Mike Flanagan’s latest Netflix horror series Midnight Mass is hardly a revelation
The newest Netflix series from The Haunting Of Hill House creator Mike Flanagan preaches to the choir, but will convert few
TV Reviews Mike Flanagan
You don’t have to dig very deep into Christianity to find something creepy. Early Christians raised some eyebrows among their pagan neighbors, who were put off by rituals where members of this kooky new Jewish cult talked about eating the body and drinking the blood of their savior. Add Catholicism to the mix, with its incense and chanting and obsession with bones and ashes, and you’ve got a religion dark enough to create—well, stuff like this. The problem is that Catholic morbidity is so on the surface, making the connection between the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and other, more secular tales of the macabre isn’t all that insightful.
To its credit, Midnight Mass, the latest Netflix horror soap from The Haunting Of Hill House’s Mike Flanagan, does complicate the teenage stoner revelation that some parts of the Bible are, like, really fucked up, man. The limited series considers religion both as a horror subgenre and as a philosophical question, blending cinematic tributes to films like The Exorcist with serious-minded monologues about faith. On the more intellectual side, Flanagan explores the theme from a handful of angles, including addiction recovery programs and prayer in public schools. When it comes time for sturm und drang, however, the writer-director turns to monsters and miracles, the “signs and wonders” the Bible attributes both to Jesus and to “false prophets” who “shall deceive the very elect.”
All of these swirl around St. Patrick’s, a shabby clapboard church in the half-abandoned fishing community of Crockett Island. The island’s location is never precisely stated, but the crab boats and chunky sweaters place it somewhere in the Northeastern U.S. It’s a very Stephen King type of setting, which makes sense given that Flanagan is a King enthusiast who’s directed two adaptations of the novelist’s work: Gerald’s Game in 2017, and Doctor Sleep in 2019. Midnight Mass is Flanagan’s swing at a King-style limited series à la Salem’s Lot or The Stand, bringing apocalyptic overtones to a tale of a small town under siege by supernatural forces. In this realm, he succeeds well enough, except that Flanagan shares a weakness with his hero: They both really like to hear themselves talk.
That’s through the medium of their characters, of course. Here, the ensemble cast is led by Zach Gilford as Riley, the prodigal son of Crockett Island who returns home in disgrace after a four-year stint in prison. Riley killed a young woman while he was driving drunk, you see, and spent his time behind bars researching recovery methods that aren’t in thrall to the “higher power” of Alcoholics Anonymous. Riley’s parents Annie (Kristin Lehman) and Ed (Henry Thomas) are devout Christians, however. So is his childhood friend Erin Greene (Kate Siegel), who also finds herself back on Crockett Island after fleeing an abusive marriage. Most of the islanders are churchgoing folk, actually. But Riley’s prison experience has made him an atheist, placing him in a small group of outsiders that includes the local sheriff (Rahul Kohli) and doctor (Annabeth Gish) as well as the town drunk (Robert Longstreet).
That stance becomes harder to maintain with the arrival of another new resident, Father Paul (Hamish Linklater), a charismatic young priest. Father Paul says he’s been sent as a temporary replacement for Crockett Island’s longtime shepherd, the elderly Monsignor Pruitt. But as soon as he’s settled in, strange things begin to happen: First, the animals start dying. (The effects in a scene where dozens of dead cats wash up on a beach are, thankfully, not very realistic.) Then, the people of the town witness miraculous healing in themselves and in others. This prompts a religious revival led by Father Paul and Bev Keane (Samantha Sloyan), an islander whose strict morality apparently doesn’t apply to acts of self-righteous sociopathy.
The first episode of Midnight Mass is pure setup, and—unlike Flanagan’s last Netflix series, The Haunting Of Bly Manor—the show saves its climax for the finale, rather than expend it in the penultimate episode. More happens in this series than in Bly Manor, and Midnight Mass is assembled with the same flair as Hill House, with some striking creature design and resonant montages. Flanagan digs into some of the church’s more ominous aesthetics as well, carving stations of the cross as a storytelling device and making ominous use of somber choral hymns. But for all this care and craft, the result is still a case of diminished returns.
As far back as Hill House, Flanagan has had a tendency to write florid speeches where simple dialogue would do, a bad habit that goes completely unchecked in Midnight Mass. It makes sense for a priest to be bombastic at the pulpit, but when a minor character monologues for a minute and a half before delivering the one piece of information she’s brought to the narrative, something is out of balance. Similarly, scenes where Riley and Father Paul debate God and morality are meant to bring some theological heft to the series. But more often than not, the two are simply re-stating themes that have already been more elegantly established through visuals. (Let’s not even get into the two episodes Riley and Erin spend talking about the afterlife.)
For an actor, these juicy, substantial blocks of text are probably a pleasure to perform. Everyone does seem to be giving their all, and eventually the horror elements of the story do rise to the grandiose pitch of the dialogue. But while some of the show’s themes are talked to death, others wither away, undeveloped. In trying to cram so many ideas into Midnight Mass, Flanagan has left himself with a jumble of mixed metaphors and overwritten soliloquies with not enough terror to cancel them out. Religion addresses some of the scariest things a human being can contemplate—namely, the unknowable void that awaits us after we die. And this fear is palpable in Midnight Mass. So why does it also feel like being a kid again, counting the beams in the church ceiling as a preacher drones on in the background?
162 Comments
Are there at least background ghosts?
The Exorcist TV series was quite effective & creepy & probably better than this
Don’t count this out yet, it’s getting nearly universal praise elsewhere
That show was awesome!
The big “surprise” was visible from a million miles away, but I loved it anyway. 🙂
Is is or is isn’t?
This is so interesting, I’ve seen quite a few reviews really praise this show. Given that I personally LOVED Hill House and loved what Bly Manor was trying to do (though it failed in the end) Midnight Mass is probably gonna be a more positive watch for me.
Are we gonna have episodic reviews? Probably not, huh…
Pretty much every other review that I’ve seen has said that this is Flanagan’s best work to date, so I’m hoping that this is just a case of it not being Katie’s bag.
I guess this is the case, given that Katie seems to not be a fan of Flanagan’s “florid speeches” which are actually some of my favourite moments in his catalogue (in particular: the woman’s monologue in Hill House episode 1, Robert Longstreet’s monologue about his son later in the season, and Ewan McGregor’s speech when he gets his sober chip in Doctor Sleep are some of the finest in recent memory imo)
Agreed. The director’s cut of Doctor Sleep was a great speech by McGregor.
