Official Trailer Provides First Look at Spike's "The Mist" - Bloody Disgusting!

Official Trailer Provides First Look at Spike’s “The Mist”

Fear. Human. Nature.

Ten years after the Frank Darabont-directed film depressed us all with its shocking ending, Spike is bringing “The Mist” to the small screen with the network’s own adaptation of the Stephen King novella. The series from executive producer and writer Christian Torpe has been described as a “twisted cousin” to the source material, and the 10-episode first season premieres in June.

On tap today is the official trailer for the series, which feels both familiar and way different than what we’ve read/seen before. Oddly enough, there are no otherworldly monsters in this first look at the small screen reimagining. Rather, the threat seems to be the titular mist itself, which looks to be playing tricks on the human characters and making them do terrible things.

Or maybe Spike just doesn’t want to spill all the beans just yet. Check it out below!

In the series…

A small town family is torn apart by a brutal crime. As they deal with the fallout, an eerie mist rolls in, suddenly cutting them off from the rest of the world and, in some cases, each other. Family, friends and adversaries become strange bedfellows, battling the mysterious mist and its threats, fighting to maintain morality and sanity as the rules of society break down.

Morgan Spector, Frances Conroy, Alyssa Sutherland, Gus Birney, Dan Butler, Luke Cosgrove, Danica Curcic, Okezie Morro, Darren Pettie, Russell Posner, and Isiah Whitlock, Jr. star.

“The Mist” premieres Thursday, June 22nd on Spike.

  • Johnny Bronto Lipscomb

    Why do we even need this?

    • Emil Tiedemann

      We don’t need ANYthing, it’s not a matter of NEEDing. If it’s good, then awesome. If it sucks, then don’t watch. Sorry if I sound mean lol

  • This actually looks really good. I was asking why we needed it too, but now I don’t even care. Where the original story and film focus primarily on that one grocery store, the series seems to be expanding all over town. People are forced into buildings, into groups, walled off from the others. I like it. I wish them luck.

  • Munchie

    looks absolutely worthless. good thing we know stephen king loves it!

    • frank54

      I Would Like To See More Of The Big Huge Creatures That Were In The Movie ”The Mist”….So Far This Looks Like Its Different MIST That Causes Peoples Minds To Be Taken Over By Something Evil!!!!….I Don’t Know,…We Will Just Have To Wait And See,…Its Way To Early To Tell Just Yet!!!

  • Richter Belmont

    I might give the first episode a shot but I’m sorry this looks really cheap looking and it’s on Spike. Plus, the last time King endorsed a tv show based off of one of his works it was Under The Dome, and look how that turned out.

  • Brando

    I dunno, man. Anyone remember that TV show Haven, which was supposed to be based on a Stephen King book? It was downright Hallmark Channel kind of crap.

    • disqus_uPh3WDxbQy

      Haven was a fun show.

    • Saturn

      I personally loved Haven – for me it was one of the best things on tv over recent years (admittedly, it was very loosely based on the Colorado Kid story, but still……).

  • Riiiiiiiiiight

    THIS. LOOKS. TERRIBLE.

  • DBZEROGRAVITY

    well that was lackluster

  • K-Dogg

    The Mist 90210, brought to you by CW (Sigh)

  • Chris Davis

    Of course they have to put some homosexuality in it… ridiculous cause there was no mention of it in the original story… left always pushing their agenda…

    • Daniel Jackson

      oh fuck off.

      • disqus_uPh3WDxbQy

        Agreed. Double fuck off.

    • MySelfDestruct

      LOL oh Chis. You sweet summer chid.

    • Sean David

      You will die a virgin.

    • Lee W Dalgleish

      Oh for goodness sake. Get over it. Why shouldn’t there be gay people in it? We are a part of society after all. The original film did a different ending, did you whine about that too? Or is it just the gays that trigger you? FFS.

    • Southernholiday

      I saw that too, and I’m thinking why did that need to be in the trailer? Two dudes making out does not add anything. Now if it were two dudes embracing I may not have had an issue with it since a broader meaning is possible. Here though, it’s just the Left’s usual virtue-signaling.

      • theundead

        If that was two lesbians making out you wouldn’t be complaining sexist homophobe

      • Lee W Dalgleish

        And what if it were a straight couple kissing? would that be an issue too? Why is it always an issue when two people of the same gender/sex show any sort of affection? I don’t bitch at all the straight people on TV making out or showing any sort of sexual activity.

