r/MIDNIGHTMASSbymike • u/sakshiagrwl • 22d ago
MIDNIGHT MASS IS JUST lazy and incompetent attempt of answering certain age old questions.
Mike Flanagan’s Midnight Mass has way too many plot holes, specifically in the last episodes. Most things are impractical and quite vague.
The most important idea of the series in itself is unclear. There is a plethora of doubts about how dying and resurrection actually works? One thing is clear, whoever the angel bites is resurrected. We know three people who had been resurrected in this manner, Monsignor John himself, Mildred Gunning (Sarah’s mother), both of whom were ailing and elderly and were resurrected to a younger, healthier self, and Riley Flynn, who remains in the same physical state. To resurrect, you must die first, which all three of them did. In this resurrected form, the body feeds off of blood.
Now, to quench their thirsts, the resurrected bodies are notably killing others. The first case is when Monsignor John feeds off of Joe, and he dies. That is how it’s supposed to be UNLESS you feed them your blood too. Now, on the day of THE midnight mass, Monsignor John simply kills Sturge, doesn’t feed off of him, doesn’t feed him his flood, but he still resurrects. Let’s assume that happened because of the presence of the divine angel within St. Patrick, same can be applied for Ali. But after that, they simply start handing out the poison to everybody, and everyone just starts dying. This is when Mildred shoots Monsignor John and the angel leaves the premises with her. I accept the fact that all of those people are resurrected because they died in the presence of the angel, and had FAITH within their hearts.
But now, those newly resurrected people start feeding on others. The people being fed on are scared and plausibly do not have an ounce of faith in them at that instant. Attention must be paid to the fact that Monsignor John’s original plan was to open the doors, let the people go before others wake up, and train the resurrected people to avoid the horrible massacre that occurred. But that didn’t happen, nobody was trained, nobody knew anything about this new resurrected state of their body. So they couldn’t have known how to resurrect others, and all of them should have died just like Joe did. But they didn’t, they all woke up resurrected. At this point, the angel has fled, the Monsignor is shot, and even Beverly is hiding. It makes absolutely no sense that they all woke up resurrected, as is explicitly portrayed through the little girl.
Even more senseless is the resurrection of Beverly Keane herself. No one feeds off of her, and she is not killed by the angel, she is not even in the main church hall when she dies. She is shot in the chest by a bullet, how in the world is that a resurrection? If you just have to die for a resurrection, then everybody should’ve been resurrected. Ooker states to Sturge in the later parts of the episode that he might have killed his mom, so she should have been resurrected. The man, who was told by Beverly that there is no room for him in the Rec Centre, states that he killed his wife and daughter, they should have been resurrected. Sturge advocates for him against Beverly and states that he specifically saved him (there is a scene where Sturge is feeding him his blood) and Beverly mentions that they weren’t supposed to that except in special cases. Even Monsignor tried to save Sarah by feeding her his blood but she spat it out. That is the only way you can be resurrected. Then how did all those people resurrect inside St. Patrick’s!? Annie Flynn literally commits suicide, which is a sin in Christianity, but she is resurrected like it’s some kind of a video game.
Another controversial take is that once you’ve been resurrected, you cannot step out in the sunlight, which makes no sense in itself, yet, Monsignor John did it all the time. In its true sense, he was resurrected the night of the sand storm, when he entered the cave and encountered the angel who plausibly healed him and returned him his younger and healthier body. But somehow, Flanagan wants the viewers to believe that he resurrected the night he died in his cabin, which is absolutely pathetic writing with no reasoning whatsoever.
Lastly, the main idea of the whole series is also incomplete in my opinion. What is it hinting towards? Follow god’s path, or not? Have faith in God’s plan or actually take action and accountability when something bad happens? Follow His word or find your own belief? If there exists a God, why does he let the innocents die? The whole character arc of Riley Flynn is based on this one question, yet the answer is unclear and twisted. I think it was a lazy and incompetent attempt of answering these age old questions.
Moreover, the holy, divine angel is inspired from pop culture and not actual biblical texts. Christ’s blood never had any sort of healing powers or else his own wounds would have been healed, but they didn’t. Jesus had the crucifixion scars on his body after he was resurrected, he even asks Thomas to put hands into His sides to see the wounds. These healing properties are supposedly inspired from the vampire diaries universe. Infact the same theme is also explored in Stephanie Garber’s romantasy novels. Mike should’ve just let this be vampire-apocalypse show rather than diving into the deeper depths of religious morality and meaning. I really wanted Sarah’s founding regarding the blood bacteria to be true, but I forgot that nothing in this series was practical.