I like several of the monologues in Flanagan’s other work too, but they are peppered in a little more judiciously. In Midnight Mass they just keep coming, sometimes one after another in a single scene (the review mentioned a scene where two characters are discussing their views on the afterlife and that really is just monologue after monologue). I was so disappointed by this series. I can’t believe I’m saying this about a project by the same person who created Hill House, but it was emotionless and boring.
Katie sucks
Katie is just really not good at her job. I hare reading her prententious garbage.
Late to the party here, but this was a very, VERY good show. Really put an interesting twist on the Religion Vs. Horror: One and/or Both? concept (I say it that way so nothing is spoiled, yet remains tempting, haha).After reading the review above, I noticed it was spoiler-free (mostly), something that is actually bad for the review, which over-focuses on the religious aspects of the show.This creates a vacuum for the more important point: are miracles religious at all and to what extent will people do things in the name of religious piety.
I’m four episodes in and gonna have to side with Katie so far. I’ve seen reviews saying the payoff is worth the slow build and it is starting to get more exciting so I’m going to keep watching but it drags at times and the monologues really are excessive. Maybe I’m a simpleton who wants thrills over sad people talking quietly but I already went in with low expectations for horror in this series. It just isn’t saying much that’s interesting to me (disclaimer: I’m not religious and was never raised religious), most of the conversations the characters are having grappling with their faith feel like they’ve been done many times before in other media and aren’t raising any new points. I’m curious as to what other AV Club people think. Figured I’d post here since as you said, episodic reviews seem unlikely.
I’m on the 5th episode of Midnight Mass, but I just finished part 1 of the latest season of American Horror Story. Both have the same theme but one is rooted in Catholicism and the other in artistry and science.
At least Midnight Mass is more fleshed out than AHS, but this genre is tiresome.
Yep, I immediately was amused by the connection between the two as well (completely different execution of course)
I finished Midnight Mass and now I’m wondering if Lily Rabe and Hamish Linklater compared notes at home between the two characters.
Rabe’s character in AHS ended with a “You dumb pathetic broad”. If you haven’t finished MM, I won’t spoil it.
There’s a lot of overlap with Epix’s Chapelwaite as well. Kind of amazing how all three attempts at seasonal horror ended up in such an extremely similar place.
I posted my very rambling thoughts above, but while I’m enjoying it much more than you, I also can completely see your point (and agree to a degree…)
I am enjoying the mystery/horror/fantasy elements and small town drama, it’s mainly the religious discussion I find somewhat trite. Not just because I’m a godless heathen—even Riley’s “atheist scientific explanation” schtick is grating.
I finished it and I don’t know why it’s getting good reviews. The last two episodes are interesting but the first 5 episodes are dreadfully boring. For 30 minutes two characters sit on a coach and talk about what they think happens when you die. 30. Minutes.And it has some huge plot holes that i couldn’t get past.
I was gonna say I haven’t watched past episode four but I got to the part where they sat on the couch talking about what happens when you die, and then I remembered Katie’s review mentions that happening in two episodes. Lord…
To be fair the death monologues after that are much quicker. But it’s not the end of the monologues (I maintain the most ill timed and ridiculous being the Sheriff’s…)
Completely agree. The plot holes and inconsistent in-universe logic killed it for me. And the monologues didn’t help matters. I can’t understand how so many people can look past that stuff.
It was more like 10 min…but it felt like 30.
I watched the first three episodes last night and now think I have a pretty solid grasp of how things are going to play out; I’m happy to keep watching to see if I’m right. I really like how, similar to CHAPELWAITE, this show seems to be putting atmosphere first. I don’t like how half the conversations feel twice as long as they need to be (Riley’s first proper chat with Erin is a prime example).
It reminded me a lot of Chapelwaite as well. I’m really digging the latter (kind of made for me), but I honestly think it probably would have benefitted from sticking to the 6-8 episode format instead of trying to stretch to 10.
For as much as I read these AV Club reviews, I find a lot of them do not align with my personal tastes. I’m actually very surprised this series got a C+. I haven’t seen the full series yet, but I would give it a much higher rating.
I adored Hill House. Bly Manor didn’t work as much for me. I’m going to watch this one though, for sure.
I loved Hill House too, and my wife and I are about to rewatch it (have watched it each October since it came out and might just make it a tradition). I also liked a lot of the stuff Bly Manor went for, but it failed mainly because the story just didn’t work.Sadly, for me Midnight Mass was similar to Bly Manor. It has some great set-up and potential, but ultimately the story doesn’t make sense and fails.
I vastly preferred this series to Bly Manor. Perhaps equally as much as Hill House. Now that it’s been a few weeks since your comment, have you watched the series? What were your thoughts?I finished it last night and find it a remarkably compelling meditation on faith, grief, the benefits of, and the perversion of, faith. The “florid speeches” are some of the most compelling pieces of entertainment on TV right now. Many of them give me the same feeling of watching a profoundly excellent two-man play. Some pieces of it did not work. But the unsettling slowly growing terror and grimness was masterful. I look forward to re-watching it.
Catholic horror is very much my thing, and I’ll probably give this a shot the next time I cycle over to Netflix, but I find it hard to finish Flannagan’s stuff. Like, in the moment, I enjoy it, but I rarely want to jump to the next episode right away, and neither is it something I want to start off a TV watching session with.
Evil, which I just discovered over on whatever Paramount Plus is called these days, hooboy. Sometimes it’s silly, but it’s also very bingeable.
Did you see St. Maud? One of the finest examples I’ve seen
I dunno, Catholic Horror could never live up to the real RCC.
Or really any Christian denomination (except maybe the Unitarians — haven’t heard any scandals about them, not that that means there aren’t any). The RCC just gets more press because of how large they are.
Quakers are pretty solid
Also the catholic church was responsible for the geopolitical structure of Europe for roughly a millennium, it underwrote the colonization of the Americas, and it seems like torturing children was part of their MO for basically that whole period, right up to the present day.
You sure? I’m a practicing Catholic, maybe you know something I don’t know. Did a priest touch you? What is this “real RCC” you’re talking about?
Glad to lift you out of the greys temporarily to answer this: That would be the RCC of mass child molestation, mass child murder (Canada), religious wars, Inquisitions, witch hanging and burning, the Dark Ages, etc. That one.
