Where the Wild Things Are - Page 3

BakeTheMooCow · #81 10-18-2009, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordSimen

Spoiler:

LordSimen · #82 10-18-2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BakeTheMooCow

Spoiler:

I think you've actually given me a new respect for that ending.

therealjohng · #83 10-19-2009, 12:31 AM

Pretty disappointing movie. Score was great as was the cinematography. But movie's sense of wonderment went away once Max went to the island and I really didn't care for anyone in the movie. Everything before Max went to the island gets a big thumbs up. Once he goes the island, the movie just loses all interest and becomes complete boredom.

6/10

BankaiZaraki · #84 10-19-2009, 01:31 PM

Spoiler:

jbar1026 · #85 10-19-2009, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BankaiZaraki

Spoiler:

JCPhoenix · #86 10-19-2009, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BankaiZaraki

Spoiler:

Mr.HyDe807 · #87 10-19-2009, 06:58 PM

JC Phoenix and Bake's awesome interpretations just reinforce my love for this film even more.

SteeleDude · #88 10-19-2009, 07:42 PM

I don't know how to do spoiler tags, so I'm just going to say:

SPOILERS

Spoiler:

BakeTheMooCow · #89 10-19-2009, 07:52 PM

SteeleDude, use [ SPOILER ] and [ /SPOILER ] without the spaces.

And good stuff.

MarcoG · #90 10-19-2009, 08:26 PM

Fantastic analysis guys!

I saw this film twice now, and I seem to pick up something new and different each viewing.
I am really pleased with this piece of work. It's so touching and real. I still have a very lively child within me, and through that I can relate to Max even in today's terms as an adult.

And I completely disgaree with whatever critics said the movie is about nothing.
To quote one of the critics, who sumed it up perfectly, "Some may view this film about nothing, when in fact it's about everything".

SteeleDude · #91 10-19-2009, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BakeTheMooCow

SteeleDude, use [ SPOILER ] and [ /SPOILER ] without the spaces.

And good stuff.

Got it, thanks!

Lat er al · #92 10-19-2009, 10:35 PM

I knew this movie was getting a good deal of hype, but woah... I'm surprised at how many people were/are excited to see it and how much people love it.

I'm definately not going to spend a penny to see this movie, but that's probably because I do not like kids. I did read the book when I was a kid, but it made no impression on me and I barely remember it. In general I do not care for family movies. They just don't possess the qualities I look for in a movie. Two friends of mine saw it with their girl friends...1 said it was "meh" other said it was like "nails on a chalkboard bad" -- but he tends to over-react to movies he doesn't care for.

This weekend I spent my money on Zombieland and Sorority Row. Both fun films.

BankaiZaraki · #93 10-20-2009, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCPhoenix

Spoiler:

I really didnt look at it like that. Im not the type of person to analyze movies though. But thanks.

MarcoG · #94 10-20-2009, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lat er al

I knew this movie was getting a good deal of hype, but woah... I'm surprised at how many people were/are excited to see it and how much people love it.

I'm definately not going to spend a penny to see this movie, but that's probably because I do not like kids. I did read the book when I was a kid, but it made no impression on me and I barely remember it. In general I do not care for family movies. They just don't possess the qualities I look for in a movie. Two friends of mine saw it with their girl friends...1 said it was "meh" other said it was like "nails on a chalkboard bad" -- but he tends to over-react to movies he doesn't care for.

This weekend I spent my money on Zombieland and Sorority Row. Both fun films.

This isn't a family film though, alteast not in the sense of Narnia or anything like that.
This goes beyond that. It's a drama/adventure.

CosmicPuppet · #95 10-20-2009, 03:24 AM

I saw this tonight and thought it was a very touching film. I enjoyed it. I'm pretty much on the ball with most of your guys' opinions about the monsters, their representation and how Max essentially grows up by watching them interact. It was a great metaphor for self reflection.

