Mike Flanagan’s New Stephen King Remake Signals a Bigger Hollywood Trend

by

Mike Flanagan became a leading horror director after his successful sequel, Doctor Sleep, to The Shining. News came in February 2026 that he’ll be revisiting another classic story by the same author, which is likely to be popular with audiences. However, while his version will probably be excellent, it represents a return to a Hollywood practice that many thought had disappeared.

Mike Flanagan is a standout horror director known for creating genuinely frightening movies like Doctor Sleep and acclaimed TV series such as Midnight Mass and The Haunting of Hill House. Recently announced plans for him to remake Stephen King’s The Mist are proving controversial, and some fear it could start a trend of unnecessary remakes in the horror genre.

Mike Flanagan is Set to Remake Frank Darabont’s The Mist

Frank Darabont’s 2007 film, The Mist, based on Stephen King’s novella, is considered one of the most disturbing horror movies of recent years. The story follows an artist and his son as they become trapped in a supermarket while monstrous creatures wreak havoc outside. The film blends classic monster horror with a chilling exploration of human behavior, particularly the dangers of fanaticism and the darkness within people. While the creatures are frightening, the movie suggests that the reactions of those trapped with them – especially someone like Mrs. Carmody – are equally terrifying, highlighting the worst aspects of human nature.

Darabont’s film delivered a truly unforgettable horror experience for Stephen King fans, pushing their emotions to the absolute limit with its powerful conclusion. It’s become the benchmark for bleak endings, a result of both the story and the director’s skill. Many viewers were so deeply affected that they find it too painful to rewatch, and that lasting impact is what makes it so hard to top. Flanagan will face a real challenge trying to create something as impactful without feeling derivative.

Whether or not people are excited about Mike Flanagan directing a Stephen King film, it’s another remake – and remakes haven’t historically been very successful. The film industry generally does much better with sequels, prequels, or even revisiting old stories with new angles. These types of projects build on what came before, aiming to improve upon previous mistakes or confusing storylines. In the case of The Mist, a remake isn’t really needed, as Frank Darabont’s 2007 film was already very well-received.

The Stephen King Remake Signals the Comeback of a Bad Trend

While a new version of The Misti might sound appealing, it also brings back a troubling pattern in Hollywood. Remaking popular movies has often failed, as seen with films like the 2012 Total Recall and numerous unsuccessful horror reboots, including A Nightmare on Elm Street and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It’s clear audiences aren’t eager for simple remakes. Instead, they prefer to see original stories expanded upon, like with the successful IT: Welcome to Derry, which explored the world before and after the original film, rather than just revisiting it.

The concern isn’t whether Mike Flanagan can make a good film, but what Hollywood will learn if his remake does well. If it’s a big hit, we can expect even more reliance on existing franchises and familiar stories. Recently, the industry seemed to be moving away from simple remakes and toward legacy sequels – like Ghostbusters: Afterlife and David Gordon Green’s Halloween – that built on what came before and addressed past issues. These expansions proved audiences preferred that approach, while straight remakes often disappointed.

Many of Stephen King’s most popular stories have already been adapted into excellent films, making it difficult to justify new versions. While studios are often driven by potential profits, the track record of unnecessary remakes suggests this isn’t always a winning strategy. Once a film establishes a strong interpretation of a story in the public’s mind, alternative versions rarely measure up. Remakes might look good on paper for studios, but they often suffer from a lack of proper funding, ultimately harming the overall franchise.

There aren’t any hard rules about when a movie can be remade, but revisiting Darabont’s film feels unnecessary while it’s still so well-remembered. Remaking it might work further down the line if people forget the original, but the 2007 version has actually gained popularity since it came out. If studios start constantly remaking even recent hits, it risks diminishing the value of the original stories.

Another Take On the Story Feels Redundant

Despite its recent attempt, the TV series adaptation of The Mist has only intensified questions about whether another version is needed. Many viewers and fans felt it didn’t measure up to the movie. Given Mike Flanagan’s excellent work on Doctor Sleep, studios might have been more willing to let him adapt some of Stephen King’s other, less popular stories. With fifty years of writing, there’s plenty of King’s work that still deserves to be made into films.

Flanagan’s take on the story could be more successful if it moved beyond the events of the 2007 film, maybe by focusing on the military scientists who originally caused the trouble. Because his stories are so interconnected, Stephen King’s world offers lots of opportunities for new films that show different sides of the same events. Doctor Sleep showed Flanagan’s ability to deliver exactly what audiences expect from a sequel, and he could continue to excel at that.

Many of Stephen King’s stories have inspired multiple sequels in books, which creates opportunities for fresh continuations on screen. For example, letting Mike Flanagan reimagine the core idea of The Mist might be better received than a direct remake. This principle applies to other properties being remade – offering something new is far more appealing than simply retreading familiar ground for an audience already inclined to favor the original.

Many beloved films, such as Top Gun and The Thing, deserve proper sequels, and remakes often disappoint fans. When adapting existing stories, constantly revisiting the same material instead of creating something new leaves audiences feeling unfulfilled. It’s better for studios to focus on developing fresh ideas or revisiting properties that didn’t initially succeed, rather than endlessly retreading familiar ground, as seen with The Mist and other horror franchises.

There Are Better Options For Stephen King

Stephen King’s stories haven’t always translated well to film, often suffering when studios try to change them too much. While the recent It movies were successful, films like Desperation and The Boogeyman show that sometimes a good story just needs better execution. That’s what Hollywood should prioritize with remakes. Working with talented directors like Flanagan allows for more potential with stories that weren’t originally well-made, rather than constantly revisiting films people already consider perfect.

Just as Hollywood seemed to be finding a good balance with adaptations and original stories, this new development feels like a step backward. While Mike Flanagan’s version of Stephen King’s The Mist will likely be popular, it raises concerns that we might see fewer truly original movies coming from Hollywood in the future.

5 Questions
Test Your Horror Smarts: Flanagan, King, and The Mist
Your Top Score
—
Attempts
—
0
0
Report Error

Found an error? Send it so it can be corrected.

Read More

2026-02-14 21:39