I finished Hill House but couldn’t make it through Bly Manor. It’s funny that you mention Evil because I find it the complete opposite of what Flanagan tries to do. But you’re right, it’s incredibly bingeable and silly as hell. It’s similar to Michelle and Robert King’s other show, The Good Fight. I don’t find it scary, but the show isn’t afraid to get incredibly downright disturbing.
Bly Manor was so boring.
I miss the demonic-goat-therapist! Soup too soon.
Flanagan’s films and serues are very much like Stephen king novels: the final moments almost fuck everything up. Some things do not really need closure.
I am absolutely up for this one anyway.
Evil is top-tier TV. The second season, especially the most recent two episodes, has cemented it as one of the greats for me. This shit’s going places, what a wonderful ride.
There are some monologues that stop the show in its tracks, but I think it’s better than a C+ if just for Hamish Linklater’s performance. He carries the show. And it’s less about Catholicism than it is about twisting any text for the sake of faith.
I’m reading some really positive review elsewhere, so I hope this is good. I thought Hill House wasn’t as good as everyone suggested, but that Bly Manor was actually better than the consensus. So hopefully Midnight Mass makes for solid fall viewing.
I love Flanagan’s movies, especially Doctor Sleep. But can never work up interest for his Netflix series stuff.
I really enjoy Katie’s reviews and think that AV Club as a whole has done a really good job covering Flanagan’s recent TV stuff so I’m very appreciate of this review and I’m very excited to watch the show.That being said, it’s EXTREMELY funny to read this (largely positive with some caveated qualms) C+ review, then turn to the firing squad that was Evan Hansen’s C- review. LOTS of vitriol in those 6-7 percentage points!
Bly Manor had 1-2 good eps but otherwise felt less…scary, I guess, than Hill House (but the episodes were VERY good, the one with the caretaker’s backstory was better than anything Hill House did).
Anyway, no way we won’t be watching this. ‘tis the season! Also after American Horror Stories, anything in the same genre is gonna look like a masterpiece.
Bly Manor was just so meandering. Pick a lane and drive in it!
I liked Bly Manor, and I get that in a way it was more of a Gothic romance (old use of the word) than true horror, but it should have been 2 or so episodes shorter. Interesting though, compared to Hill House and now this, Flanagan was less directly involved—I believe he only has one directing and writing credit (whereas he directed all the episodes of Hill and this and at least shares writing credit on all the episodes here, and four on Hill House)–obviously he was the one in charge as everything is done exactly in his style, but I wonder if that made any impact.
Yeah it’s funny you should mention AHS. Why this specific backdrop twice so close together, small New England-ish communities and this particular strain of the supernatural?
Apparently this is actually meant to be the Pacific North West (living on Vancouver Island I often have to point out that they do fish for crab here too…) But I think it’s just one of those “something’s in the air” coincidences? Flanagan said he first proposed this project, but even Netflix turned out down, 10+ years ago.
I love watching the actors deliver his dialogue in the two other long series, and I’ve rewatched both twice, so I’m gonna guess I will enjoy it despite this review. Plus Hamish Linklater is creepy as fuck.
i thought the film version of “doctor sleep” was better than the book so i might give this a chance.
Watched it two weeks ago. It was like a slasher where the evil guys were the victims and loved most of it.
Of course that’s pretty much the case for vampire hunter films and shows, and Dr. Sleep was basically a vampire hunter movie where the vampires were a bit different than normal.
Yeah it’s fantastic and really improves on the book. Having Abra be her own person and not directly connected to Danny helps the entire story. Making the Overlook the climax because it wasn’t burned down previously also works better as a final set piece.
It was better for a lot of reasons. Cutting the bizarre 9/11 scene was one of many good calls.
When I heard they were making a film out of the book, I though that Rose the Hat was one of those King things that is great on the page, but would be ridiculous on film. The movie was a positive surprise.
Midnight Mass, however….. somebody though combining Legion and a Stephen King book would be a good idea?
i only care when the new catholic priest is also a boxer.
What about Father Ted?
I think this is the first “average” score I’ve seen for this show. Most are calling it Flanagan’s best. I Appreciate your viewpoint Katie!
Reads like a 7/10.But seriously…it does haha but where a seven equals ‘doesn’t do anything particularly new but what it does do, it does well.’ A backhanded compliment, perhaps, but to be honest when it comes to this type of horror, is absolutely a-ok with me. I’m looking forward to giving it a go!
A 70 is a D, actually.
no it isn’t not in film and TV ratings. In those a D is like 1 1/2 stars out of 4 or maybe 4/10. Look at IMDB and how terrible a movie you have to be to get a 4.0, it’s nearly impossible, and then how perfect a horror movie has to be to get above a 6.5.
Hamish Linklater is incredible. I love him in everything. He was great in Legion, The Crazy Ones, The Big Short, Fargo, and he looks like he’ll be amazing here.However, and this is a huge distraction to me, the man looks incredibly English, to the extent that when he opens his mouth and sounds American it throws me off every single time. I don’t get it.
I’ve only seen the first episode but this reminds me that Rahul Kohli doing an American accent kind of comes off more like an Irish accent?Linklater definitely wears his UK pedigree on his face.
What am I missing? From all I can see, while his family is from the UK he was born and raised in the US. “
Linklater was born in Great Barrington, Massachusetts, the son of Kristin Linklater and James Lincoln Cormeny.[1] His mother was a Scottish-born Professor of Theatre and Chair of the Acting Division at Columbia University and a teacher of vocal technique. A single mother, she raised her son partly in the Berkshires, where she was a founder of the Shakespeare & Company drama troupe. Linklater was eight years old when he began doing small Shakespearean roles.”
Yes, he’s American and his mother (r.i.p.) was Scottish, you’re not missing anything!
You’re not missing anything. My dumbass brain looks at Hamish Linklater, a man I’ve only seen playing Americans, and goes “British”, and hears him in an American accent and says “No. This doesn’t work for me”. It doesn’t do this for other actors unless their accents are bad – Aaron Taylor Johnson, for instance, has an imperfect accent but I go with it. Hugh Laurie isn’t a problem for me. Hamish Linklater, an American, makes me go “he’s English”. I need to share this fact with people because while most people go “what the hell are you talking about”, occasionally I’ll find one who’s like “god damn it I see it”.