Max Records delivers a very good performance. It's nice to see a kid be a kid rather than a mouth piece of exposition or the writer's conscience. The creature performances are all excellent. They all felt like living, breathing beings. I loved Gandolfini's voice mixed with Carol's body and face... it was a perfect match. He became this huge, vulnerable creature that you just want to hug the hell out of. Lauren Ambrose is also great as KW. She really brings a lot of warmth and tenderness to the role. Catherin O'Hara comical performance was a perfect fit. I always dug her work, especially with Christopher Guest and I think Jonze saw that gift of gab she possesses. It works perfectly as Max's vocal double.

It is Jonze' ode to childhood and he played all the right notes. It's mature, melancholic and comforting all at the same time. It's all about the confusion and the loneliness of being a kid. It made sense to me why Max was the way he was. I enjoyed the undertones about his lack of a father which is only hinted at and how the monsters were always in search of a king. It was a nice parallel that they don't hit you with over the head. I loved the way the story progressed with Max and the monsters. The performances were magical. The actors do a brilliant job at making you believe the monsters are alive.

I have a feeling this will be a movie that will linger in a lot of children's minds. It's very different from many films involving children. It's not exactly a children's film in the way that the Land Before Time isn't a fun ride for kids. It doesn't give you easy answers. It doesn't give Max a big reunion with Carol. Kids will question it and probably wonder a lot. And I think that's a good start.

9/10

Sigur509 · #96 10-20-2009, 06:50 PM

This film could have been terrible if not in the right hands. Thankfully, it was in the right ones.

9/10

Could go up when I see it again this weekend. I had a few annoying people behind me that were MY AGE. Some asshat anwsers his phone during the scene with Max and the goat and starts to chat away. The kids in the theater were not a problem at all.

Other than that amazing expierence, and I was very surprised at how emotional it was. Very deep and moving.

athf1980 · #97 10-20-2009, 10:16 PM

4.5/5

unquie kids movie that older folks will enjoy more.

Danger^Cart · #98 10-20-2009, 11:10 PM

This movie is a psychology professor's wet dream.

8/10

Moviefreek · #99 10-21-2009, 05:34 PM

Where the Wild Things, based on the children's book by Maurice Sendak, was released into theaters this past weekend. The film is about a young boy named Max who runs away from home and creates his own world where the wild things roam. The film is created from a source material that contains about 50 pages, all pictures, and a sentence per page story. Many wondered if it would be possible to create a feature length film based on short children's story. Not only is it successful but it is a wonderful film at that.

Director Spike Jonez, who directed such films as Adaptation and Being John Malkovich, creates a engrossing dark children's film. The film looks wonderful and moves at a very brisk pace. He manages to create characters that everyone can relate to and packs the film with every possible emotion that can be experienced. The film contains moments of happiness, sadness, and fear. The director took a chance here in creating a film that is very dark at moments, some may argue that the film is too dark for a film that many children will see. I would disagree with this as I think children will be captivated by the world created in Max's imagination.

The cast is top notch around the table. Mark Ruffalo(Zodiac, Blindness) and Catherine Keener(Soloist, 40 Year Old Virgin) do well in their brief screen time. Max Records, who plays the main child character Max, does a wonderful job with all required displays of emotion. This is saying a lot as it is hard enough to find a good child actor but even harder to find one that carries the entire movie on his shoulders. The voice cast for the wild things is great. It contains such notable voices as James Gandolfini, Catherine O'hara, Chris Cooper, Forest Whitaker, and Paul Dano. All voices fit perfectly with the personalities of each wild thing.

The special effects here are nothing short of amazing. Using the combination of costumes and CGI, a wonderful cast of characters are created. The CGI used to create the faces of the wild things is some of the best I have seen. Each face displays emotion that I've never seen in a CGI created character. In the closing scenes of the film you will know exactly what I am talking about as you experience one of the most touching scenes I have seen in film this year.

The film is a very unique experience and one of the best non-animated children's films I have seen in a long time. It is also a film that a child of any age can enjoy, young and old. There are moments in the film I believe everyone can relate to as a part of growing up. I enjoyed the dark atmosphere of the film and chances that were taken with the direction of the film. A film I can see being loved and experienced more widely in the next couple of years. Where the Wild Things Are is a wonderful film and easily one of the best of the year.

10 out of 10.

