Midnight Mass - Mike Flanagan Sets Next Netflix Series

[Erik20]

I’ve seen loads of people on Twitter also saying the Father is

Spoiler

dumb for thinking it was an angel.

My take on it is - he’s old, confused (which is why he got lost in first place), gets a sudden rush of adrenaline when bitten closely followed by a euphoric rush of dopamine to his brain as his body begins to die. Add in a lifetime of being exposed to religious imagery and a winged creature facing him in his last moments . . . I can buy it

Also

Spoiler

doesn't the ending point out that he never really believed it was an Angel? I kind of feel like he was playing "dumb," in his heart he knew the truth. (When he got his mind back) He just wanted a second chance with his family. In the end he calls it "that thing."

 

[Man in the Suit]

I've only seen the first two episodes, but...

Spoiler

The old age makeup is a terrible and distracting. It kinda gives away what they're doing. Bad choice.

 

[Sawyer]

To me the only one that felt completely obvious to the point of being a red flag was

Spoiler

Alex Essoe. The minute I saw her, I said “That’s not an 80 year old, or anything close to an 80 year old.” It was a little Winona Ryder at the end of Edward Scissorhands.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Finally finished it today and it was a great series. It was more American Horror Story than AHS is and it should strive to be once again.

 

[Man in the Suit]

Three episodes in and I finally realized who Father Paul looks like half the time.

Spoiler

 

[Man in the Suit]

Just finished it. Mike Flangan finally has a decent color grading! Probably my favorite project of his after the director's cut of Doctor Sleep. But needs to cool it with the monologues. Hamish Linklater was the only actor who could make those work and not have me look at the clock.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Just finished it. Mike Flangan finally has a decent color grading! Probably my favorite project of his after the director's cut of Doctor Sleep. But needs to cool it with the monologues. Hamish Linklater was the only actor who could make those work and not have me look at the clock.

Only one that really annoyed me was Siegel's at the end of the final episode, that went on for about twice as long as it should have and hurt the ending quite a bit for me.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

There are few characters I have wanted to see die more then Bev. I like how different all three of Flanagan's Netflix projects have been. That along with the overall tenderness of them all. I can watch them over and over again.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I couldn't get through this. I love Flanagan, he's one of the best directors working today, but this just falls into the prestige tv traps in not knowing how to write for their episode count. Nothing was interesting until the end of each episode, prompting you to watch the next one. Which is a classic Netflix binge watching model. Hill House was the complete opposite and Flanagan has never disappointed so I don't get it. I knew something was wrong when instead of Riley arriving to the island sooner and first, there's an elongated scene of the brother and his friends talking and the first meeting between Riley and Flanagan's wife is a long walk and talk.

From what I got to, this seems to be like Flanagan's

Spoiler

'Salem's Lot

.

And I loved that. I dug the set up, the themes, the ideas of where some of the characters could be explored within those themes, the setting, the direction. They're what made me keep watching. Everything was set up to be another great Flanagan story. But that wasn't enough, and it got to the point where I couldn't take it anymore. Most scenes consist of long monologues as "development." I had to shut it off at episode five when there's a 20 MINUTE DIALOGUE SCENE and they say nothing but superficial crap disguised as important "character development." I couldn't take it anymore. I don't want to hear the, "It's like a play" excuse.

Riley was a victim of these long dialogue scenes. Television now has confused character development for people sitting in rooms and talking for extended periods of time. This is excused with "getting to know the characters more." There's a ten minute scene of two characters talking about death. Do these writers not know how this works? Character development isn't inherently in characters telling each other their thoughts, it's about where they start and think they want and are tested through conflict from situations that change them. Instead you have these episodes all feel like long extended second acts that wheel spin with occasional gradual progression. It's not until the endings there is some "revelation" or "big surprise" that is supposed to hook you to watch the next episode. Are these writers writing towards a binge watching model or something?

I go back to Film Critic Hulk's Netflix/Luke Cage analysis on this and that was five years ago. It's gotten much worse and more frequent.

This is why I'm done with "prestige tv." It's mostly an illusion. They might look and sound better than the crap network tv, but they're just as formulaic now. I'll watch Dexter next month, and Superman and Lois season 2, but I'm done with it all.

 

[Sawyer]

Ok.

 

[Sithborg]

I couldn't get through this. I love Flanagan, he's one of the best directors working today, but this just falls into the prestige tv traps in not knowing how to write for their episode count. Nothing was interesting until the end of each episode, prompting you to watch the next one. Which is a classic Netflix binge watching model. Hill House was the complete opposite and Flanagan has never disappointed so I don't get it. I knew something was wrong when instead of Riley arriving to the island sooner and first, there's an elongated scene of the brother and his friends talking and the first meeting between Riley and Flanagan's wife is a long walk and talk.

From what I got to, this seems to be like Flanagan's

Spoiler

'Salem's Lot

.