Ha well thanks for the explanation. My dumbass brain simply misunderstood this discussion and thought you two were commenting that he should do more work with his native British accent (and re-reading the posts, I have no idea why I thought that…) I first remember him from New Christine, so it’s never occurred to me, but looking at it now, I do see where you’re coming from…
I love that his wife is Lily Rabe the MVP of AHS.
Hamish Linklater is great, but my first exposure to him was the wildly underrated “The New Adventures of Old Christine”, so he’ll always be Matthew to me, first and foremost.
(And he doesn’t come across as remotely English in that show.)
I HATE Jerry Dantana for ruining what the Newsroom was trying to do with Genoa.
Although “Tell Me a Story” is very flawed, he gets to be evil evil evil in it
As a reformed Catholic I cannot wait to watch this!!! I have really enjoyed Flanagan’s prior works so it’s a definite “yes” for me. Also I’ll pretty much watch anything Zach Gilford is in, I’ve been a big fan of his ever since Friday Night Lights
But is it as nonsensical as Bly Manor?
I love Mike Flanagan to death, and think he’s one of the most talented directors working in horror right now, but Jesus Christ, will someone please make him stop writing his own scripts. He’s got two that are pretty good (Ouija and Oculus) but in everything else he does, the writing always stands out as the worst part of the project, by a lot.
Curious–did you think Bly Manor (where he only got credit for one actual script) had better dialogue? (I’m genuinely curious–I don’t know myself 😛 )
It seems from this review, correct me if I’m wrong, that while it takes a while to ramp up, the end of the season picks up a bit. If that’s the case, I’ll give it a watch. I’d rather that than a promising start with little to no payoff. 30 Coins had one of the creepiest scenes I’ve ever seen in the first episode, and then went basically nowhere for the rest of the season.
I was so disappointed by 30 Coins. I would watch Miguel Angel Silvestre in anything, but I couldn’t even finish the season, I was so bored.
I finished it just because I felt obligated to see if it went anywhere. It was not worth it.
Oh, darn. That one is still on my (extremely long) “To watch” list.
Jerry Dantana you bastard
According to Netflix, the island is supposed to be in the Pacific Northwest.
They don’t look like the San Juans though.
I mean it’s filmed just outside Vancouver… I live in Victoria, on Vancouver Island and the landscape is pretty familiar to me…
I guess your opinion of this show will hinge on whether or not you like watching two characters have a long scene which is obviously the creator trying to find answers to his own questions about life and death and where religion fits into that. I like that kind of thing, and I especially like when a director isn’t scared to take his time. In the first three episodes, there was no force feeding of horror down my throat…it really was all about the characters. I appreciate that.
Do not watch episode two. It contains an account of animal death that is so heartbreaking it took me awhile to pull myself together. I’ll never understand it, but you can try by Googling a story called “Why Does The Dog Have To Die?” and the smug answers from asshole little boy writers and directors as to why they continue to believe it’s a sure fire way to keep viewers.
Funny, watched the first three episodes last night and am really enjoying it. Maybe even more than Bly Manor… I really enjoyed Hill House though, there’s just something about that one I think I’ll always take to. But the setting and characters of this one, I’m really into! Not for everyone, I guess…
I found this to be some very good TV. I totally enjoyed it, except when the female MC described in depth what she thought happened when she died. An ‘I do not know’ would have sufficed. Having grown up Roman Catholic and now being a Muslim, the feels were all over the work for me. The end I found quite moving and a very satisfactory conclusion. It was a work I could relate to on a few levels and the nuances were such that if you were not of either religion, you might miss some things.
Don’t watch the 2nd episode. It contains a segment of animal death that is one of the most heartbreaking I’ve ever seen. I just don’t get it. If you want to know more, Google an article called “Why Does The Dog Always Have To Die?” You’ll get smug answers from smug little brat writers and producers who say it’s a good thing and keeps the audience tuned in. They should all be thrown into a cage with hungry Rottweilers.
Id rank this higher than C+. C+ to me is mediocre, watch it in the background. I’d put it at B. Intriguing story, great acting, great direction. Knocked down due to too many monologues vs action. You’re totally on the mark he went very unchecked on those lol.Mike Flanagan is still a very trustworthy creator and Im really excited for his Christopher Pike adaptation.
Yes to the Pike! (And while I was disappointed I didn’t get more emotionally involved, I do agree with you in general.)
*no Spoilers until my last paragraph which has a spoiler
warning for episode three and a question about it that I hope someone
with a better knowledge of horror works than I have can answer.*There was a good piece today in the NYTGood piece about Mike Flanagan and his work,However, I take exception to one part: “The
writer-director Mike Flanagan has become best known for his adaptations
of works by Shirley Jackson (“The Haunting of Hill House”), Henry James
(“The Haunting of Bly Manor”) and Stephen King (“Gerald’s Game,”
“Doctor Sleep”). The horrors in his latest project, “Midnight Mass,” a
seven-episode limited series that premiered Friday on Netflix, are
homegrown.That includes the unease of being an author,
not adapter. “There’s nowhere for me to hide now,” Flanagan admitted in
a recent video interview, speaking from Los Angeles. “Behind Stephen
King is a great place to hide. This is much more frightening.””I’ve
watched five episodes of Mass so far and (no spoilers), it feels just
as original, and just as not-original as Flanagan’s Haunting of Hill
House and Bly Manor did (admittedly his King adaptations are more or
less faithful). Neither of those were remotely close adaptations (and
there’s been the fair argument from some that the adaptations betray
themes from the original works) and honestly this feels just as
influenced from previous, familiar works as those did, to me. (And the
community has a very Stephen King feel—early episodes actually reminding
me of the little I remember of the 1990s original miniseries Storm of
the Century.)I’m enjoying the show a lot, even if I
also have some major issues with plot points, etc (as I did with Bly
Manor). I admit, not having a Gothic (albeit modern Gothic) setting
like those previous shows, means that Flanagan’s tendency for incredibly
florid monologues and his characterization feels more camp to me here.