----------------------------

My review of this film along with others at:

http://www.examiner.com/x-6010-New-O...-Film-Examiner

MarcoG · #**100** 10-22-2009, 05:05 PM

double post (edit)

QUENTIN · #**101** 10-22-2009, 06:03 PM

Jim Emerson described perfectly how I felt about the film with the one exception that as "Indie™" as the soundtrack was, I quite liked it. I was totally underwhelmed by the movie, never felt joy or exuberance during it, and despite being quite impressed by the stunning visuals never connected to it on any narrative or emotional level. Max is kind of a brat, not particularly sympathetic, and all the wild things are so unrelentingly mopey that I got bored and bummed. I'd give it a very reserved 6/10 because the performances by the Wild Things are great, they look incredible, and so does the movie.

Where The Morose Things Are

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Emerson

Spike Jonze's "Where the Wild Things Are" (aka, "The Decline and Fall of the Wild Thing Empire") is not Maurice Sendak's "Where the Wild Things Are." It's only fair you should know that in advance. The book's illustrations and nine sentences have been turned into a surprisingly (some might even say shockingly) literal-minded 90-minute motion picture about the misery of being a kid. Jonze and co-scenarist Dave Eggers are clearly in touch with their inner-miserable child; they seem to vividly remember all the daily turmoil that childhood is heir to -- the tantrums, fights, scrapes, bruises, fears, anxieties, insults, hurt feelings, bossiness, cruelty, rejection, confusion, heckling, bullying, bragging, pouting, moping, testing, haggling, crying, rage...

Those aspects of childhood trauma are acutely and accurately portrayed in the movie. Every time the fun starts, somebody goes too far (like a puppy who hasn't learned his soft mouth yet), and someone gets hurt or scared or angry or sad or all of those things. The movie's adulterated sensibility is that of an alienated grown-up looking back at the (somewhat romanticized, over-intellectualized) misery of childhood and denying or downplaying the equally real fun stuff -- the in-the-moment joy, the exhilaration of being and imagining and doing and playing. So, in some sense it's a corrective to all those stupid "Isn't it wonderful being a kid?" movies that remember childhood through equally distorted rose-tinted lenses.

Parents who spend all day dealing with their kids' bickering and fleeting, unpredictable emotional outbursts will immediately recognize the verisimilitude of Jonze's "Where the Wild Things Are," but you can't really blame them if they don't want to sit through it. Again. Or take their younger kids, who won't necessarily be frightened but will likely wonder why everybody is so morose. Especially the Wild Things, who aren't so much wild as the very opposite: neurotic, overgrown, overanalytical, dysfunctionally domesticated. They don't need a fake boy king, they cry out for group therapy.

That's the source of my ambivalence about the movie as a whole: It's so transparently an adult's diagnostic reinterpretation of childhood ("Will you keep out all the sadness?"). Tempestuous feelings don't just pass over and through these kids (I'm including the Wild Things as big kids -- more in a moment), as they do with most children of Max's age (that is, of the age when they still wear soiled hooded terrycloth animal peejays). Torments aren't soon forgotten, abandoned for more pleasurable activities; they hang around all day like wet blankets, wrung out, mulled over, discussed, overanalyzed, brooded upon. There's a preciousness to the film that treats commonplace childhood agonies (and they are agonizing in the moment) as something "special." One of these days, the movie seems to say to itself, you'll look back on your childhood and remember the torture you went through on your way to becoming... an artist! (A filmmaker, that is. And a writer.)¹

The problem is not that it's so "dark" or "adult," just that it's emotionally monochromatic, leaving out almost everything else. Most kids can handle more real-world "darkness" than adults are comfortable with. Your kids may not have any problem instinctively understanding that this movie is about the rotten stuff in their everyday lives. They may, however, regret that seeing it left them feeling so bummed afterwards. But then they'll move on to something else.

wtwta2.jpg

Maybe you remember the Sendak book. The mischievous boy Max gets rambunctious, out of hand, yells "I'll eat you up!" at his mom, who sends him to his room without supper. He sails off to where the Wild Things are, and proclaims himself their king, proving his worthiness by staring them down. They go on wild rumpuses, and Max sends them to their rooms without supper. Then Max gets hungry and lonely and decides to give up his royal position to return home, where someone loves him best of all. The Wild Things cry, saying they love him so much they could eat him up. When he gets home, his supper is still hot.