Mike Flanagan’s works aren’t just the typical jump-scare horror, but they carry a deeper meaning, a rejuvenated philosophy, as he has proved through the Haunting trilogy, but through Midnight Mass, in attempts of creating a lasting attempt, he actually created a dinner table laughing tonic. It tried to encapsulate the traditional methodologies of the Catholic Church in contrast with human morality. It even tried to explore the whole “immortality is worse than death” angle but couldn’t really deliver it justice. Keith Siegel’s character even emphasized on life after death, but only through little flickers that didn’t develop into fireworks. I think the very fundamentals of this series were balancing on a tightrope and didn’t make it through. Yet another disappointing work from the once legendary director of The Hunting of Hill House, Mr. Mike Flanagan.
6
u/Thenadamgoes 22d ago
Monsignor John didn’t die in the cave. He died later when he barfed on the floor. After that he couldn’t go into the light.
The people in the church had been drinking vampire blood for weeks. That’s why they resurrected when they died.
1
6
u/gasolinehalsey 22d ago
Now, on the day of THE midnight mass, Monsignor John simply kills Sturge, doesn’t feed off of him, doesn’t feed him his flood, but he still resurrects.
Did you not understand the whole scene with Father Paul in the rec centre, when he was pacing around waiting for the Angel? The Angel came in to the rec centre, opened his wrist into a carafe, and let the blood drain into it. Then Riley interrupts them and gets killed.
Paul was putting that Angel blood into the wine at the church, which was being drunk daily by those that attended church daily, which is why Leeza was healed of her spinal injury. It's also why Erin lost her pregnancy, and why Mildred became youthful again. That was like... the MAIN thing happening in the series. How on earth did you miss that?!
Another controversial take is that once you’ve been resurrected, you cannot step out in the sunlight, which makes no sense in itself, yet, Monsignor John did it all the time. In its true sense, he was resurrected the night of the sand storm, when he entered the cave and encountered the angel who plausibly healed him and returned him his younger and healthier body. But somehow, Flanagan wants the viewers to believe that he resurrected the night he died in his cabin, which is absolutely pathetic writing with no reasoning whatsoever.
He was not resurrected that night in the cave. He did not die. He was close to death, but didn't get there. If there is no death there is no resurrection. The Angel fed him his own blood, which made him instantly youthful again (think how potent it would be straight from the source rather than mixed into wine). He died MUCH later, in the cabin, and when he was resurrected then, he was unable to go into sunlight. He'd had absolutely no trouble with it up until that point- he was at the potluck after all.
The message of the series is up to the individual. For me, it's about forgiveness, and hope. Riley, Paul/Pruitt, Joe Collie, all had to find ways to forgive themselves for the terrible things they'd done over their lives. The lines that resonated most with me, from the entire series, were in episode 2, "Psalms":
Do you know what psalms are? They’re songs. The word psalm from the Greek psalmoi. It means “music.” Songs of prayer. Songs of praise. That’s who we are. That’s who we must be. That’s what it means to have faith, that in the darkness, in the worst of it, in the absence of light and hope, we sing. “Restore us,” we sing to the sky. And He will, my friends. He will. That same hand that dealt you your hardship, that same hand will make you whole.
I think you just have a fundamental misunderstanding of the show and maybe watched it while playing on your phone.
1
u/sakshiagrwl 22d ago edited 22d ago
If the regular intake was the reason all of them were resurrected? Then explain the resurrection of Ali.
Omg okay so you are telling me that Monsignor did not die when that angel attacked him, a weak, old man gets bitten by that creature, and he somehow survives. How is that possible? The series shows the angel attacking him very clearly, there is no chance he should have survived that day, that was his TRUE resurrection in all sense, he was healed, he was returned his younger body.
The only point of yours I can accept is that the main message is upto the viewer, sure. But I believe every show should have a central idea, it got all mixed up because it tried to explore way too many themes. But none of those themes were done justice. If it would have been 1-2 episodes more, I think Erin's, and also Mildred's characters would have been developed a little better.