But that’s not necessarily a bad thing (and those monologues are often
so compelling to me that I can forgive it if it feels like every single
character is prone to them—it also gives the show a theatrical or even
novelistic element I’m fine with). So a slightly mixed, but positive
review from me so far (I will also say that things involving Satan and
religion simply don’t really scare me as much as simple old ghosts,
etc—maybe just because I wasn’t raised with any religious faith.)*random
side note that I’m sure people will say is me reading too much into
things* I’m sure I just notice this as a gay guy, but it strikes me
as… interesting? that in all three series Flanagan has shown lesbian
relationships to be perhaps the most healthy ones, or at least a good
thing. He has yet to really delve into any gay (male) relationships at
all though except to strongly imply (especially in Bly Manor with
Quint’s backstory, but to some degree in al three) the horror and
devastating affects of men who were sexually abused by other men when
they were boys (which, of course it is and doesn’t really have anything
to do with homosexuality anyway). Which… kinda irks me at this point,
even though I’m all for healthy representation of lesbians on screen. SPOILER through episode 3But
here’s the spoiler question… Speaking of this work not feeling
wholly original any more than the previous Netflix shows (and maybe one
of my really knowledgeable horror friends can answer this).I
actually completely guessed the nature of the horror by the end of the
first episode. I don’t say this to brag, but it wasn’t remotely a
surprise, which makes me think that I must have read or seen a previous
horror work that used the same conceit—what if what we saw as Angels
were actually winged vampiric entities… So, anyone know what previous
works might have used that idea?
I have also noticed his inclusion of lesbian romance and agree it seems to be a thing for him, along with casting people of color (albeit mostly in supporting roles) even in small towns where it wouldn’t make that much. Not complaining at all, I like that he makes that effort for inclusion but hadn’t thought about the lack of gay male characters. *spoilerish discussion for episode 3*I was also trying to remember where I’d heard of angels as scary winged creatures and couldn’t quite place it. There’s the B-horror movie “The Cave” which has cave explorers attacked by winged, humanoid creatures and I could’ve sworn there was talk of them being like Old Testament angels but the Wikipedia summary describes them as demons. There’s also a Ted Chiang story where angels occasionally visit Earth and bring terror and destruction along with miracles etc., and that may have been where I learned that angels are scary creatures as described in the Bible. I doubt either are widely known though, surely there’s other references in media that I’m forgetting. Maybe the Red Dragon stuff in Hannibal?
Well I did see Red Dragon when it came out (though not The Cave), but not sure… But at least I appreciate that I’m not alone in that revelation (sorry, couldn’t help myself) being familiar from a previous horror work.
Yeah, I think it’s the fact that he does tend to be inclusive in terms of cast and characters is why I started to wonder why there hadn’t been any gay men… It doesn’t ultimately matter–as you say, I’m glad he is inclusive and it isn’t made a big deal (I think this was the first time the lesbianism even was a *tiny* plot point–with the Priest constant starring at Sarah initially implied to be due to his disapproval of that, among other, aspect of her life).
Doesn’t NEON GENESIS EVANGELION call the monsters “angels” and present them as horrific, destructive beings?The gentle, beautiful seraphim and cherubim that are what we think of as “angels” in modern Christianity don’t remotely fit the Jewish notion of angels, which are largely terrifying and not at all human-looking…….and now I can’t find the page I was looking at some months back that did drawings of what the six classes of pre-Christian Angels looked like.
I think even in Christianity the Cherubim and Seraphim are pretty horrifying. The chubby winged babies we call Cherubs are usually Putti from Renaissance paintings, and Biblical Cherubs are a mass of wings and eyes. I believe Seraphim are supposed to look the same, except that they reflect the holy light of God off their bodies so you’d burn to a crisp long before you actually got to see one.It’s all pretty metal.
Right! And I mean if Lucifer was a fallen angel, that also gets into aspects of how they’re visually depicted.
Definitely. From my reading as a teen fantasy nerd I get the impression that angels are messengers between the divine and humans, so have to look relatively humanoid, enough to blend in and talk to people without incinerating them. Whereas the orders of angel above archangels serve some other purpose beyond our understanding, and so are free to look like eldritch horrors from beyond the stars.It all works suspiciously like an alien caste system. #ancientastronauts #theyliveamongus
I think even in Christianity the Cherubim and Seraphim are pretty horrifying.
::Nods:: I should have said “Modern Christianity”, taking “modern” as The Renaissance on. I remember C.S. Lewis saying about The Screwtape Letters (I think) that Angels were such terrifying figures they had to say “Fear Not” — now he said Angels are presented as more likely to say “There, There…”.
Good call re Evangelion–which I did a rewatch of last year.
Interesting point about the lesbian representation. I did read that his wife is bisexual, I wonder if that’s in some form an influence? I like it regardless of inspiration.
I’d like to ask a question that has been bothering me ever since I finished the show.SPOILERDid Ali, the Sheriff’s son, ever take the angel blood? Because I distinctly remember the sheriff say he can’t do it because, you know, we don’t believe in that. And wasn’t that step one in the process to becoming reborn or whatever? I wasn’t expecting him to complete the rebirth process because he didn’t do step one but he pops up afterwards and I was like WTF? Did I fast forward through a boring church scene?Also, what happened to the dog!?! The poor dog dies and everyone just shrugs and it’s never talked about again!And one last thing, did they ever explain why the priest died, when he fell on the floor in front of Bev and the mayor? He just…passes out and dies for no reason? Was everyone taking the angel blood going to eventually just pass out and die like the priest? So. Many. Plot holes!
I posted elsewhere I couldn’t find this post of yours—and yet, here now it is. Oh Kinja, never change.
Y’know, I can’t remember seeing Ali ever take sacrament. But Bev was so into converting him, maybe she persuaded him to when he went to church without his dad (I never got a keen sense of just how many times he would have gone to church and how much time passed—several weeks?)
Your comments do make me question some more “rules” about these vampires. How often do they have to feed anyway?? Also it’s strongly suggested that the angel blood restores people to when they were at their physical “peak” (which seems to be… mid-late 30s?) But what about for teens and other people who have not reached their physical peak??
I thought the Priest died because he was badly in need of a feeding (which is why the next day or whatever he says he’s so hungry, won’t eat the soup, and soon eats Joe.) But yeah—see my question above about needing to feed.
And yeah, poor dog. Again it seems like that should have been tied into the greater plot (like I have said elsewhere I felt the alcoholism should have been, but even more so here) instead of, I guess, just serving to make sure we know how awful Bev is?