        • Southernholiday

          Because straight people kissing is called normality, and alludes to something that propagates a society or civilization.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            kissing is normal, regardless of your sexuality. Love/affection/relationships are normal, regardless of sexuality. Straight people are just common. Straight people are no more normal than gay people. And I hate to break it to you, but gay people will always exist. If you have an issue with gay people being in your TV shows, there’s this wonderful invention called a remote. Use it. Don’t start bitching because there’s gay people on TV. Chances are many of your favourite shows will have been made by a gay person or had gay people working on them in some format… Unless it’s Duck Dynasty. That’s always a popular show for the small minded homophobes.

          • Southernholiday

            1. No, heterosexuality is the norm and homosexuality is abnormal.

            2. If you can point to where I have ever denied the existence of gay folks then please do so.

            3. The homophobe name game is up, bro. Between people laughing when called a homophobe bc of its meaningless, and recent revelations that its intended meaning was contrived at best; nobody cares about being called that….with the exception of chronic virtue-signalers.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            Nope, heterosexuality is common. You are common. Deal with it, princess. There’s nothing abnormal about being gay. The only abnormal people are the homophobes. The meaning behind homophobe is fear/hate/dislike/discrimination of gay people. I personally prefer using a word that begins with C and sounds like runt. You seem obsessed with the left. I’m going to guess your one of those right wing loons that dislikes anything that shows any ounce of diversity on TV. Must be a daily struggle for you watching the TV.

          • Southernholiday

            Once again heterosexuality is actually normative because it actually has important biological and societal functions which homosexuality just can’t fulfill. In fact large scale propagation and forced normalization (the idea that hetero and homosexuality are just two equal, but different lifestyles) has disastrous effects on society. And thank you for showing g that the meaning of homophobe is contrived at best. The idea that homophobe can be applied to anyone that doesn’t buy into the leftist view of homosexuality demonstrates a complete lack of critical thinking.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            Oh poppet, I don’t think thinking is a skill you yet possess. Gay people can still have kids and reproduce, even if they have to have sex with the opposite gender. They’re still gay. Being gay is normal. It’s just cretins like yourself who seem to think things are forced down your throat or forced on you. No one is forcing you to watch a TV program or a film or read a book. I’m assuming you’ve not progressed onto books that don’t have pretty pictures in it. Being gay isn’t a lifestyle. Just like being straight isn’t a lifestyle. Buying fancy clothes and taking expensive holidays is a lifestyle. Being gay has no disastrous effect on society.

          • Southernholiday

            Once again it seems you failed to comprehend what I wrote. That happens. The catch is that homosexual couples can’t get each other pregnant. Also, are you saying there are other factors to homosexuality than just biological, sexual attraction? Maybe nurture and environment have a role, or maybe there is substance to various studies that molestation at a young age increases the chances of boys becoming homosexuals?

            ETA: Thanks for the cretin comment. I think I finally understand why I enjoy cretin hop by the Ramones so much.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            What you wrote was a pile of shit, to be quite blunt. I’m tired of cretins like yourself getting uppity about LGBT people having any sort of presence on TV. You watch something and the first thing that comes to your mind is a gay couple in the trailer. Of all things to criticise it’s a gay couple. I wouldn’t sit there and go on about it being a straight couple. There is absolutely NO SUBSTANCE to molestation being linked to homosexuality. That is a load of BS that the right wing, low IQ homophobes trot out.

          • Southernholiday

            Really? There has been no 100% conclusive findings, but there are legitimate findings that suggest a link. Notice I included the word maybe in that sentence about the substance of such findings. That can be a very important word, so you have to be on the lookout for it. And I hate to break it to you, but psychologists have found that when dealing with gay men it is not uncommon to find that their relationship with their dad or older men has played a role in their homosexuality. I’m not talking conversion therapy, I’m talking about regular therapy or counseling.

