re: Does The Mist have the worst ending ever?

quote:

---

Yeah, no. He can be a bit wordy, but he's one of the very best at creating atmosphere and tension through words. The Stand is a modern classic, while IT and The Shining are both also GOAT horror novels.

---

But there is a distinction between writing and storytelling. The "academic" consensus is generally thought to be that King is a fantastic storyteller but rather pedestrian writer. I'm agnostic in respect of the matter.

quote:

---

But there is a distinction between writing and storytelling. The "academic" consensus is generally thought to be that King is a fantastic storyteller but rather pedestrian writer. I'm agnostic in respect of the matter.

---

Oh agreed, King is no Faulkner, that much is true But he's far form "shitty."

Ok, I'm willing to concede he may not be a "shitty" writer, but his stuff is just kind of lacking in a certain style I like I guess.

I'd compare him to John Grisham or Clive Cussler, two widely read authors who churn out a lot of work that is easy to read but, as another poster mentioned, somewhat unrefined in an "artistic" sense. Cussler is much more formulaic than the other two, to the point of absurdity.

Also I've enjoyed books by all three of these authors, so I'm not above reading them or anything.

I agree with the guy who said the book ended better. With them stuck traveling through a world with these things. It was bleaker for humanity but it wasn't shock for shock. I don't mind the movie but I'll skip the scene where he shoots everyone and I never do that.

I'd say Remember Me has a much worse ending. Fantastic job by having 9/11 come right out of nowhere in order for us to care about the characters. I'm sure someone who had family who died in it were thrilled when that unexpectedly came on the screen.

It was a great ending... and I'm one of the most critical viewers imaginable.

quote:

---

Stephen King said he loved the ending better than his own book.

I liked the twist :shrug:

---

agree. they were terrorized the entire time, they all wanted to die before being eaten, not a leap.

quote:

---

The "academic" consensus is generally thought to be that King is a fantastic storyteller but rather pedestrian writer.

---

I think it's actually the opposite.

In my opinion (and I've read an incredible amount, including most of the "classics" of English literature) King's prose is really pretty good. It's clean and efficient, unambiguous, and it flows in a natural way so that the reader doesn't have to consciously read in a mechanical manner that takes them away from experiencing or living in the story as if they were watching a film.

If your idea of good prose is Hawthorne or Faulkner, you'll diss him, but the way he writes is stylistically perfect for his stories.

quote:

---

I'd compare him to John Grisham or Clive Cussler, two widely read authors who churn out a lot of work that is easy to read but, as another poster mentioned, somewhat unrefined in an "artistic" sense. Cussler is much more formulaic than the other two, to the point of absurdity.

---

As a writer, his talents really lie in characterization. Kings paints some pretty incredible characters and that's where he expends all his energy and talent. THAT'S what sets him apart from Cussler and Clancy et al and why people connect to King in ways they don't to those other authors.

Where he fails is from denouement on. He writes well stylistically speaking, he's excellent at characterization, and he has really good ideas to base his stories on. He just can't "bring it home".

The latter half of a King book always descends into silliness and kookiness, they suffer from his tendency for over-explaining (where it would be better if more things were left to mystery or for the reader to color in as they see fit), and the very end is always unsatisfying.

quote:

---

I mean, there's probably like thousands of abandoned vehicles in the area, no one wanted to risk siphoning some gas or just trying to steal another car?

---

This is what makes it dumb as hell. Negative ending is fine, but don't make people who were acting fairly logically and showed strong survival instincts for most the movie start acting like idiots just to fit a narrative.

The whole driving along the interstate makes it an idiotic ending when they are obviously able to get off anywhere and hit a gas station, not even going into the entire siphoning angle.

It was a dumb ending that made no sense just for the sake of shock value.