At least he's not dead!

Terry Pratchett announced yesterday that he has Alzheimer's:

Best-selling fantasy author Terry Pratchett has been diagnosed with a rare form of early onset Alzheimer's, he said in a message posted to his illustrator's Web site.

In a brief note to fans entitled "An Embuggerance," Pratchett, 59, said he was taking the news "fairly philosophically" and "possibly with a mild optimism."

Well, it's bad news but at least it's not an announcement that he died, which we've seen a few too many of in the last year. Here's hoping he sticks around for quite a while.

The Mist (movie and novella) by Stephen King

www

I really enjoyed this novella when I read it some 15 years ago. It's really one of the best examples of Stephen King's writing. I was complaining to my wife after the movie that evidently most people who make Stephen King movies either don't understand what his books are truly about or don't read them in the first place. I don't take credit for inventing the idea that stories are either primarily about characters or plot, but I did figure that out for myself and one of the most obvious examples of a writer whose books are about characters is Stephen King. That must sound like a strange analysis of the "Master of Horror" that King is called or claimed to be. But I have read almost the entirety of his body of work and King is, above all, concerned with characters. He thinks about what they feel, think, do, say, and react to each other. This is in sharp contrast to some people who write characters that are about as realistic as a He-Man action figure (like JK Rowling).

So one can say that the plot of The Mist is that a weird mist rolls over the town, filled with monsters and creatures all of which seem to be bent on killing people. Some people manage to find refuge in a supermarket, where they struggle to survive. The meat of the story is about what exactly they would do to survive, and how they decide to act under these circumstances. Basically it's all a setup for the characters so that King can explore their actions and reactions as individuals and as a group. And that's what's really fascinating about this book. People have done monster stories before. People have done stories about people trapped in a situation with no way out. King's story isn't remarkable in his choice to use those two elements together. It's remarkable because he can write realistic and believable characters in that situation.

You have Mrs. Carmody, the nut (some might characterize her as a religious nut, but religion is her enabler, not the cause of her viciousness). This is the woman you're hoping the monsters will eat first. There are plenty of memorable characters and King manages to give them, mostly, distinct personalities that react to the situation in different ways. There's also the mob mentality of Mrs. Carmody's followers, which is all too believable.

The action of the story is driven by the monsters in the mist, but the drama is all in the choices the people make. Most of the time the monsters are simply some threat out there, not inside the store at all, but that merely gives the people more time to turn on each other. I really don't take this as some kind of scary monster story. It's not an Alien or Predator situation. This is a psychological thriller about what happens to people under extreme duress. It's a fine story, and at about 113 pages it's not too long to take the time to read it.

The Movie

Frank Darabont's adaptation holds up pretty well (this is Darabont's fourth time adapting a King work). Unlike many, perhaps most, movie adaptations, the story is left almost completely unchanged, with even a lot of the same dialog. Darabont has a very simple directorial style in this movie (and overall, mostly), with no dramatic slowdowns, no dramatic closeups, very little in the way of swelling music, etc. I'm very pleased with that as many directors can't seem to figure out that nobody appreciates what they think are wonderful shots.

I thought the movie was good pretty much because it left the original story alone. The monsters were pretty cool and the effects were pretty good overall. The actors were great though. Thomas Jane was a very, very good choice for this role. Just about everyone was absolutely believable in their role, and Andre Braugher played Norton perfectly. It's always nice to watch a movie where actors act like their characters!

There is a major, major drawback to this movie, and that is what Darabont does with the ending. He does not keep the original ending and what he does is inexplicable. After the movie had gone the way it had for so long, why he would choose an ending like that is beyond me.

I'd give the movie 4 out of 5 stars, but the ending alone takes it down to a 3. However, let me say that I enjoyed that movie a lot and I do recomment seeing it. As long as you're prepared to be disappointed by the ending, you won't be as upset as I was.