            Let me also clarify that I was merely responding to another poster. I wasn’t saying it would play a role in my decision to watch The Mist. I am actually a fan of the novella (I found out about it after playing the first Silent Hill), and the movie. In other words I am a fan of The Mist, and like the op said, the gay kiss wasn’t in the original story; and it’s inclusion is probably nothing more than virtue-signaling.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            There are no findings at all. Nothing. Nothing to suggest molestation is linked to being gay. Nothing legitimate. No relationship has played any role in my sexuality. I am gay. I knew at 4. I hid it for years and tried to pretend I was straight. The mental and emotional burden was too much and I came out at 20. Conversion therapy is also debunked as harmful and no decent psychologist supports it. Even those who ran the therapy centres have admitted it’s all a load of shit.
            Who cares if there wasn’t a kiss between a gay couple in The Mist? This isn’t a direct remake. Alterations have been made and the content runs far longer than a novella would. Things get padded out, characters get added. Who is to say there wouldn’t be a gay couple in the town? There would be

          • pablitonizer

            No need to make him understand something he’ll NEVER understand…he’s a prehistoric person!

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            He’s most likely just a troll anyway. I agree, he’ll never understand. He’ll just continue to trot out the same BS I see time and again from people like him. Of all things to single out in a trailer it’s a gay couple. Says a lot about him

          • Southernholiday

            Prehistoric? Now that is the one insult which has truly gotten to me. I would have much preferred medieval.

          • pablitonizer

            I’m not insulting you, I’m defining you!

          • Southernholiday

            Well that’s even more insulting that you didn’t define me as medieval.

          • Southernholiday

            Actually there are plenty, you just have to go to Google. Dismissing them by labeling them illegitimate doesn’t make it the truth. And, yes, I’m sure 4 year old you was completely able to make such a credible decision.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            I’ve had these discussions with your ilk before and the links are ALWAYS right wing/religious clap trap. There are no credible links/articles that support your claims. None of the gay people I knew have been molested. They weren’t influenced to be gay in any way. They just knew their sexuality. And who are you to tell me what my own experiences in life are? Yes I knew at 4, as did many other gay people I know.

          • Southernholiday

            Ah qpq. You have assumed many things about me, none of which were based off a comment I made about some major decision when I was four. I’ve seen your type too often. They have no actual argument (it’s all feels and no logic) so when someone defies their views on the subject they lazily resort to empty names like “homophobe”

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            Major decision? That would imply I chose to be gay or decided I was gay. No, it was a realisation. I realised that I was/am gay at a young age. People realise their sexuality at varying ages. You’ve provided no argument at all. Point out where you’ve used any logic. You’ve not used any. There’s no logic in getting uppity about a gay couple in a trailer. It’s like me getting upset that there’s straight couples in the series. It’s stupid and pointless. Your gripe is that there were no gay couples in a novella. AND? This is a series that will span hours longer than the film and is not a direct duplicate of the novella. do you not see how ridiculous you are? What am I saying? Of course you don’t. You’re the sort of person that watches a trailer and gets hung up on a gay couple briefly being shown in it. It’s like people being up in arms about Beauty and the Beast having a gay character in it. The scene people were ‘boycotting’ lasted barely 2 seconds and yet people lost their shit over it. i feel sad for you. To watch a trailer for a show and your gripe is the depiction of other people in society.

          • Southernholiday

            You yourself have alluded to sexual activity being a choice. It may not have been a choice for you, but the 4 year old part is questionable at best. I commend you on completely ignoring my first post, and coming up with an argument that is downright inane. Anything past my first post and my references to the original novella is just you reading into something that isn’t there. My point isn’t whether or not there would be gay people in the town, it is that such an inconsequential thing was included in the trailer for the sake of virtue-signaling, but then again you haven’t directly addressed my arguments because you can’t, which is why you result to profanity and name calling. You do make for quite the lolcow though.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            Sexuality and sex life are two completely different things. I have not written a word about sexual activity. I have not mentioned my sex life or anyone’s sex life. You yourself have brought up sexual activity. For all you know, I could be celibate. Why is it questionable for you when I tell you MY experiences? Because I was quite self aware at 4 years old? When did you suddenly realise you were straight? Was it just something you always knew? It’s funny how people like you like to analyse gay people’s lives/experiences so much. You don’t get this sort of critique when it comes to straight people and their lives.
            Your whole stream of posts are the only thing inane. You just can’t handle the fact you’ve been called out and constantly questioned. Not to mention you’ve been rather embarrassingly wrong the entire time. My original point seem to have alluded you it seems. Would this be an issue if that couple were straight? Why is it virtue signalling with a gay couple? Maybe, and i know this might be difficult for you to grasp, maybe, it is merely the inclusion of a regular couple, regardless of their sexuality. If this had been a straight couple you wouldn’t have batted an eyelid I bet, but because it’s a gay couple, it’s suddenly ‘the left, virtue signalling’… You’re a tit short of an udder.