In the movie, Max (Max Records) is not punished by an adult for any of his wild behavior. His mom is one of those wishy-washy, boundary-less parents who encourages him to tell her stories and probably thinks of him as her best friend. He plays with her feet when she's trying to work, and she seems to think it's cute. His absent dad (no explanation) has left him with a globe bearing a "Scarface"-like inscription, telling Max the world is his. His older sister doesn't pay enough attention to him, and his mom (that's the great Catherine Keener) has a date (Mark Ruffalo) over for dinner one night. Max gets jealous when mom won't come up to see the fort/spaceship he's built in his room. He doesn't just ferociously growl, "I'll eat you up!" -- he actually bites her on the shoulder. He doesn't get sent to his room, he runs away (filmed so that you expect him to get hit by passing traffic). When he gets home, there are no repercussions. His soup is still hot. He doesn't fall asleep first, his mom does.

That's a really different story, but obviously Jonze and Eggers had to do something to stretch nine sentences into 90 minutes. The book (in modern child-rearing language) was about Max using his imagination during a time out, working through some boundary issues and struggling to pull himself together after he's allowed himself get too far out of control. The movie is about Max doing whatever he wants, including biting his mom, and getting away with it unscolded. It's all OK, Max, whatever. There are no rules or limits on your behavior. Nobody cares what you do. (In a few months, this Max will start torturing small animals as a cry for help...)

Ah, but the Wild Things -- the physical fact of them as realized on the screen -- are so wonderful and amazing that I wondered if the filmmakers just figured they didn't need much of anything else to justify their movie. They're almost right, too, except that these incredible beasties behave like they're clinically depressed so much of the time that even they become a drag to hang out with after a while. Everybody's so listless, and so sensitive.

As living creatures, however, they're fantastic to behold. You can tell that they are biologically related to little kids and big dogs who rarely bathe. From their matted fur, runny noses and goopy eyeballs down to their canine foot pads and claws, they are so meat-and-hair real you can almost smell them. (There's a real physical intimacy to the, too: When one of them hides Max in her mouth, he finds himself in a womb-like sac that appears to be made out of slimy '70s shag carpeting, and he's not the slightest bit grossed out.) It's as if somebody took the latex foam creations of H.R. Pufnstuf, made them flesh and bone, and then threw dirt clods at them. The Wild Things live outside (or in "houses" that are really spherical forts made out of sticks) and sleep in the comforting (but nearly asphyxiating) safety of piles. Nearly everything they do has some direct correlative in Max's home life, including the messy sleeping pile that almost crushes him the way his front lawn igloo did when his sister's friends jumped on it and smashed it during a snowball fight when he was taking refuge inside.

In the movie, unlike the book, the Wild Things have individual names and personalities. Max's best bud (the one most like him) is Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini -- an effortlessly masterful performance), who also has problems with his temper and his desire to bite. He lives with several others, including the kvetchy Judith (Catherine O'Hara -- genius, as always) and somnambulant Ira (Forrest Whitaker), Carol's birdlike best-friend/appendage Douglas (Chris Cooper), the introverted goat-like Alexander (Paul Dano), and KW (Lauren Ambrose), who's been taking off on her own a lot recently (just like Max's sister) to hang out with a pair of owlish creatures named Bob and Terry (after former longtime Warner Bros. heads Bob Daly and Terry Semel) she thinks are a lot cooler and more interesting than her own clan.

I can't say enough about what splendid creations these Wild Things are, in appearance and vocal characterization. The few moments when the movie approaches unfettered joy are when it allows them to let loose and rumble with Max: the beginning of a dirt-clod fight (even after the hurt feelings of choosing up sides, but before the wounded pride and physical abrasions that come from actual dirt clods), or tumbling down a sand dune, head over heels.

So, although I found much to admire and appreciate in "Where the Wild Things Are," I was also perplexed at what a downer the movie is. (The anemic Karen O. indie™ songs don't help.) It makes sense, I guess, that a skateboarder and "Jackass" producer would direct a film that gets such a kick out of down-and-dirty physical reality. But how did he manage to leave out the fun?

