Where the Wild Things Are: Nowhere You’d Like To Be
The monsters, led by Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini) and K.W. (Lauren Ambrose) accept this and soon everyone is running around, whooping and yowling and howling and scratching trees with their fingernails.
By now the movie is more than half an hour old and yet there isn’t really a purpose to anything. What is Max’s quest? It seems all he wants to do is hang out with his furry new friends for a while, doing not much, then go home. When everyone decides to sleep together in a giant pile, it’s the movie’s cuddliest moment. But, still: when you’re in a world of unlimited imagination powered by an active nine-year-old, is a nap really the most exciting thing you can muster?
At the halfway point, Max and the gang decide to build a fort (it looks more like a piece of outdoor sculpture designed by Frank Gehry), which would be a reasonable goal if there was some force that needed to be kept at bay. There isn’t.
These monsters do have demons, but they are internal ones. Max tells the furballs that he learned in school that the sun is going to die someday, which depresses them. Carol and K.W. spend a lot of time whining about their dysfunctional relationship. Carol (the boy monster) seems jealous of K.W. (the girl monster) for having a friendship with a pair of owls. Of their relationship, K.W. moans, “It’s complicated.” Another creature worries that Max is showing favoritism towards Carol. Is this a kids’ movie or the transcript of Eggers’ latest therapy session? The movie may lack for a plot, but you can’t say it lacks a theme. Here it is: Everything is very, very depressing. Family, the planet, aging.
The script heaves with downbeat lines like, “It’s hard being a family,” “One day it’s gonna be dust and the whole island’s gonna be dust and I don’t even know what comes after dust,” and “You know how it feels when all your teeth are falling out really slowly … and then one day you don’t have any teeth anymore?”
Whoa, Grampa. Let’s keep it light here. There are children present.
Scary monsters are cool. Funny monsters are wonderful. Even silly monsters would be welcomed by your average nine-year-old. But who needs a movie about neurotic monsters?
Thanks for the review. I loved the book, but the movie just sounds awful.
Hollyweird never fails to disappoint.
Yes, I realize that’s an oxymoron.
The budget was more like $50 million, & sorry you couldn’t see it for the dreamy, stylized adult film about childhood made for the 30 to 40 something generation (who grew up on the book). All your review reveals to me is the lack of imagination you have and how this movie is way over your head! Sorry you missed out on such a great flick due to your narrow vision of it “supposed” to be a kids movie that will bore… Insightful stuff!
I think I’ll go see it anyway… My boys, now 14 and 17, want to see it too. My wife and I read this to them sometimes 5-6 times a day when they were younger.
When a piece of literature is put up on the big (or small)screen their is always a chance it will get butchered.
But, that is worth the risk and the $8.50.
Oh cool, a cartoon for adults that treats adults like big kids, apparently a sterotypical whining American pre pubescent white male with poor impulse management skills and always in need of adult supervision. Think I’ll miss this one. But I have the appropriate song for the sequel:Mild Thing, the hip presidential foreign policy song by the Troglodytes.
Mild thing…you make my heart sing…
You make every Jew
Groovy
I said Mild thing…
Mild thing, I think I love you
But I wanna know for sure
Come on, don’t be so tight
I love you
Mild thing…you make my heart sing…
You make every Arab
Groovy
I said Mild thing…
Mild thing, I think you move me
But I wanna know for sure
So come on, don’t give me a fight
You move me
I saw this last night, and had most the same reaction to the depressing tone of the film, but furthermore had a really tough time trying to see the kid as a likeable character. And when the movie finally ends, it fades out on the last scene and I’m thinking, “What? That’s it? You stopped *there*?” I go to movies for entertainment and this didn’t particularly entertain me at all.
But then I get home and go over to Rotten Tomatoes to see how their reviewers went. About 2/3rds Fresh, but what struck me about most of the negative reviews were the piling-on of RT comments along the lines of “This reviewer is stupid! This is art! How could they let this review onto the site?” I didn’t care if it was artistic, or “a film about children, not a children’s film”, because it’s definitely being marketed as something you’re supposed to take the kids to. Instead, it ended up being something dreary that had me disliking nearly every main character in the movie.