The Priest died in front of the Mayor, Bev, etc. because he had Bev poison him with the same stuff she used on the dog and on the congregation at the end. He wanted to prove to the small circle that what he was preaching was the truth. They didn’t do a very good job explaining it.
I’m pretty sure Bev poisons Paul at his request. There’s a brief scene of her putting the poison back up on the shelf, and the blood he spits up resembles the dog’s death. He later mentions God required him to take a leap of faith – referring to him killing himself.
Childhood’s End by Arthur C. Clarke had beings that acted benevolent (at least at the beginning) but looked like demons/devils when revealed. Pretty similar to the vampire in MM (minus the horns) IMO.
Having so many actors aged up or in full-on old age make up was very telling. That and a guy with a thing in a trunk.
I’m surprised there hasn’t been more discussion of the v-word. I scrolled through the comments just to see if anyone was talking about it.
Oh, rats. I’m Jewish so I really can’t explain it but I somehow sort of enjoy Catholic horror stories, so I hoped this would at least be kind of interesting. Though I confess, I thought Hill House started well and finished poorly and the second season was a mess (gosh, are you right about florid speeches. YEESH). I’ll still give it a try but I’ve adjusted my expectations as what you’re calling out is stuff that I’d roll my eyes about, too.
Your opinion is in the minority, but I feel ya. I ended up skipping through all the monologues which turned out to be the majority of it. Monologues are fine if it’s done right – as it was in True Detective, where the monologues were in keeping with the character of Rust Cohl. But here all the characters did was monologue endlessly to each other, even in the midst of terrifying situations, which brought the action to a standstill.While there are definitely some good elements here, I really don’t understand why it is being praised to the high heavens everywhere. Forget ‘show don’t tell,’ this is tell and tell and once everyone has gotten the point, tell for another 10 minutes.
I watched the entire series. I liked it, but man those monologues just don’t stop, there was one scene where a charceter talks about death, I zoned out, only to then realize the character he was talking to was about to give their own way overlong monologue.
Character A: asks a straightforward question Character B: when I was a kid my dad used to take me fishing… Way too many monologues
Coming to this late but…That was the scene that the show lost me. My wife and I were completely dumbstruck by that scene and went back to see how long it was (10 min with two 5 min monologues for both characters). Also, when we tracked back it, the scene preview thumbnails showed they did the exact same camera move (a slow push in) on the monologuing character. The way people launched into their speeches just left the other character hanging at times as in the Sheriff’s scene. They might as well have burst into song.
SPOILERS
Midnight Mass wouldn’t have ended in tragedy if someone had just warned the islanders that vampires combust in sunlight.
SPOILERS
Wait, isn’t that essentially the knowledge that the remaining islanders did in the finale? (I’m confused…)
The vampire islanders were the ones that started torching their own homes. So if Pruit had been able to warn them of their (obvious) vulnerability, they could’ve avoided the wide-scale arson & survived to be a happy vampire community.
Ugh–sorry for my reply, I think I was misreading what you wrote. (I thought you meant if the, for lack of a better word, hero characters had only been aware.) Yeah that was pretty… dumb. I mean it kinda made sense for Bev to think that way (leave nothing left but the church center and then leave the “unwanted” to burn) but for everyone to go along with it… (I guess the thinking is when they first wake up they aren’t rational–you know eating their children etc, but…)
But they did so under Bev’s instructions when she was already formulating the plan to have everyone survive in the church/rec center.
I am on episode 5 and I am nearly desperate with the need to hear someone say the word Vampire! It burns me, this omission, in a way the Walking Dead never has. Especially since the Walking Dead came up with a new word at least! I will forge ahead and see what happens. Sigh.
Spoilers: They never do!
“All of these swirl around St. Patrick’s, a shabby clapboard church in
the half-abandoned fishing community of Crockett Island. The island’s
location is never precisely stated, but the crab boats and chunky
sweaters place it somewhere in the Northeastern U.S.”
Apropos of absolutely nothing, as it doesn’t effect the narrative, Flanagan has said it’s set in the Pacific Northwest (which makes sense as it was filmed close to me in BC). They did make a few mentions of cities in Washington I think…
Really? I live in the PNW, and I got a pretty heavy East Coast vibe.
Maybe it’s different on the Canadian side 😉 The friend I watched with assumed it was set in the PNW straight away.
Equally odd, I live on the East Coast and I got a PNW vibe from it
PNW makes sense, as they didn’t saddle all of the actors with a bad Matt Damon imitation Baaaaaawwston Drawl.
I thought it was New England because that would make more sense with Erin saying she had Hollywood aspirations and when she ran away she went south and then west. I mean I guess she could’ve gone to Hawaii or Guam or something…? Or BC/Alaska is technically further west, although I’d probably call that going north from the Pacific Northwest.
I mean, forget Erin’s itinerary—what’s up with all of the New York/Chicago storylines if they’re on the West Coast? Why isn’t what’s his face (Riley? Ryan? Sure, I could scroll up, but why bother?) doing his start up thing in the Bay Area?But I guess the thing that really clinched “East Coast” for me was the last episode where the kids say the “angel” is trying to outrun the sunrise by flying to the mainland. I mean I know there’s shelter there, but he’s supposed to be flying toward the sunrise?
Yeah, it felt like New England to me and if there were geological references, I completely missed them. The character of Bev had a particularly East Coast style of Puritanical religiosity.
While I’m probably a couple of weeks late in commenting, the Pacific NW setting makes no sense. Your mad Angel thing is seen flying west at the end and the kids say it’s 30 miles to the mainland. Also from what I’ve seen the geography of the area looked more coastal Atlantic – all windswept and barren and lacking in places to hide from the sun whereas the Pacific NW has always appeared to be heavily forested (and usually raining) from what I’ve seen.
I mean it was filmed on the southwest coast of BC which is basically the Pacific NW (and where I currently live) and looked… typical to me? Otherwise I’m just going by Netflix’s official info but they could be wrong–your arguments make sense.
I read this yesterday before watching the end of the last episode, so I paid attention right at the end. ***********SPOLIERS*************The sun rises on the opposite side of the island as the two in the boat. If it’s supposed to be off the west coast, meaning they’re moving west. So, if they’re off the west coast, that would mean they were moving away from the coast. Them being off the east coast would make more sense there.
I thought that “Midnight Mass” was one of the better horror series I’ve seen in a while. I am Catholic though so I liked the wrestling with theological issues. My guess is that people who are at least somewhat religious are going to like the show quite a bit better than folks who are completely secular.
