Why, when a Stephen King adaptation is made, do they keep his dialogue or the tone of his dialogue...

Why, when a Stephen King adaptation is made, do they keep his dialogue or the tone of his dialogue? The man can do many things, but dialogue is not one of those things. Especially not when it comes to kids. I don't think I've ever noticed how jarring King is with kid characters prior to The Mist.

My opinion is the exact opposite of yours, Stephen King's dialogue is great.

stephen king writes most of his own screenplays
which breaks down to him copying all the dialouge while throwing out everything else

which is why most stephen king movies stink,
save for the ones where he has no involvement like the Shining

This movie is the only movie in which I've hated the good, bad, and stupid characters equally.

Yep. Probably the closest that I've seen a King story really 'get' the human condition, especially in times of panic.

Storm of the Century is fuckin great, including the dialogue

I love how they managed to make it look like an Asylum production with that poster

I meant that as an insult.

Was the kid taken at the end supposed to be Flagg or was the demon Flagg looking for a successor?

I know you meant it as one, but it isn't one.

The Mist is probably the best Stephen King movie that's actually a Stephen King movie (pro-tip: it's Kubrick's Shining not King's Shining)

[Bachman is King's pen-name]

This desperately needs an adaptation. Is there another piece of media which even closely resembles the synopsis of this book? I've never seen or read anything else quite like it.

Oh but that ending though. Seriously, was there any reason they decided to go full edge when the original ending was perfectly OK?

Stephen King is a fetishist, he gets off with his shitty writing, I always wonder how a man can write so much unfiltered shit, you might believe a man with so much success could try at least once to try to write something passable but no, King can't stop his cum from flowing 24/7 while writing his inane kid books

The ending was better executed in the film than the book, sorry to say you just don't get it. If it didn't pan out the way it did it would be just another ambiguously bleak conclusion to an apocalypse story. Just like the book

Because it keeps with the theme of the movie and the story, which is what happens when people are confined in a tight space, and they think that there's no hope in the future. Even the most intelligent, most rational people lose their minds.

>entire premise of the show is that there is something in the mist that kills yet no one knows what it is so it's super mysterious
>let's just show it's a bunch of monsters and shit right on the poster

This should be a two season Netflix Original.

Give me a recap. Pretty sure I read either this or the one under the Stephen King pen name. But not sure which.

If characters were broken down instead of written as insufferable shits from the beginning, then maybe you would any credibility.

From what I recall it's like an amalgam of an acid western and a sci-fi backboned by a bunch of suburbites trapped in a (what I'd assume to be) Kafkaesque situation.

>top movie on IMDB is a Stephen King adaptation
Really files those neutrons