Sorry, Michael; not only do the rest of us have real lives, we have genuine imagination, and can think up better worlds than the one described here.
It’s pretty entertaining when someone combines fanboy intolerance with condescension.
Clue: you’re not impressing anyone here with your claimed superior perception or taste…
I absolutely agree with this review – you captured everything I felt the entire time I was watching an early screening on Wednesday. Max was a completely unlikable character and he ended the movie the same angst-ridden kid he started it. The basic idea being that, as long as I run away for long enough, I won’t have to deal with the negative consequences of my actions. Thanks for your insightful review.
I think those disliking the film for its tone and “plot” may not be familiar with the book, or at least not appreciative of the film trying to capture aspects of the book, as opposed to having them imposed on the film by Eggers and Jonze.
As a child (and as and adult when it comes to his artwork) Ive enjoyed several of Maurice Sendak’s books(Pierre another unlikable child,In the Night Kitchen another book of a fantastical journey), but never W.T.W.T.A in particular. Max is indeed a not an entirely likable child nor are the monsters entirely likable or sympathetic. As a child I found it to be “sad” and Max to be “mean” though I could never explain why.
It is a rare thing for the dream factories of Disney and Pixar to really acknowledge that childhood and children (even stable,normal, happy childhoods/children) can be sad, confusing and emotional and not always in cute,enteratining easily understood ways. That the sadness of childhood comes sometimes as a result of “shouting” and “pouting” and “destroying things” and sometimes can drive a child to those actions.
And that sadness and confusion and emotion starts happening long before we figure out that “all things turn to dust”.
It sounds as tho the film has captured this aspect of the book and weather that makes it a good film for children or not I dont know. Im not sure if I’ll be seeing the film; but I do hope children who do see it think about it and the book as opposed to just dissmissing it out’ve hand or moving onto the next amusement.
Hands Casey a ticket to “Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs” and Michael a ticket to “The Red Balloon”. Prizes for BOTH of them managing to sound intolerant and condescending.
I haven’t seen the movie, but your description doesn’t sound all that far removed from the book. I don’t know why, but the book always struck me as glum and disturbing. Why does this kid fantasize about sailing across a stormy sea all by himself and living with wild monsters in the jungle? Doesn’t sound like a happy kid to me.
I saw the film yesterday. No, it is not a movie for young children. It’s a simple tale, really, of how a young boy grows up a little bit. All the chaos in his life – divorce, cruelty, loneliness, despair (thanks a lot gradeschool science teacher!) – are reflected in Max’s crazed behavior. His voyage to the Land WTWTA and his interactions with the beasts help Max realize that yes, life does suck at times and that people are complicated beings but so what? You just make the best of it, especially when you have someone to love you like Max’s Mom loves him, imperfectly, it is true. At the end Max is eating a late supper at the kitchen table following his return. He is watching his exhausted mother fall asleep in front of him, but you see something in his eyes that wasn’t there before. Max has some level of sympathy and appreciation for his mother’s plight, a single mother trying to do the best she can while at the same time attempting to patch up her own broken heart. And with that sympathy comes love. And love changes everything. Max is a little less beast and a little more human than he was before his voyage. So for me, it was a trip worth taking.
“I haven’t seen the movie, but your description doesn’t sound all that far removed from the book. I don’t know why, but the book always struck me as glum and disturbing. Why does this kid fantasize about sailing across a stormy sea all by himself and living with wild monsters in the jungle? Doesn’t sound like a happy kid to me.”–Mike Blackadder
Sounds like H.R. Puff-N-Stuff:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obxfuFrUTzg
Thanks for the review. I saw a couple of other reviewers gush over the “emotional texture” of the movie and how it deals with “real problems” and did have a feeling that instead of a fun kids romp, it might actually be an emo indie where all the conflict is internal and you’re waiting for the main character to get their act together and take responsibility for their life and decisions. A few movies like this have been done well, like Good Will Hunting and more recently Reign over Me, but most are junk.