*Spoilers for the ending*
So the one main character who didn’t get a monologue is one of the survivors? (The other, Leeza, did get one, moment.) Maybe it was by design to leave his character mostly blank, but it seems like a missed opportunity to open the show with Warren, to end with it, and to have him barely play a part in the rest of it. No scene with his brother (we didn’t even find out what was in the letter). All we know about him is that he seems nice, likes Leeza, and likes being an altar boy. While it would have been a bit of a horror trope (but it’s not like Flanagan dislikes horror tropes) I had assumed from the opening that we would see the town’s horrors at least partially through his point of view.
I also felt like certain characters seemed to come around to believing the crazy things happening *really* suddenly (granted, in “reality” if you saw all this happening you would have to accept it pretty quickly if you wanted to do anything about it.) But the thought process seemed awfully fast in general, given a show that played other things awfully slow. Your daughter JUST died and your immediate thought is “I remember she really liked that one bridge–let’s take the body there?” Okay…
All in all I enjoyed the show, but I think it ranks last out of his three Netflix series (and that’s despite big reservations with Bly). One reason? I realized that when a major character would die, despite usually being milked for full pathos, I really had no emotional reaction to their death—so I guess I never was fully invested.
I definitely found it weird that the show has Warren and Leeza survive when they are both basically total non-entities throughout the show. Warren seems like a major character in episode one and then is relegated utterly to the background for the rest of the series.Leeza at least gets her big miracle and a laborious monologue of her very own when she confronts the guy that shot her, but after that, she also disappears and the show barely even acknowledges her after her big moment(s).The cast is pretty big and Flanagan just doesn’t juggle all of the pieces particularly well.I honestly felt like Erin could have been written out of the show entirely, she seems entirely incidental to everything that’s going on, just kind of a bystander without much to do except deliver (even more) monologues.
Absolutely agreed. The fact that Warren (and Leeza) are introduced so early on—given the impression we WILL follow them to some extent throughout the show—and then end up the endgame, make me wonder if Flanagan liked the idea of these young people as the survivors/hope but was not remotely interested in writing for them otherwise (seriously–Warren has NO direct interaction with his brother?)
One more comment about all the monologues…SPOILER FOR EPISODE 7
I do find some of them genuinely compelling and sometimes they make perfect sense. But when we got to Erin telling the Sheriff that he should investigate the church–and immediately it’s understood by the viewer why he feels this is the last thing the town will “put up” with from him–and with everything ramping up, that’s really where the scene shoulda ended. Instead suddenly the Sheriff goes into a five minute monologue about whyhe became a cop, how hard it’s been to be a cop with his faith and skin colour, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc… It was well written. It was very well acted. But… c’mon.
I genuinely didn’t see the reason for that monologue, or why Erin would sit there and listen to it? Because WTF. It was clearly a time-killer?
Exactly. It was pretty ridiculous. You’d think they would know, if they wanted to have a monologue spelling out all that backstory, that it would be better to have it an episode or two earlier and slightly rewritten…
Kinja tells me you replied to one of my posts with
“I’d like to ask a question that has been bothering me ever since I finished the show.”
But, typically, I can’t find that post anywhere. And now I’m really curious what your question was!
Thinking back on the series as a whole, I guess one problem I have (and again, this may very well be by design) was how it set up things that didn’t get “resolved”. Like seeing the ghost of his victim in the first three episodes (I guess it was so similar to what happened in Bly Manor that I thought there would be more to it than just reminding us of his guilt). Or the whole alcoholism element which was *such* a major theme here but, unlike how addiction was handled in Hell House, I felt like it never really joined directly to the other themes of the show, if that makes any sense. I get that it got one of the main characters onto the show, and interacting with the priest, yet it felt like it was just something Flanagan wanted to write about (which it was–in interviews he discusses his own problems with alcohol and how he realized, despite coming up with this fifteen years back, that he could only write it sober) and so just an extended tangent. By the final episode it had zero relevance… (and again, I’m not sure if that’s inherently a problem in a miniseries like this, but…)
After years and years of hip, hyperaware about the tropes of horror stories media, watching a miniseries in which the basic premise was that no one in the story had apparently ever heard of a vampire was… strange and somehow kind of off-putting.
It seems at some point someone should have at least said “Oh, you mean like a vampire?” I mean our lead had horror movie posters on his wall… c’mon.
Not just horror posters – an X-Files poster, which had several episodes specifically about vampires.
I guess I think of X-Files as horror, but you’re right (and right to point out the vamp related stories on it). I was more confused by the posters in Warren’s room which seemed to be for pop stars/actresses Samantha May and Starla May who… I’m guessing are in-jokes as I’m not just out of touch and have never heard of them.
They alluded to it when they were at the table saying “these stories usually come from a certain type of blood disease”. I think it would have sounded weird either way. But yeah, I was kinda waiting for Riley to be like, THAT WAS A FUCKING VAMPIRE.
I remember a few years ago the air whip cracked suddenly into autumn and everything turned orange and brown and I got the Halloween Fever. And lo and behold, a spooky series fell in my lap: The Haunting of Hill House. It’s exactly what I was in the mood for and boy oh boy did I never finish it. What a let down. And now…I’ve fallen for it again!!! Quarterback Matt Seracen deserves better, I deserve better, and Halloween deserves better.
It wasn’t my favourite Flannigan series but I still enjoyed it. Part of me wished that Flannigan had been charge of The Stand instead of the crap we go on CBS all access.
Okay spoiler question for those who’ve seen it:How the fuck did Ali become a vampire? He never took communion and drank the blood and wasn’t given blood after his death.
Was that a goof or did I miss something? We know that the more blood you get, the stronger/more vampiric you are (it took Father Paul a while before he burned in sunlight, for example, or for Leeza to be healed enough to walk.)
I believe we are meant to understand that Ali had done communion behind his father’s back, even though he said he hadn’t. Which makes sense with the characters. What doesn’t make sense is when Father Paul tries to convince Hassan to drink the poison, when we know for a fact that he hadn’t done communion.