          • J Jett

            Lee, you are awesome! i agree w/ you 100%.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            Thanks 😉
            I just get tired of seeing comments by people like this person. I didn’t even notice the gay couple at first and I’m gay! lol
            I watched the trailer and my instant thought was “I hope there are creatures and it’s not the mist making people hallucinate”.
            I like that shows are depicting gay couples and trans people. They need to be seen and heard for people like the OP to realise that their views are outdated and ignorant. If it’s not depicted as normal (which it is) then things don’t change. I watch a show and I don’t count the number of straight couples or analyse why a straight couple is in a show. Yet some people seem to do just that with gay people. It’s weird. I have no idea why they would be so invested in such things. Like people who think shows should only show 100% statistics of society, like there can only ever be 1 gay person in a village at one time. Like they evenly distribute us amongst every community. lol
            Sorry for the essay. I’m on one today. Haha

          • J Jett

            Lee, no need to apologize! i’m gay as well and i have had interactions with various people over the years (those like the misinformed/unenlightened person you’ve been admirably trying to educate about this subject) and i’ve said almost every single thing you’ve said here (although you have MUCH more patience with this Southernholiday person than would have! LOL). unfortunately close mindedness/homophobic attitudes are still around in 2017.

          • Southernholiday

            You do know what sexual activity means don’t you?

            “even if they have to have sex with the opposite gender. They’re still gay.”
            Those are your words and they definitely imply choice in regards to sexual activity.

            “My original point seem to have alluded you it seems.”

            Someone of your superior intellect should have known the difference between elude and allude.
            Oh and other than whatever else I have said about it being virtue signaling, it’s pointless inclusion comes off as a way of showing how morally progressive they think they are. Had it been kept a secret my opinion may have been different. As I think is clearly visible from this discussion, right wingers are clearly more tolerant of differences in opinions that those on the left.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            I’m multitasking, sweetheart. If all you’ve got is a typo, you really don’t have much of an argument. AH, the old, ‘I don’t mind gays on TV as long as it’s secret’ mentality. Fuck off. Why should it be secret? You don’t see straight people keeping it secret in every damn film/TV show. Plenty of fucking going on between straight people in shows like True Blood or romances in The Walking Dead.
            And I think you’ll find, the right wing are historically and notoriously anti LGBT. You have just cemented that even further.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Yes–that it’s followed up by one guy beating the shit out of the other is TOTALLY moral signaling. Those evil, evil, evil leftist Hollywood types.

            And when people resort to grammar policing as part of their argument, it’s because they don’t have anything of substance to actually say.

          • Carlton Fisher

            You can also google studies that “prove” the health values of smoking. Those studies have been debunked as well. If you want to cling to junk science, that’s your choice, but don’t try to legitimize studies that have been disproven and pretend they are equal to studies that have actual scientific grounding.

          • Blood Boil

            You are simply just a fucking idiot and there is zero objective evidence to what you are stating. It is also sad that a homophobic sub mental such as yourself would even listen to the Ramones, a band who were clearly not homophobic and would disprove of your ignorance

          • Southernholiday

            Johnny Ramone was a right-winger.

          • Blood Boil

            1 out of 4, wow. Read their lyrics and get back to me. You’re still a hate spewing clown.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Watch the trailer again, bud. There a ton of stuff in it that’s not in the original novella.

            And maybe, if you watch a bit closer, you’ll feel better about the gay kiss when you notice that it, apparently, gets followed up by one of the guys beating the shit out of the other. Is that “normal” enough for you?

          • Carlton Fisher

            I know the studies you’re referring to that have attempted to link homosexuality to molestation at a young age, and no, there is no substance to them. They’ve been disproven as junk science time and time again. It doesn’t stop people who find their conclusions to be convenient from quoting them over and over again though. Of course, as usual, with people of your ilk, your obsession seems to be with homosexuality in men. Lesbians a turn-on for you, are they?

            And plenty of heterosexual couples can’t get each other pregnant either. No one seems to be railing against their sex lives though.

          • Southernholiday

            And what are your qualifications? If you have any that aren’t limited by a progressive worldview then tell me.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Oh, so a “progressive world view” is a limitation, but your conservative world view isn’t? If you want to play qualification wars, then, please, tell me what YOURS are. So far you’ve indicated the extent of your “qualifications” comes down to a Google search.