* * * *

¹ As I said in reply to a comment below: The movie practically wears a bumpersticker that says: "I'm Proud of My Extra-Sensitive Child." It privileges Max's pain -- as if every kid doesn't go through it one way or another.

Shockwave · #**102** 10-22-2009, 07:09 PM

I honestly think this is the best movie i have seen all year. 10/10.

There was so much to take in, from the scenes where Max was at home, and themes repeating themselves on the island, as well as the way many of the Wild Things represented people/emotions to Max in the real world.

Spoiler:

That was my take on it anyway.

MarcoG · #**103** 10-23-2009, 08:41 PM

I wrote a thesis on Wild Things...........

Care to read? It's a bit long, lol.

http://www.marcogennuso.blogspot.com

Heavy spoilers, so please read if you've already seen the film.

ScaryFreak1827 · #**104** 10-23-2009, 10:27 PM

I just got back from seeing it, having been anticipating it since seeing the teaser trailer, and I'm honestly kinda torn. I loved the opening moments with Max and immediately felt sympathy for him (being the youngest in a line of siblings, I could relate to him in many ways.) Max Records is a terrific young actor and his angst seemed realistic, making the moments that follow all the more meaningful. The look of the film was beautiful, I dug the indie music, the Wild Things themselves looked awesome (I'm so glad they didn't take the "strictly CGI" route) and I liked their individual personalities (each representing a certain part of Max). Carol especially was a fun creature and probably the most multi-layered of the beasts (aside from the goat).

However, the reason I'm on the fence about this film is it felt it was lacking something. I don't want to say "heart" because I felt it had plenty of emotional moments yet I just felt like it could've been something more. It wasn't necessarily boring but certain scenes didn't seem to be going anywhere and I wanted more "fun/adventure," even if that wasn't necessarily what Jonze was going for. It certainly wasn't a bad film but I have to say I was disappointed.

6-7/10 (although I bet a rewatch could possibly raise the score)

Crazy Dud · #**105** 10-25-2009, 04:11 AM

Where the Wild Things Are

***1/2 out of ***** (7/10)

Let's get one thing straight: Where the Wild Things Are is an art film, and it isn't for children. It is a movie for adults about childhood. It is slow and moody, and those looking for typical Hollywood junk food won't find it here. Most of this film is highly symbolic and metaphoric. I know I will pick up on much more of the symbolism in repeated viewings. This film also contains beautiful visuals, stunning camerawork, top-notch special effects, and one of the finest performances from a child actor I have ever seen. This is a film rich and deep in meaning and beauty, but it could have been more compelling and entertaining than it is. Max isn't as well-developed as he should be, and the middle section of the film drags in several spots. This does make the film frustrating at times, but the film is something VERY different and risky from Hollywood, and that doesn't happen too often. If you're looking for Hollywood escapism, look elsewhere. If, however, you appreciate a film of artistic beauty and a script rich in subtext, than this film comes recommended.

SteeleDude · #**106** 10-25-2009, 11:12 AM

Wow...Jim Emerson is a terrible reviewer. I can understand why some people don't love this movie, but that guy goes on way too long trying to justify why and starts saying some ridiculous crap.

Like this gem: "I'm Proud of My Extra-Sensitive Child." It privileges Max's pain -- as if every kid doesn't go through it one way or another.'

Yeah? Has he forgotten that movies aren't about, at least primarily, creating stories everyone HASN'T gone through? Often times we go to movies to, I don't know, identify with the main character. If we've all been through Max's issues (which funnily enough, a few chapters up in his review he seems to say that Max goes through different things than the rest of us), then that would mean we identify with him in this movie. And that's what makes it so uncomfortable. Like the dirt clod fight that ends in hurt feelings and kids storming away. Everyone leaves that fight feeling awkward.

Another beauty from that review was that Max has a wishy-washy mom because she encourages him to tell stories or because she allows him to play with her feet! How dare a parent indulge imagination in her children! If my four year continues to tell stories I guess I'm going to have to put a stop to it.

MarcoG · #**107** 10-25-2009, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteeleDude

Wow...Jim Emerson is a terrible reviewer. I can understand why some people don't love this movie, but that guy goes on way too long trying to justify why and starts saying some ridiculous crap.