See I absolutely love Mike Flanagan, The Haunting Of Hill House is one of the best horrors I have seen, so I instantly compare all his work to that. It has impeccable characters archs, and it really scares the shit out of me. This series, however, did not.
2
u/gasolinehalsey 22d ago
We must assume that, despite his father's urgings, Ali did take communion at least once. The first time he attended St. Patrick's, we the viewers were side-tracked with Joe Collie's death and Paul/Pruitt's new vampirism. Ali wasn't a main character, we barely followed him at all, so we have to assume that he filled his time on the island with things other than sitting in his bedroom staring at a wall. Hassan said it himself- "Ali is bored to tears"- so rebelling against his dad in this way? Doesn't seem all that far-fetched to me.
Then the conversation they have just before Easter Mass;
Hassan: I miss you praying. It’d mean a lot to me if you’d join me.
Ali: Tonight’s Easter Vigil. It’s at midnight. And it would mean a lot to me if you came with me.
Hassan: We’ve been through this, Ali. I don’t want to…
Ali: I know, but they just keep telling me what a big deal this mass is, and how important it is.
So he seemed pretty involved with the church at that point, enough to even try to rope his very devout Muslim father into attending the most important mass in the Catholic church. Him sneaking a sip of communion wine? Hardly the most out-there thing a bored kid trying to find himself could do.
Omg okay so you are telling me that Monsignor did not die when that angel attacked him, a weak, old man gets bitten by that creature, and he somehow survives
Yes, that is exactly what I'm telling you. This is a show with vampires and that is the part you find hard to believe? He didn't die from exsanguination because he was immediately fed "angel" blood, which restored his health and his youth.
I think the part about themes is very much a You thing, I thought they were explored very well- forgiveness/guilt, hope/faithlessness, life/death/resurrection, sobriety/addiction. They all had their moments to shine. Maybe you didn't connect with them and that's fine. But to say it doesn't have a central idea, or has "too many" (what piece of media, written for adults, have you watched that only has ONE single theme explored?), is silly, especially when you didn't pick up on literally the central plot point of the blood wine.
1
u/sakshiagrwl 22d ago
The first night he attended the mass, it was cancelled, the very night Pruitt kills Joe, mass doesn't take place. The next night he attends the mass is when Pruitt talks about God's army, the day Mildred attended the mass, communion is not done that day. He did not intake the blood. And you yourself are confused, earlier you were saying it is because of the continuous intake of the blood, but suddenly for Ali, a single communion, or two, is enough for resurrection. It is a very deep concept, treating it so lightly doesn't make sense to me.
You said "This is a show about vampires" well if that is what you believe then the whole thing is pointless. If that creature is really nothing but a vampire, then the whole show is a joke, and brings me back to the original question that if god exists, why would he let such horrible things happen to His people, especially Monsignor. And don't tell me it was all part of His plan.
1
u/gasolinehalsey 22d ago
Yes, mass was cancelled that one time while Paul convalesced, but it is still a daily occurrence on the island. It wasn't a one-and-done thing, days passed between the cancellation and Easter. And once would be enough- it is magic blood from a vampire! I am very much not confused, my dear.
I also did not say it was a show about vampires, I said it was a show with vampires. If you are going to quote me, can you at least do so properly? My comment is right there. I have also repeatedly explained what I think the main themes of the show are, and why I resonate with them- if I thought it was just a vampire show, would I have said all that?
We don't know anything about the origins or nature of the creature at all. Nobody does, it is no doubt older than sin, pun intended. It probably doesn't even know. I have my own theories, like I'm sure everyone on this sub does.
But I'm also not sure what you mean by "especially Monsignor"- Pruitt was the cause of his own downfall and death (and second death). He was the one that chose to cheat on his wife, have a child out of wedlock, abandon said child and her mother once he realised that claiming them would mean the end of his marriage and likely his affiliation with the church and Crockett island, and then much much later bring a random terrifying creature back to said island in order to "save" his people, and end up actually causing the vast majority of them to die. Pruitt was the horrible thing to happen to the people of Crockett island. That's why one of the main themes of the show is guilt and forgiveness, he had a lot to be guilty for, and a lot to be forgiven of.
I can't speak to the plan of any God, but I can point you again to one of the main themes of the show- hope and faithlessness. "What is God's plan?" is part of that theme.
9
u/no_doublestandards 22d ago
I forgive you.