And I loved that. I dug the set up, the themes, the ideas of where some of the characters could be explored within those themes, the setting, the direction. They're what made me keep watching. Everything was set up to be another great Flanagan story. But that wasn't enough, and it got to the point where I couldn't take it anymore. Most scenes consist of long monologues as "development." I had to shut it off at episode five when there's a 20 MINUTE DIALOGUE SCENE and they say nothing but superficial crap disguised as important "character development." I couldn't take it anymore. I don't want to hear the, "It's like a play" excuse.

Riley was a victim of these long dialogue scenes. Television now has confused character development for people sitting in rooms and talking for extended periods of time. This is excused with "getting to know the characters more." There's a ten minute scene of two characters talking about death. Do these writers not know how this works? Character development isn't inherently in characters telling each other their thoughts, it's about where they start and think they want and are tested through conflict from situations that change them. Instead you have these episodes all feel like long extended second acts that wheel spin with occasional gradual progression. It's not until the endings there is some "revelation" or "big surprise" that is supposed to hook you to watch the next episode. Are these writers writing towards a binge watching model or something?

I go back to Film Critic Hulk's Netflix/Luke Cage analysis on this and that was five years ago. It's gotten much worse and more frequent.

This is why I'm done with "prestige tv." It's mostly an illusion. They might look and sound better than the crap network tv, but they're just as formulaic now. I'll watch Dexter next month, and Superman and Lois season 2, but I'm done with it all.

On the other hand, when religion is your target, isn't overly long speeches part of the point?

Ok finished it. Quite loved it. Starts slow, but there is this slow build up that is fun to see happen. I love the end of episode 5, in the unexpectedness of it, and how it was both beautiful and horrifying at the same time.

Spoiler

I know Bev Keene is the easy one to hate. And make no doubt, I hated that *****. But I think the mayor is the one I hated the most. The ever so casual racism toward the sheriff was angering.

Also, get Rahul Kohli an award.

 

[Man in the Suit]

I couldn't get through this. I love Flanagan, he's one of the best directors working today, but this just falls into the prestige tv traps in not knowing how to write for their episode count. Nothing was interesting until the end of each episode, prompting you to watch the next one. Which is a classic Netflix binge watching model. Hill House was the complete opposite and Flanagan has never disappointed so I don't get it. I knew something was wrong when instead of Riley arriving to the island sooner and first, there's an elongated scene of the brother and his friends talking and the first meeting between Riley and Flanagan's wife is a long walk and talk.

From what I got to, this seems to be like Flanagan's

Spoiler

'Salem's Lot

.

And I loved that. I dug the set up, the themes, the ideas of where some of the characters could be explored within those themes, the setting, the direction. They're what made me keep watching. Everything was set up to be another great Flanagan story. But that wasn't enough, and it got to the point where I couldn't take it anymore. Most scenes consist of long monologues as "development." I had to shut it off at episode five when there's a 20 MINUTE DIALOGUE SCENE and they say nothing but superficial crap disguised as important "character development." I couldn't take it anymore. I don't want to hear the, "It's like a play" excuse.

Riley was a victim of these long dialogue scenes. Television now has confused character development for people sitting in rooms and talking for extended periods of time. This is excused with "getting to know the characters more." There's a ten minute scene of two characters talking about death. Do these writers not know how this works? Character development isn't inherently in characters telling each other their thoughts, it's about where they start and think they want and are tested through conflict from situations that change them. Instead you have these episodes all feel like long extended second acts that wheel spin with occasional gradual progression. It's not until the endings there is some "revelation" or "big surprise" that is supposed to hook you to watch the next episode. Are these writers writing towards a binge watching model or something?

I go back to Film Critic Hulk's Netflix/Luke Cage analysis on this and that was five years ago. It's gotten much worse and more frequent.

This is why I'm done with "prestige tv." It's mostly an illusion. They might look and sound better than the crap network tv, but they're just as formulaic now. I'll watch Dexter next month, and Superman and Lois season 2, but I'm done with it all.

This post is longer than Flanagan's monologues.

 

[Doctor Jones]

On the other hand, when religion is your target, isn't overly long speeches part of the point?

Perhaps that was the intent of the writers. But I think it's wrong. Because the choice is often made for the monologue to BE the character development. From the writers room, this is a superficial appraisal of the hard work that goes into properly developing characters. Characters are developed by the construction of good dramatization through conflict and situation. A good monologue will just be an extension of those things, like good dialogue. Aaron Sorkin said it himself. If he doesn't have an intention and an obstacle, his dialogue will just meander and go nowhere.

I just compare it to Breaking Bad. Different shows and format with different stories/themes, but the point is Gilligan and his writers knew A to B to C storytelling to develop Walter White across its episode count. His change wasn't constantly dramatized by monologuing.

 

[Sithborg]

While I do agree that the episodes felt a little too long, especially the early ones, I do not think the monologue are the character development.