          • Southernholiday

            You are stalling because you have nothing to back up your claims. Generally speaking I want to see that there is an attempt to establish a proper control group, what groups were sampled, sample size, recognition of factors that the study was unable to measure, plus sources, and the reputation of the company conducting the study. Let’s use Huffpost’s article on the study that showed racism via online sales of baseball cards. The writers thought they struck gold as did their readers, but TL;DR did a video detailing how sloppy and faulty the study actually was

          • Carlton Fisher

            Huffpost isn’t an outlet for actual research, which I should think most people would understand. I’m not “stalling.” I’m asking you to put up or shut up. You’re deflecting by asking what my qualifications are, then, please, tell me yours, since you’re apparently under the impression that you’re in possession of some sort of superior knowledge base. If you supposedly have such a definitive study that, as you claim, supports your point of view, then where is the information about “an attempt to establish a proper control group, what groups were
            sampled, sample size, recognition of factors that the study was unable
            to measure, plus sources, and the reputation of the company conducting
            the study”? You’re not coughing it up because you have nothing to offer, because your study was debunked. So instead, you’re deflecting by saying anyone who questions your evidence (which you haven’t actually offered) has to provide concrete evidence that will somehow trump what you supposedly have. So if you want someone to definitively debunk your source and knock down your argument, then put it out there where it’s a fair target. Or, shut the hell up if you’ve got nothing to go with except junk science and your “feeling” on the matter.

          • Southernholiday

            I can see that my point went over your triggered head. Huffpost is a news outlet though, and it reported on a particular study. This particular study was then analyzed by someone on YouTube who pointed out the study was mishandled. That video is a decent reference what to look for when reading studies. I never claimed any one concrete source that settled the matter once and for all. I merely suggested he Google what was available online for himself and he could come to his own conclusion. You on the other hand are under the impression that you have solid proof of the opposite of my claims, and since you won’t show me your solid proof I consider your claims to be progressive fantasies like 1 in 5 and 77¢.

          • Carlton Fisher

            You specifically said you had a study that linked molestation to homosexuality. But i can see you’re backing down at the moment, because you got called on being full of shit. You want qualifications, yet seem to have none. You want information on “proven studies,” yet have none of your own. Yet you somehow think the people on here are supposed to accept your assertion? That’s an interesting fantasy world you live in. You’re giving me “a story” that happened to be be “reported” on Huffpost and then analyzed by “someone” on YouTube of all things (the place I know I always go for my intellectual needs) and then say I’m the one who has nothing. Please–put up or shut up. And since you apparently have NOTHING to put up, then PLEASE, shut the fuck up.

          • Carlton Fisher

            Now you’re changing terminology without acknowledging a vast difference in meaning. There is a HUGE difference between “normal” and “normative.”

            But please, untangle your contrived and jumbled rhetoric for me and explain this “leftist view” of homosexuality. Do you mean the one that’s supported by actual science and psychological studies? Because I would venture that if you’re willing to deny supportable evidence to complain that what two people do which doesn’t affect you is somehow repugnant, then yes, you fit the standard profile for a homophobe (more appropriately, a heterosexist) rather perfectly.

            Though, not that this will matter to you, I doubt anyone will be breaking into your house, putting a gun to your head, and forcing you to watch this “abhorrent behavior.”

          • Southernholiday

            And what would be the one supported by actual science? Let me know please. And I like heterosexist, so thank you.

          • Carlton Fisher

            The fact you “like” heterosexist says an awful lot right there. It’s like saying you like being called a racist.

            There’s more than one study that’s been supported by verifiable, peer-reviewed research methods. Is there a specific one that you want? I’m not going to be able to link you into the databases that I use because they are subscription only and I’m not sharing my password with you. but why aren’t you able to Google it, as you’ve indicated people should do to find your “study”?

          • Prince Of Darkness

            I know a guy who said he knew he was gay as an early teen because whenever he’d see a man and a woman kissing, or a video of a man and woman having sex, he’d get nauseous, so it’s not really abnormal for straight people to find same sex affection gross. Right now, gays are more tolerated than they ever have been in history. What they don’t have is mass acceptance no matter how hard they try to force it. And that is what is happening, an attempt to force mass acceptance.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            Although the tolerance depends on what state in America you live and what country. Chechnya at the moment is horrific. Personally I know of a few people who joke about feeling sick at the sight of straight people kissing but it’s more bravado and to mock straight people who take issue with it. I’ve never really been one to feel nausea over anyone kissing or having a relationship in film/TV or even seeing pda in the street. It’s not something I feel I should be disgusted or offended by. Love is love as they say.

