked the new ending better. https://www.reddit.com/r/horror/comments/z7894i/why_do_you_think_stephen_king_liked
Remember space 🐢?
The book ending is super lazy. The “I was actually writing this story this whole time and now I’m leaving it here for someone to find” trope was used sooo many times before (“Handmade’s tale” to name one). Movie ending was at least original.
For reference: handmaids tail was published in 1985, the mist was published in 1980. There are probably examples of that trope prior to the mist, but the handmaids tale isn’t one.
The Handmaid’s Tale (it’s kinda funny how both you and a commenter replying to you misspell the name in two different ways) is going for a “The Lady or the Tiger” ending. Do you believe that Nick is actually part of the Resistance, or is he part of the state secret police? The narrative tricked us a little with the “relationship” between Offred and the Commander - can we trust anyone at all?
The epilogue also gives the narrative some verisimilitude. It’s pretending to be a historical document - how would the world post-Gilead react to accounts of what happened to women during Gilead? How would you interact with the Diary of Anne Frank if you didn’t know that she was killed in the camps?
I fail to see how it’s similar to “The Mist” here.
If I remember correctly “The Mist” also ends by pretending it was a “historical document”. That’s the similarity I was referring to. In my opinion it’s a bit silly. Are we really to believe someone had time to write entire book while running for their lives? With dialogs and detailed description of all events? It’s also totally unnecessary. You can have an open ending without pretending it’s a historic document. It’s also crazy old. Don Quijote does he same thing, pretending it’s actually a real story being translated from old, Arabic sources. It doesn’t mean the books are bad. It just a trope ending.
The changed ending for the film is a fucking masterpiece. Even King says it, and he’s famously bitchy about filmmakers changing his storylines.
I strongly disagree… It was deus ex machina trash with a twist. Using the original ending would have left the audience wanting closure and not getting it. Instead, they wrapped it up nice and tight and King got to murder another kid.
It was narratively consistent. Other world, no way home, found a way home at a steep cost.
I completely agree with you. I’ve left very similar comments whenever this movie’s come up in the past, and someone always shows up to say “Even King agrees the movie ending’s better!” Well, it’s bullshit.
Right? King, who’s endorsed and even appeared in some of the worst adaptations of his books. He’s truly a master, but a movie writer he is not…
Maybe the first time I read a comment disliking the movie ending! Yeah, the story leaves the ending open, maybe scarier? But the movie ending is a sledgehammer to the face.
Either way, can we agree the religious-nut lady was one of the most hateful characters of all time? I’d have shot her just to keep the situation from spiraling out of control any further. Seriously! You’re in a fight for your very survival and this bitch is riling up the crowd, the very people you need to work with so you all survive, and against your child?!
I can totally agree with that. I found her to be one of the most humanly believable villains in any story I’ve seen or read. She’d fit in to so many real world situations as that exact person. Absolutely the kind of nut job you’d see having a meltdown tantrum as someone recorded her on their phone.