 

[Holy Slapper]

Worst of the Flanagan "horror series" so far for me. I fast forwarded on sooo many of the monologue/dialogue scenes with two characters talking and the church scenes. Really disappointing series.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

While I do agree that the episodes felt a little too long, especially the early ones, I do not think the monologue are the character development.

Every episode flew by for me. I was so intrigued by the goings on, and all the actors so terrific. The one exception was Seigel's finale monologue. I did felt like that went too long.

 

[Persona]

Worst of the Flanagan "horror series" so far for me. I fast forwarded on sooo many of the monologue/dialogue scenes with two characters talking and the church scenes. Really disappointing series.

This was much better than Bly Manor, imo.

I get that people approach the horror genre expecting character and dialogue to be more minimal and the focus to be on visceral scares or atmosphere, but I appreciate how Flanagan has carved out his own approach that really emphasizes character and dialogue. Sometimes he falls into the trap of telling more than showing, but I think one of the reasons Midnight Mass works well is because the visuals are doing almost as much heavy lifting as the extensive dialogue. I do just wish the final Erin monologue had been shortened and Flanagan had tried to convey more of the thoughts there simply through the visuals.

Anyways, it's a very novelistic horror drama with diverse characters and a unique setting and conceit that are incredibly well realized. Whatever some of my own personal taste qualms with it, I think it's a strong achievement for Flanagan and pretty easily one of the best new shows/series of 2021.

 

[Holy Slapper]

This was much better than Bly Manor, imo.

Not even close to me. And I liked Bly Manor the most because I liked the characters the most. The setting was also very dull in Midnight Mass.

Also should be said that I'm raised Lutheran, moved from agnostic to atheist and we had religion as a school subject all of my 12 years, so I skip the church stuff due to that.

 

[Sithborg]

The monologues didn't bother me, mainly because the cast is amazing.

 

[Rodimus]

This post is longer than Flanagan's monologues.

 

[Drizzle]

I finished this today. Overall I thought it was really good, I didn't think it was on the same level as Hill House but I thought it was far better than Bly Manor when compared to the other Flanagan Netflix shows. I enjoyed the overall Stephen King vibes of this, especially the characters. Hamish Linklater and Rahul Kohli were the standouts here. Kohli was one of the better parts of Bly Manor so I wasn't surprised to see him give it his all in this. That guy is going places. Kate Siegel was really good too. And Bev was the perfect Stephen King-esque antagonist.

Spoiler

The whole vampire subplot was a bit predictable but there were some twists and turns I didn't see coming, like Riley dying at the end of episode 5. The only thing that really would have improved it is if they had just cast older actors instead of just using makeup, especially for Mildred. Henry Thomas didn't look as jarring but considering I can't look at him without picturing Elliott from E.T. it was still strange to see him as the father of someone in their late thirties.

 

[Brother Jack]

Little late to the party, but I just finished this and it might be my favorite thing Flanagan's done to date. Hill House is still probably better overall, and this show does get self-indulgent with the monologues (the one that closes the show was particularly egregious), but I truly valued the refreshingly deep and mature conversations about faith, theodicy, and religious fanaticism. It's exceedingly rare to see these topics dealt with in pop culture, and even rarer still to have them explored with the nuance and substance that Flanagan does here. It felt personal and authentic and I loved that about it.

 

[Iceman]

I’ve just finished this. I’m not a horror film fan and not very knowledgeable on the genre but I couldn’t take my eyes off this show. I love Flanagan’s work. He gets me interested in the settings and characters so much more than many of the jump-scare cheesier horror films. Some really great performances too, especially Hamish Linklater. Do we know anything about what Flanagan is up to next?

 

[elgaz]

I’ve just finished this. I’m not a horror film fan and not very knowledgeable on the genre but I couldn’t take my eyes off this show. I love Flanagan’s work. He gets me interested in the settings and characters so much more than many of the jump-scare cheesier horror films. Some really great performances too, especially Hamish Linklater. Do we know anything about what Flanagan is up to next?

I was the same, I can count on one hand how many horror films I've watched in the last decade - I used to love stuff like Nightmare on Elm Street, Fright Night etc growing up, but in recent times a lot of horror seemed to become more about gore (e.g .the Saw series, Hills Have Eyes remake, etc) and less about traditional spookiness.

But I've watched this, Haunting of Hill House and Haunting of Bly Manor, loved them all. Flanagan has a unique way of crafting and delivering a story which I really enjoy.

His next work ironically has the word 'Midnight' in the title again, but has no relation to Midnight Mass - it's called Midnight Club. As far as I know it's about a group of terminally ill teens who live together at a hospice and meet every night to tell scary stories and so on, they make a pact that the first to die will try and contact the others from beyond the grave. And predictably, I assume, some strange stuff will ensue. No official release date yet but it's in post-prod so probably April/May next year.

 

[scarlet-witch]

I thought this was really engaging, but the final episode so stupid, so it brought it down a bit for me. Hill House is still my favorite.