The thing that has made Mike Flanagan stand out in the modern age of horror has been his understanding of the importance of strong character work in the genre. On top of coming up with uniquely unsettling concepts and petrifying scenarios, he has always ensured the people in his stories are just as compelling as the supernatural terrors they face. It's an aspect of his style that he's been able to explore to the fullest extent ever since he's made the move from feature-lengths to miniseries. More so than anything he's made prior this is a human drama that just so happens to have a monster in it. The majority of the "action" consists of watching the inhabitants of the small island fishing town struggle with things like guilt, regret, redemption, religious faith, death and so much else. Usually through lengthy conversations. Flanagan portrays all of this with his usual sense of empathy. He genuinely seems to get why humanity is this way and doesn't appear to hold it against anybody, despite having no trouble depicting and serving justice to the most heinous of those among us. Despite the narrative being centered around a Catholic church, he never condemns religion as an inherently bad thing like so many others would. He never condemns anyone or anything at all. Rather he simply critiques how religion can be misused to justify abhorrent behavior. The overall message being to look past the race, beliefs, or creeds of others. Midnight Mass isn't telling you to agree with everybody as it realizes that's impossible. Rather it's asking you to accept that there are those with different beliefs and lifestyles, not judge, and continue going about your own life. A moral I can get behind 100%. Now let me tell you why I think this is one of the weakest efforts of Flanagan's career thus far... No, not because it isn't scary. Few though they may be, these are some of the most effective frights tactics he's come up with to date. The first problem I have is evident from the very start. The whole thing looks really cheap to the point where I was regularly taken out of the experience by the obvious green screens and lackluster CGI. It becomes clear that the bulk of the SFX budget went into the absolute parade of blood and fire that is the finale, which explains why it's so rough visually early on. However, you mean to tell me Netflix could give upwards of $90 million to David Ayer and Michael Bay, but couldn't slip a few extra bucks to the guy who gave them The Haunting of Hill House which is likely STILL the best content the streaming service has to offer? Unreal. My other issues stem from the writing. Characters have a tendency to talk in really unnatural ways. Like how at one point a teenage boy uses the phrase "good and truly" as if he's from the 1600s or something. It's bizarre. The biggest and most egregious fault of all though is the ginormous plot hole resting at the center of the script. I can't go into details for fear of incredibly significant spoilers, but suffice to say it very easily ruins any sense of believability. Between this and The Haunting of Bly Manor (which he admittedly had a less hands-on role in), I'm ready for Flanagan to return to movies where a smaller running-time forces him to deliver tighter, more focused narratives while leaving a smaller amount of room for these kind of mistakes to creep in. Especially since his last two films were the outstanding Gerald's Game and Doctor Sleep. This is still solid enough for me to recommend it to you based on the strength of its well-realized characters, their dynamics, and the internal dilemmas they face. As well as for the creative twists it puts on one of the oldest creatures of the night ever to grace the screen. Just know that it is flawed in a way we're not used to from him.