I liked it. I think it shows just how fragile society is, and how people react when rules go out the window.

Thoughts?

I thought it was an excellent film. The acting was well done and the many scenes that took place in the supermarket did not get boring. I also enjoyed the special effects quite a bit.

cool movie, i thought the main characters acting was horrible, and i wished they showed more of that GIGANTIC monster.

Pretty dramatic ending, for sure.

Oh, I remember I absolutely hated the preacher lady. The actress did a good job, I suppose, but holy hell I just wanted to stab her through my monitor. I think if I ever saw the actress in real life I'd still hate her.

Ending is lawl.

The ending pretty much ruined it. Aside from the idiocy involved in them simply driving out to the middle of nowhere without stopping for gas or food, the military magically finding them seconds later? It seemed like a joke, as opposed to an ending to a serious, dramatic, horror film.

I'm not one of those a-holes that always thinks the book is better than the movie, but honestly...Stephen King offered this story up to the big screen on a silver platter. This is one of the few King books that would have been very difficult to fuck-up (ie. it was an easy transition to film), and yet somehow Frank Darabont managed. I'd say his ending was the film equivalent of flashing Goatse on the screen, and then yelling "PWNED".

EDIT: Although the ending is my biggest problem, I also was annoyed with how bland and typical most of the creatures were. He captured the extra-dimensional, Lovecraftian theme with the tentacle and the collossal creature (at the end), but for the bulk of the film we just see these unimaginative prehistoric-looking creatures. The creepiest part about King's story was that the monsters looked like they came from a "lunatic's nightmare", and were often comically grotesque. The flying creatures did not look like pterodactyls (they were pale, disgusting things, in fact), and the bugs were not just giant cicadas. The "spiders" weren't spiders, but rather a "spider" was the closest thing that could be compared to it. I mean, I'm not just talking about a difference in interpretation here; Darabont threw out completely nightmarish monsters in exchange for fucking...dinosaurs, and a monster from Half-Life 2.

I could forgive the monsters if the overall film was good, but alas...Darabont changed a great story in exchange for somthing subpar, and downright goofy, so fuck him, and fuck this movie.

The ending was fucking hilarious, and all of the monsters had googley eyes. Overall I thought it was an okay movie, i thought that the acting was a little bit off.

The plot did take a lot from half-life. But I havn't read The Mist so I don't know if that's how the story was in the book? Although I wouldn't have taken Stephen King to be a gamer.

Shit movie, awesome ending.

I think it's amusing that the director decided to replace the Flat Earth society with atheists. The religious overtones to the movie made it a lot better than the short story, and I loved the ending, something the story didn't have.

On the downside, someone already said it, but they really fucked things up by showing the bug monsters in full. When it comes to suspense and horror, it's so much better to suggest rather than to give it all away. I suppose that has something to do with my enjoyment of the Sci-Fi channel where every single kind of possible monster has been done to death.

The giant walking creature, the tentacle and the death of the flat-earth society worked great.... maybe if they hadn't given full creature shots of the flying bugs, it would have been better.