Like this gem: "I'm Proud of My Extra-Sensitive Child." It privileges Max's pain -- as if every kid doesn't go through it one way or another.'

Yeah? Has he forgotten that movies aren't about, at least primarily, creating stories everyone HASN'T gone through? Often times we go to movies to, I don't know, identify with the main character. If we've all been through Max's issues (which funnily enough, a few chapters up in his review he seems to say that Max goes through different things than the rest of us), then that would mean we identify with him in this movie. And that's what makes it so uncomfortable. Like the dirt clod fight that ends in hurt feelings and kids storming away. Everyone leaves that fight feeling awkward.

Another beauty from that review was that Max has a wishy-washy mom because she encourages him to tell stories or because she allows him to play with her feet! How dare a parent indulge imagination in her children! If my four year continues to tell stories I guess I'm going to have to put a stop to it.

Many of the reviewers, including people in general, who don't like this film are not liking it for all the stupid, most ridiculous reasons. As I've said many times, there ain't no other film like this. And probably won't be for a long time, if ever. And in 10 years from now when people look back, this film will be a unique gem and a timeless classic.

I can't say the same for the two films topping the box office at the moment.

DaMovieMan · #**108** 10-25-2009, 11:12 PM

Just came back from seeing it. I'm from the camp that never heard of the book until the news of Spike Jonze's "risky" kids film hit the web, so my thoughts about it are not as empassioned as somes. It's an excellent film if only for the fact that it's one of the few that is at the same time perfect for adults and children. Gotta love those Wild Things and how they looked in the film; even though it's supposedly riddled with CGI the Wild Things' puppet-look really made me appreicate the non-computer manipulated side of filmmaking. The voice work was terrific with an inspired voice-cast for once which is another breath of fresh air next to mediocore animated films that seem to be competing with who can load it up with more star-power.
Max was certainly very bratty, the way most kids are at that age, but he goes through a nice growth from beginning to end, which was inspiring to watch (and one of the reasons I'm going to be showing this film to my kids one day probably).
It was a little too purposefully tear jerking at points, where I felt Jonze and co. were relying a little too much on "sappy" moments to pull the audeince forward. The soundtrack, though I like the Yeah Yeah Yeahs and many other names featured, was a little jarring to say the least.

But these are just minor thorns for an otherwise smooth flower. It's miles away from Adaptation and Being John Malkovich so it's great to see Jonze show his versatility. I'd recommend it whole-heartedly and that last scene of the Wild Things at the beach saying their goodbyes won't be something I'll soon forget.

8/10

bigred760 · #**109** 10-29-2009, 05:40 PM

I enjoyed this movie in that I think it kept the book's fantasy aspect. It handled the monsters really well, the cinematography and direction are excellent, and I really liked how it showed that this was Max's imagination. I have a 5-year old nephew and I can see him acting in a similar fashion when imagining some fantastical world like Max did. Him coming up with stories and saying how others should act is how I see somebody of that age acting. That being said, I wasn't always interested or fascinated by what was going on in the movie; I felt it dragged a bit at times. But other than that, it was a really fun, fascinating movie to watch.

7/10

silentasylum · #**110** 10-29-2009, 10:43 PM

I enjoyed it very much. and it was the first children's movie I have seen in a while that wasnt animated but was still great. This movie exceeded my expectations and I would recommend it to just about anyone.

9.5/10

Dr.Frankenstein · #**111** 11-07-2009, 04:22 PM

Just back from the Saturday matinee-neat film-leaves one with a day dream like experience. I rate it- ***1/2 (outta 5 stars)

TheCanadian · #**112** 11-07-2009, 07:16 PM

I am in the minority and not entirely blown away...It gets extra points for being built from a story that is only 12 lines long...but I feel the moral was just not there...don't want to get into details/spoilers but the above posts (criticizing) pretty much sum it up...

AWESOME visual journey and great soundtrack...voice acting was mostly ok, but I couldn't get over the Tony Soprano patented fat guy breathe-talking...

just wasn't as awe inspiring over all as I hoped it would be, but decent effort

7.5/10

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode