Mike Flanagan’s adaptation of Stephen King’s humanist storytelling in The Life of Chuck moves beyond horror to explore deeper emotional themes, premiering in U.S. theaters on June 6 and in the U.K. on August 22. This film draws on King’s 2020 short story, transforming it into a complex character study that highlights the warmth and empathy often overlooked in King’s work.
Beyond Horror: King and Flanagan’s Shared Sentimentality
Stephen King is frequently labeled a horror writer, but this characterization misses the broader scope of his storytelling. While his tales contain chilling events and disturbing imagery, these elements mainly serve as fleeting moments within stories built on profound humanism. Those who only focus on the horror often overlook the layers of compassion, vulnerability, and hope that define many of King’s narratives.
A handful of filmmakers have recognized this, yet many remain preoccupied with only the surface-level thrills. Mike Flanagan stands out as a director who embraces King’s fundamentally optimistic worldview within the dark genre. He has made a name for himself on Netflix with acclaimed adaptations of Gothic classics by Shirley Jackson, Henry James, and Edgar Allan Poe. In this line, Flanagan’s previous King adaptations—Gerald’s Game, Doctor Sleep, and Midnight Mass—showcase his ability to weave the macabre with the soulful. For The Life of Chuck, Flanagan leaves behind overt horror, but not King’s spirit of empathy and resilience.
The Story of Chuck: A Humanistic Collaboration
The film is adapted from King’s 2020 short story about Chuck Krantz, a seemingly unremarkable middle-aged accountant whose twinkle of joy and hint of sadness reflect the contradictions of living. While the story brushes against tragedy, disaster, and even ghostly elements, it avoids intending to frighten. Instead, the film becomes the ultimate expression of the creative kinship between King and Flanagan, emphasizing their shared sentimentality and the compassionate undercurrents running through their work.
Comparable in tone to the likes of The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile, and nostalgic like Stand By Me, The Life of Chuck amplifies the empathy that is the hallmark of King’s storytelling. The narrative leans into Walt Whitman’s perspective that people hold multitudes within themselves—a theme several characters express plainly. Some viewers may resist the overt sentimentality, but Chuck Krantz (portrayed by Tom Hiddleston) illustrates the possibility of choosing hope and joy, even in ordinary moments, like connecting with a drumming busker on a summer afternoon.
Innovative Structure and Unfolding Mystery
The film introduces Chuck during its second act in a euphoric sequence, but the story itself unfolds in reverse order. It opens with what appears to be a global apocalypse marked as “Act Three,” kickstarted by a worldwide internet outage. The catastrophic premise serves as a narrative hook, yet it mostly operates as a narrative device rather than the film’s main concern.
Much of the early action follows two unfamiliar faces: Marty, a school teacher (played by Chiwetel Ejiofor), and Felicia, a nurse (played by Karen Gillan). Amid global chaos, their personal goal is not to linger on despair, but to bridge the distances enforced by circumstance, technology, and even separation through divorce. At the same time, they attempt to unravel their own mysterious ties to someone named Chuck.
Chuck emerges fully in the film’s middle segment, with the structure moving further backward in time—from months prior to decades earlier. First glimpsed as a suited figure with understated flair, Chuck seems unlikely to embrace spontaneous joy, yet the story reveals layers that extend into his childhood. These sequences spotlight frequent Flanagan collaborators such as Kate Siegel as a poetry teacher and Mark Hamill and Mia Sara as grandparents haunted by memories and, at times, spectral visitations.
Disclosing more of the storyline could diminish its impact, as the focus is less on plot mechanics than emotional resonance. Flanagan populates the film with richly drawn individuals—some introduced by Nick Offerman’s familiar narration, others brought to life in standout performances by Matthew Lillard, Carl Lumbly, and a host of seasoned actors enjoying their roles in Flanagan’s ensemble drama.
Performances Fueling the Film’s Emotional Core
The mosaic nature of The Life of Chuck results in nearly every character, from misfits to mentors, receiving the space to express their humanity. For Chuck himself, played as an adult by Hiddleston and in youth by Jacob Tremblay, the role is shaped by an understated tension: visible sweetness masking quiet sorrow. This duality anchors the story, giving it emotional depth while allowing other cast members room to shine, most notably Mark Hamill’s portrayal of a patriarch burdened by secrets and reflection.
The ensemble approach is not overly indulgent, but rather underscores the idea that a single life is deeply interconnected with an entire community. The film draws influence from the romanticism of Frank Capra, celebrating “the little guy,” while also embracing surreal and abstract touches to highlight life’s intangibles. The outcome is an expansive character study—a vivid “opera” without the melodrama of song but featuring a striking amount of dance and movement. This ambition and emotional honesty elevate the film into what could be considered a standout achievement in both Flanagan’s and King’s careers.
Significance and What’s Next
The Life of Chuck opens to U.S. audiences in limited release on June 6 before a wider rollout on June 13, with U.K. cinemas following on August 22. The film places Stephen King’s humanist storytelling in The Life of Chuck at the center of a story that avoids genre clichés, assembling a collective of characters and emotions more interested in hope, reconciliation, and memory than fear. As Mike Flanagan and his cast bring King’s nuanced understanding of the human spirit to life, the movie stands as a testament to the enduring power of empathy and connection.