          • There is a basic flaw in your premise – that “normalcy” has inherent value.

          • Honest

            Also that the premise of continuation of a society is in and of itself the purpose of every individual, and that maintaining what is comfortable and unchanging to some people (anybody who isn’t straight isn’t allowed to show emotions or behavior that makes them uncomfortable) is a detriment to said society and ignores the evolving nature denoting a healthy one. It always amazes me how the people who rail against “political correctness” throw tantrums whenever someone says or does something that makes them even slightly uncomfortable. It doesn’t affect them. It unsettles them. They should own it, deal with it, and grow up.

          • You’re absolutely right. It’s especially concerning in a comments section about horror – a genre that is in its very nature opposed to close-mindedness.

          • Dave Galloway

            Word salad. Please explain why you would send a gay couple to colonize a planet?

          • Honest

            Not word salad, and colonization is the job of the pansexual armada if I recall the minutes from the last Gay Agenda meeting correctly

          • Carlton Fisher

            Yes, because straight people only make out when they want to make babies, which is why birth control is a billion dollar industry.

          • Dave Galloway

            Which is exactly why I have zero interest in the new Alien movie. They are colonizing a planet, and one of the couples is gay. Makes absolutely no sense other than Hollywood pushing the gay agenda down our throats.

      • Gross. You’re gross.

        • Southernholiday

          I’m guessing you are referring to my comments overall as opposed to the one above?

    • theundead

      Shut the hell up homophobe

    • Blood Boil

      Half the stuff in this wasn’t in the original. The only agenda being pushed here is the one from homophobic knuckle draggers such as yourself. Funny I didn’t even notice the gay dudes kissing on first watch, you seemed to have picked right up on that right away…

    • Blood Boil

      The right, always ignorant, unenlightened, and scared by something that has zero effect on their pathetic and close minded little lives what so ever. I hope we can find you a safe space to hide you.

  • zombie84_41

    this looks really freaking good hope its as amazing as the movie.

  • Jake

    This looks terrible. Stephen king seems to work when the adaptions are movies, but his shows seem to miss the mark.

    • Saturn

      I dunno, Haven was pretty good.

      • James

        Because haven was nothing like the Colorado kid.

    • theundead

      You’re comment looks terrible

      • J Jett

        it’s “your” not “you’re”. so it’s YOUR comment that looks terrible, theundead.

  • Geno1987

    Throw it in the trash with Under the Dome.

  • Vesuvian Villain

    Don’t know about this show but I consider the Mist a classic. I saw some countdown on mojo of films you should only see once and they listed Mist just because of the ending. Pussies. The ending is fucked up but that’s what’s great about it, and it would be different if the rest of the movie sucked and then they gave the unhappy ending but the whole movie is awesome.

    Darabont kicked ass on that and probably would have kept Walking Dead going strong a lot longer than it has if they hadn’t fucked him over. Scott Gimple is a bitch and he looks like the creepy kid from The Ring had a midlife crisis.

  • Sean David

    I’ll give it a go, if only for Francis Conroy.

    I just really hope that it isn’t simply a case of their hallucinating; but rather that they initially find what they’re seeing so out-there that they believe they must be.

    The woman being dragged in to the air at the end is probably a clue that there are actual monsters.

  • Looks nice, i loved the ending of the movie.

  • KSE1977

    I will also give it a look, for at least an episode, but the trailer seems to indicate that some sinister force in the Mist makes people crazy or do things and that is not the Mist at all. Under the Dome was so terrible that I am fearing this will follow suit. I was getting a creepy vibe between the priest and that younger dude. Some skeezy stuff going on there.

  • SHANA MARIA VERGHIS

    Gaah. We’ve already seen two versions…well I have. King has so many other stories to adapt.
    I guess it was the economics. Just use lots of stage mist and make everyone disappear in it.

    • Carlton Fisher

      What’s the second version? Or are you counting the B&W version as another version? (Not a trolling challenge–I genuinely want to know if I’ve missed another version of this, since it’s one o fmy favorite books by King.)

      • Sandra Engelhardt

        Maybe they are referring to The Fog movie.

        • David Andrew Baros

          No.