Also, from what I’ve seen in terms of kids movies, everybody is way behind Pixar in terms of creating both a fun story and interesting characters. The Incredibles is probably the best kids movie made in the last 10 years.
Sebastian,
Good call. I’m afraid that H.R. Puff-N-Stuff is a little before my time. But thanks so much for subjecting me to that video. Is it just me or is that witch really creepy?
A real genius might have casted it with a middle class or adpoted African American as it’s main character..Instead of just using “whiteface”
Anonymous, I watched HR PuffNStuff as reruns in the late-1970′s as child; I watched all the Sid & Marty Kroft shows. Witchipoo isn’t creepy; she’s really funny (watch a few episodes). My favorite Sid & Marty Kroft shows were HR PuffNStuff, Land of the Lost, Sigmund & the Sea Monsters, Electra Woman & Dyna-Girl, & one other show I’ve forgotten the name…
17. Sebastian Shaw,
You’re rehashing my childhood.
I LOVED witchy poo.
lol
Mama Cass:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvDKAacrHWs
Oops. Here’s a better youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZzfM05tSfM
Yesterday, I watched one of the most enchanting films I’ve seen about a child’s boundless imagination that I’ve seen in years. Unfortunately, it wasn’t WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE, it was an animation festival screening of the not-yet-even-released-in-Japan anime film MAI MAI MIRACLE.
Later that day, I watched WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE. It looked pretty good, and was well-acted, but, good lord, it got boring at about the hour mark. Even building the fort kind of fell flat. Plus, I hated that they completely skimped out on what would have been a pretty awesome effects sequence where Max imagines his bedroom transforming into a forest where he finds the boat and instead he just runs off into a literal forest, which does leave me wondering if that means the boat was meant to be literal and the monster island was meant to be literal too? Also, the forest in the Sendak drawings looked more like a jungle than the Melbourne area forest in the movie, and, as someone who lives in a serious winter city, Ottawa (and used to live near Montreal), the “winter” scenes at the beginning obviously just used truckfuls of shaved ice instead of actual snow. You could see that the trees were green in the background; you’d think they could at least CGI the leaves out.
I’m still wondering how they got the idea to make a whole movie out of a 40 page picture book!
21. rutledgeinbc123:
“I’m still wondering how they got the idea to make a whole movie out of a 40 page picture book!”
One of the cutest posts ever! SO true! lol
I saw it on Friday and I agree with Kurt’s summary.
This was NOT a lighthearted kids movie. It’s an adult’s movie based on a book from their childhood. The theater that I went to was full of kids…and most of them were bored silly.
I did appreciate the theme that being part of a family and loving all of your family isn’t always easy, but no matter what, you DO love your family. That seemed to be what Max took from his time with the monsters.
I’m suggesting that my friends wait for this to come out on Netflix. It’s worth watching, but not paying $10 to watch, in my opinion.
“At the halfway point, Max and the gang decide to build a fort (it looks more like a piece of outdoor sculpture designed by Frank Gehry), which would be a reasonable goal if there was some force that needed to be kept at bay. There isn’t.”
A child building a fort is unreasonable? Did you bend reality to fit your bitter joke? It wasn’t worth it.
I’ve always understood Max’s visit to the monsters to be a representation of the unholy temper fit he throws when sent to his room, and his decision to leave the monsters and come home to be him slowly gaining control of himself again – as all children do when they have a whopping fit and then get over it. I thought it was about learning to walk away from your monsterous behavior, even though that behavior may seem fun for a while.
In light of that interpretation, the movie sounds like it makes even less sense! Won’t be spending the money on 4 movie tickets any time soon.