But it’s way too big of a plot point to hide from the audience and just let us assume that he had some communion wine off-camera.I mean, how? We know that Father Paul prepares it specifically by himself, adding it to the wine from the bottles. So when would he have gotten it?We also know that the vampiric effect is cumulative. It took Paul/Pruitt a while before he was burned by the sunlight and a while before Leeza was cured and a while before Sarah’s mom fully de-aged.So it seems like even if that was the intent, he’d need more than just one quick, secret nip.
I think the setup was that the kids were hanging out smoking weed in the beginning, “fuck the sheriff”and all that, so we knew he was a rebellious kid that wanted to fit in, and was somewhat ashamed that he didn’t. With the pressure from Bev and his need for acceptance, I just figured he was doing more that he said he would.
To fully become a vampire, you have to die first after having some infected blood put into you. They actually used Bram Stoker as an inspiration.Pruitt started to get powers, after the “Angel” shared some of his blood with him in the tomb. He then starts to turn into a vampire, gets some abilities, his blood has “curating” virtues, but it isn’t before the time he’s poisoned (probably by Bev, who has taken the Scriptures even more literally than he has) and dies that he becomes fully vampire.https://www.thewrap.com/midnight-mass-angel-vampire-bible-father-paul-monsignor-pruitt/
What’s particularly weird about the large (and rather clumsy) ensemble is how seemingly important characters float in and out of focus and even out of the show’s “main” characters, none feel indispensable or even truly necessary (beyond Father Paul, of course.)
Erin seems like she exists simply so Flangan can give his wife a juicy part complete with endless monologues. But even when the show shifts focus to her after the death of Riley, it fails to make a case as to why this character in particular has become the de facto protagonist of the show slash leader of the survivors. Her attack by and subsequent maiming of the angel feels like a completely random happenstance, as if Flanagan is tying together two loose plot threads clumsily in order to wrap everything up in the final episode.
Sarah exists largely for purposes of exposition and a very late-in-the-day plot twist which provides Father Paul/Pruitt with retroactive motivation for doing everything.Riley seems important and occupies so much real estate in the early episodes, but the show isn’t hurt one bit by his absence when he exits the series before its conclusion. He ends up making zero impact on the plot.
Characters like the mayor and his wife briefly take the spotlight, only to recede into the chorus.Even the sheriff, who is one of the most compelling figures with the most interesting backstory, almost feels like he’s on another show.
I couldn’t agree more about the monologues. That aspect was way overdone. ******SPOILERS******More than that, though, the story just made no sense. Bev’s turn was not set up. Yes, she was self-righteous and passive-aggressive, but not “Oh, you’re a vampire, and you just killed someone, cool, let me help you”.Along with that, all of the attempts to justify the craziness and murder with stuff from the Bible just didn’t work. Including Bev’s convincing of the mayor to help get rid of Joe’s body and be an accomplice. Sorry, but a regular, nice guy isn’t going to buy into that crap.Then the vampires were either bloodthirsty savages with no conscience or perfectly rational and in control of themselves, and it was arbitrary, just depended on what was needed for the story. What about the cats from the beginning? I get that they were victims of the vampire, but why in the middle of a storm and why scattered on the beach? It’s like he wanted a cool visual to get you wondering but didn’t bother to make it actually fit the story.Why did Ali, the sheriff’s son turn into a vampire? He had never had communion. It was explicitly stated that he couldn’t and wouldn’t be allowed to. And if we’re supposed to assume he snuck some, that’s something that needs to be made clear, not just assumed.And I guess in this universe no one had heard of vampires? Even if not, it’s still not believable that people went along with everything as much as they did. Even if I’d never heard of vampires, you’d have a huge mountain to climb to convince me that vampire thing was anything but a monster to destroy.Most of all, I just can’t believe I’m not seeing any of these criticisms anywhere, and that the show is getting so much praise.
I can see why there’s a chilly reception to this show based on a few key things mentioned above, but I found it really compelling. As a person in recovery who has had a lifelong crisis of faith – the themes here, and even parts of the dialog have had me pretty riveted. I absolutely love the dichotomies of redemption vs immortality – the addiction aspects and the development of vampirism as another form of dependency. The idea that recovery and redemption are possible through community, but the perception of the faithful that the immortality of the institution depends on literal blood in this story, let along the perspectives on death and guilt – it’s all just really interesting to me. The visual scares are really effective, though if you’re hoping for a creature feature you’ll definitely be left wanting. I’m a very committed horror fan – have been all my life, and this show didn’t appeal to me in that way – but I still found it pretty riveting.
*spoilers*
I don’t quite get why people who have seen Hill House and Bly Manor don’t quite know what they are getting into with another Flanagan series. Talkytalkytalky people! I personally thought both Riley’s and Erin’s death monologues were beautifully delivered, as was the Sheriff’s even if it was totally ridiculous to stop everything for a monologue right then…but not as ridiculous as the two kids taking all that time on the beach to say goodbye instead of getting into the fuckin canoe! There were a ton of plot issues, like that the doctor could have called the cops and said that a bunch of people just got murdered on the island and they have to come out…or Bev existing at all…but in the end like with Bly I will remember the high points and not worry too much about it. I mean…they showed Father Paul standing right outside under an eave…you’re telling me the people in town don’t have any leaves they can hide under for a day, any blankets left over? They burned all the buildings! except…basements.I will say that Bev was just too much. You need to disperse the villainy a LITTLE bit.
Agree. This was way too talky. It feels like a Stephen King adaption in that much of the monologues feel like it was prose from a book..but that is the problem. This is a TV show, not a book. Nothing in this show is particularly scary and most of the main characters drone on and on I actually as rooting for the vampire to be done with them. Hill House is looking more and more like a fluke. Bly Manor was a bait and switch that promised horror and instead was more interested in a mawkish romance. This once again feels like a bait and switch as anyone expecting a good vampire horror instead has to sit through interminable soliloquies about bad parents and faith. The best horror sometimes is a metaphor for something real, but it seems like Flanigan is putting the cart way before the horse…again. Yeah, I give it a “C-” too.
I hate to say it, but if your first idea is to paint early christianity as off-putting to their ‘pagan neighbors’ because of ritualized cannibalism, it’s pretty hard to take your review in good faith, considering the fact that Christianity’s cannabilistic ritualism is literally pagan in origin.
Tl;dr, if you’ve got a hard-on to hate on organized religion as a concept and are intellectually lazy enough to forgo learning enough about the topic of your quips to realize the dramatic irony of your low-handing fruit, you aren’t really qualified to analyze this show in good faith.