Mike Flanagan Is Overrated

This one has been a long time coming, and honestly, I think it's about time we talk about Mike Flanagan and how he is (in my opinion) seriously overrated. Mike Flanagan is a name now well known in the horror sphere for some time now, and with his most recent accolade being a miniseries remake of "Carrie" (because that's what we need in 2026), I think I need to discuss why I think he's overrated. Let's dive in.

Let's set the clocks back to 2018 when "The Haunting Of Hill House" was announced as a mini-series helmed by the writer and creator of the movie "Oculus", a movie which I enjoyed. "Oculus" wasn't scary (at least not to me), but it did present what I'd like to call "intelligent horror", which I define as a film where the characters make logical choices but ultimately fail anyway because what they're up against is far too powerful for them. "Oculus" was an enjoyable film that I am happy to own, and "The Haunting of Hill House", although this is a loose adaptation, was thoroughly enjoyable. I think the best episode the mini-series had to offer was "The Bent-Neck Lady", which was probably one of the saddest hours on television. The YouTube reactions to that moment and the pit in my stomach I felt during that episode's climax, I won't soon forget. It was a masterful moment to say the least. And ultimately, "The Haunting of Hill House" as a whole was a pretty fantastic series, save for a few strange moments. 

"The Haunting of Bly-Manor" was...not the best. It was a loose adaptation of "The Turn Of The Screw" (which isn't all that good to begin with), and despite having some AMAZING and I do AMAZING acting from the child actors, the story was ultimately a lesbian love ghost story and a story about possession...which is hardly scary. The story got high praise and saw Flanagan working with frequent collaborators: his wife, Kate Siegel, Carla Gugino, Victoria Pedretti, and Henry Thomas. While the acting is on point, the story leaves very much to be desired; not only that, but having various ghosts in the periphery is hardly cause for the high praise the show received.  "Midnight Mass" was his next offering, and finally, this was an original story that touched on faith and miracles and did something interesting with Vampires that I have not yet seen...but at the same time...didn't exactly care to see. 

Mike Flanagan, atheist that he is, took Vampirism and dressed it up as a form of The Euchrist and miracles, with the very much confused Father Pruitt having been attacked by a vampire and suddenly regaining his youth, insisting that the vampire is an angel and his revived youth and vigor a gift...but of course, we as the audience know better. I understand that for the sake of the show ignorance is needed, but first and foremost, I'm tired of Christian = Catholic when it comes to Hollywood, and I suppose it's because Catholics have a uniform and are easily recognizable, whereas general Christians are not. And secondly, I'm supposed to believe a Priest wouldn't have enough Biblical knowledge to know how angels interact with people? Scratch that, I can believe that, but I digress. The point is, when trying to write a critique on religion, rituals, and piety, one should at the very least understand the religion they're critiquing.

I didn't bother with "The Midnight Club", but I did, however, bother with "The Fall Of the House Of Usher" and aside from the article I wrote, here is where I was officially done with Mike Flanagan. Mike seems to fail not only in his understanding of Poe but also in what the word "tragedy" even means...and it doesn't mean watching a bunch of hedonist losers get maimed (I've got the "Saw" series and "Tales From The Crypt" for that). "The Fall Of The House Of Usher" was nothing but an exercise in LGBTQ nonsense and weird kinking sex masquerading as intrigue; every character is either gay or some form of fetishist. Prospero, Napoleon, Cammile and Tamerlane (yes, she counts because she wants to watch her husband have sex with another woman) are bisexual, C. Augustine Dupain is gay, Victorine is gay, and both are married, and can there honestly be this many sexual deviants in the same family? And moreover, why is this a focus on the plot? Edgar Allan Poe was a Romantic, yes, but ultimately Poe wrote about tragedy, and the main driving force of tragedy is that the character does not deserve the fate that has befallen them. The characters in "The Fall Of The House of Usher" are all douche bags who deserve whatever they got, save for Lenore. 

And now Flanagan is doing an adaptation of "Carrie, and in this hyper-feminized world, there's no doubt we're going to get an anti-patriarchy Carrie and an INCREDIBLY Christian caricature in Carrie's Mother. I get this is the book that launched Stephen King's career, but the story of "Carrie" has been told enough to the point where another modern update, and mini-series nonetheless, just seems pointless. And with Mike's obsession over sexuality, expect to see Carrie go through at least one lesbian phase. This is my core contention with Mike, is that he's only managed to write one actual tragedy, and that is "The Haunting of Hill House," but with everything else, he's either obsessed with sexuality or doesn't understand what he's critiquing to write a knowledgeable story about it. Edgar Allan Poe wrote stories about madness and characters who were otherwise normal, succumbing to something they can't quite understand, and that's the beauty of Poe. "The Black Cat" and "The Tell-Tale Heart" are what happens when you let your intrusive thoughts win, "The Cask Of Amontillado" is a story of offense taken to drastic measures, "The Masque Of The Red Death" is about not only the escapability of death but the out-of-touch revelers who danced as their kingdom died. All of these stories showcased tragedy, not sexual deviants and their kinks, but everyday average people getting ravaged by their own madness. Mike has also written one tragedy, and that was "The Bent-Neck Lady," and if you haven't watched "The Haunting Of Hill House," I suggest you do because that was a tragedy, everything else...naw.

Mike seems to have an obsession with sexuality, and despite the acting in his series being very good, he gets by on creating atmosphere and a bunch of details in the background (similar to Ari Aster) before they ultimately succumb to their own hype. M. Night Shamalyan fell into this trap and is slowly getting out of it, but Mike seems to be stuck. Mike Flanagan is not Stanley Kubrick, and Ari Aster is not David Lynch. With Mike taking on "The Exorcist" as his next film project, and whether this is a remake or another installment of this awful franchise (which its only contribution to cinema history in my opinion is the movie poster and is its theme, yeah, I said it) I have a feeling this will be as hollow as everything else he's made after "The Haunting of Hill House" and lack the tragedy therein. Let me know what you guys think. Deuces.