Best movie I’ve seen this year. The woman I love was on one side speculating that a particular monster was mirroring one of Max’s earlier outbursts and my 8 YO daughter was on the other explaining that KW was a metaphor for his sister who he loved even though he’d dumped snow on her bed… (okay w/out the word metaphor but it was a thing of beauty to see). This is a movie that engages minds young and old, if all you saw was depression you either had your eyes or your mind closed. Everyone senses on some level how everyone has “times” or “sides” that they don’t always like, integrating those sides doesn’t have to be a 300 level Freudian psych course, you can get a start on it by seeing a thoroughly entertaining movie. Or at least apparently my 8 YO can. boydk425
Tari said “I thought it was about learning to walk away from your monsterous behavior, even though that behavior may seem fun for a while. ”
YES!
“In light of that interpretation, the movie sounds like it makes even less sense! ”
NO! That is -exactly- what the movie (and the book) depicts. Don’t count on the movie description you read here… go and see it! -boydk425
Sounds like a lot of adults today are used to simple, fast-food fare that doesn’t require any thought – just lots of ‘flavor’. It is nice to see that there are still some people who know how to actually use their noggins as something other than sponges…
I saw the movie and strongly disagree. I think Max Records (the actor who plays max) played an emotionally confused child brilliantly and very true to the book and the way children actually behave. Spike Jonze captured the emotions and feel of a child feeling misunderstood perfectly and reflects it through the Wild Things. As for being true to the book, Maurice Sendak has continually lauded the movie and how it was filmed.
I saw it with children who loved it although it was a little long. I urge you to check the movie out. This is not Kung Fu Panda or Cars, this deals with real emotions of childhood, just through wild things on a fantasy Island. My only qualm with the film was its length and I think its pro’s certainly outweigh its cons.
Characterized by many as “A movie for adults about kids”. OK fine. Great. But why then are Sendak and others still trying to position this PG-13 movie as targeted at the same audience as the book, which in my experience is the 3-4 year old set.
All I had to do was read Sendak’s interview in Ruben Navarrette Jr’s column to know this is going to be a bad movie for kids. Very defensive. When asked “What do you say to parents who think the Wild Things film may be too scary?” his answer is “I would tell them to go to hell. That’s a question I will not tolerate.” I can tell just from that this is not someone capable of providing quality entertainment to my 3 year old.
He then goes on to rationalize “life is scary” and how he saw all sorts of horrible movies when he was a kid and ended up fine. Yeah I’ve seen those parents. They’re the ones losing it in the shopping mall when their preschoolers act up (making it worse) and screaming orders at soccer games (“herdball” at that age). In my mind kids get to be kids at least until Kindergarten, and a gloomy, scary, semi-violent angstfest does not qualify as children’s entertainment.
Maybe it’s not “bad” or “evil”, and hey maybe I’ll like it, but that doesn’t make it worth time and money on behlf of my child.
Anjie: I completely disagree with this negative post. I don’t understand how one person can have such a shallow grasp on this book and film. Obviously you haven’t seen the movie, or we saw different versions because the version I saw was incredibly heart-touching. The purpose of the film was not only to reflect upon one side of the story, but to show that even if you have issues with your life, there are always people with bigger problems and you have to look at the better and lighter side of your life. There is always someone who loves you emensly, even if you yell at them, or run away. Someone to hug you, or understand you, or leave you a hot dinner.
trevor- i’m sorry to see that those of you who saw this movie in a depressing light could not enjoy it for its actuality as a monumentally new-age and sensationally sensitve film as it was.. it seems that most judgemental people would have thier minds mislead them into mistaking emotion for dreariness and negitivity.. you must understand that just because it was a kids’ book and seemed as if it was markteted for children,, that does not necessarilly mean that it was meant solely for children. a movie could run enjoyment across the age gamet and one can not base such a rough and tumble statement on what you could only see with prejudiced eyes.. i hope that those of you who have not seen this film yet can disregard such posts and see it with your heart and enjoy it as much as i did (which is to say a whole hell of alot)