      • David Andrew Baros

        There’s only one version, but available in b&w also. This guy tried to confuse people on purpose. Lol.

  • Bleh. Unwanted. Unnecessary. Not watching.

  • PsychoMantis18

    Looks generic and crappy.

  • Un Gsund

    im out

  • Darren Kerr

    I’m led to believe that Stephen King has written more than a handful of stories.
    How about giving in to the absurd novelty of adapting one that hasn’t been done before, instead of rehashing one you know there’ll be a guaranteed audience for?

    • Andrew Flynn

      Multiple King stories who have not received an adaption in the past are currently in development.

  • J Jett

    i was expecting and wanting a show more in line with the book and/or movie (but expanded to last 12 or more episodes) but this new take on it where the mist brings out inner demons (or whatever) looks completely tired. so no monsters/creatures in this? WTF?!

    • Satanzilla

      Yeah that will be crap. In fact I think the idea that the mist makes people behave badly is crap, period, monsters aside.

    • Richard Ferrara

      I was thinking the same thing, I’ll give it a couple of episodes out of hope, but no monsters, I’m out!

  • The trailer looks really good, but I hope won’t be cheesy like Under the Dome.

    • Sandra Engelhardt

      I was so disappointed in that show.

      • I haven’t read the book but the show was far away to be good.

  • Andrew Flynn

    I have enjoyed all of Flanagan’s films and am eager to view this one also, should be released on Netflix this year I believe.

  • Carlton Fisher

    The thing that hits the windshield looks creature-ish. Granted, it’s really quick and i don’t have the reflexes to pause it to get a better look, but I think it’s a creature, so not a “creature-free” trailer.

    Though, if it DID show creatures in it, the wouldn’t people be complaining that it was showing too much and spoiling the show? I’m beginning to think the comment section on internet sites is just a place for people to complain about something when there’s nothing wrong in their actual lives.

  • Vicente Garcia

    There are creatures, but 99% sure they’re all CGI and the effects work isn’t done yet since we’re still months out from the premiere. Almost guarantee we’ll see alot more creatures in the next trailer!

  • David Andrew Baros

    Hmmmm… from what I’ve seen in the whole of this trailer, it looks more like it’s based on James Herbert’s 1975 novel, The Fog. It looks nothing like the film THE MIST based on Stephen King’s novela.

  • DS Ullery

    Eh. It plays like an unnecessary expansion of a story that was already adapted to perfection in the 2007 film. I guess it could work, but based on this trailer it seems destined to disappoint. For a preview with so much going on, this seems surprisingly mundane.

  • Dave Galloway

    Gay in the trailer…i’m out!

    • Finally! Good for you for breaking out of that closet.

      • Zachary Brown

        hahaha

      • Red Right Return

        HAHAHAH I was going to say the same thing.

      • Richard Ferrara

        You mean “trailer” lol!

    • Carlton Fisher

      Gay on the planet! Please feel free to leave.

  • Prince Of Darkness

    Bottom line – The shows creator was quick to point out that this show will have special emphasis on sex. Wasn’t The Mist supposed to be about how quickly sanity and civility dissolves among a group of people trapped by a mist and the horrors within? If anything, the PC heavy trailer and the emphasis on people getting laid is a red flag that this show will be garbage, just like every other PC heavy themed tv show currently airing (Fear the Walking Dead, American Horror Story). Hell even the gay audience who AHS is supposed to target complain about how disappointed they are with the show. Hollywood is not so much making good tv and movies PC as they are making everything PC in an attempt to offset how bad the original idea is.

    • Anthony Gulino

      whole heartedly agree… The PC and there mind conditioning is on full display in this trailer..Sometimes it makes it impossible to watch but ya have to just remember its horror and fiction just like the world the PC lunatics live in.. just ignore it and try to enjoy..

  • American Atheist

    Where are all TWD actors? Oh, they have their own show. Seriously, this looks like shit. It was a stretch to make a full length movie out of the material (be it a phenomenal movie). A tv series doesn’t make much sense.

  • Zachary Brown

    Is it just me or does this look awful? I love the novella and I love Frank Darabonts film but this looks cheap and cheesy and stretched very thin.

  • Carlton Fisher

    Well, you know, technically elk and deer are creatures. 😛

  • DarkBree

    I hope this doesn’t become a UTD.

  • Colin Christian

    For me,The Mist is Lovecraft type monsters and Bible human monsters,without those up at the front,I’m not really interested.