Beltmann

Thanks for the kind words! I'm just a high school English teacher. My primary area is American Literature for honors sophomores, but I also handle the journalism class. Sometimes I teach Ancient and Modern Mythology and sometimes a course called Humanities (which is the study of modern painting, music, and film from a humanistic standpoint). Next semester I will teach a brand-new course that I proposed called Film as Social Criticism. Feel free to audit the class. Some of the complaints about WTWTA remind me of how the Impressionists were initially received: Their work was widely crit

No, I'm not missing that. (I mean, come on: Do you really think I don't recognize the value of character development and sturdy narrative?) What you're missing is that I'm rejecting your premise as too narrow. Certainly your premise applies to movies that choose to emphasize traditional narrative (nearly all mainstream movies, I'd say), but my argument is that there is no such thing as a standardized, one-size-fits-all rubric when it comes to judging art, and that it's unfair to apply such a rubric to movies when it doesn't really apply. For example, if I used your rubric to judge, say, St

The Big Pink - A Brief History of Love. It's growing on me fast.

Saw this last night, and my first impression is that A Serious Man is one of their stronger works, but I want to think about it some more. I enjoyed it immensely, but it remains slightly enigmatic. I saw the movie with a friend, and afterwards we had a good discussion about the act-of-God ending, but the more fruitful conversation revolved around this question: The movie is clearly about Larry, but why is his son emphasized in a way that his daughter is not? And why is Uncle Arthur emphasized in a way that the wife, Judith, is not? [MINOR SPOILER ALER] I pointed out that the opening seque

I also enjoyed Up a great deal; I really didn't mean to denigrate it above. The opening sequence is one of the greatest sequences of the year, but after that the movie settles into the by-now familiar Pixar mode--which means that it's masterful, but masterful in expected ways. I suppose that's one reason why I preferred WTWTA: Jonze's movie feels equally brilliant, but for trickier, more singular reasons.

Handshake Drugs, probably. Poor Places -> Spiders I Am Trying to Break Your Heart Via Chicago Misunderstood Typical choices, all. One I've never heard live (I don't think), but would love to hear: "We're Just Friends."

It's true that Max doesn't experience an epiphany at any point. I suppose my only response is, Thank God for that. As Max was running home, I consciously envisioned what I wanted to happen next, and was astonished when Jonze's images matched up nearly perfectly with my hopes for the final moments. In other words, what you disliked about the movie is precisely what I most cherished about it. Instead of leading to some kind of hard-won yet conventional "lesson," Jonze has a different goal in mind. He instead strings together small observations, minor psychological turns, and the beginnings

Even if that well-known book is beloved precisely for being unconventional? I'd say Jonze's first responsibility is to stay true to the spirit of the book--and I would argue that he does, brilliantly--not cater to the expectations of viewers who just want another Ice Age. Don't we have enough Ice Ages and Shreks and Madagascars? Why isn't there room for a children's movie that tries to do something unique and special, even if that means a more limited audience? I resist with every fiber of my movie-loving soul the notion that "conventional expectations" ought to be the driving standard by

I would argue that the creatures do help tell a story, just one that works differently from standard-issue plot mechanics. The creatures are integral to the story of Max's psychological arc, which is tangible and readily understandable. And I think criticizing the movie for choosing to emphasize psychological turmoil rather than conventional plotting is rather like trying to shove the movie into a box where it doesn't belong. I recognize that Jonze's approach might turn off some viewers, especially those looking for the bright highs of, say, Pixar. But for me, his approach is what makes t

Nice call! I love, love Matilda. I actually saw that twice in the theater, and that was before I had any kids.

I don't agree with any of those critics' comments, especially the second, which I think misses the point by a wide margin. (Super-short version: I disagree that the creatures don't work as individual personalities. But if you don't connect with the monsters as individuals, perhaps that's partially because they aren't actual characters but instead representations of various facets of Max's psychology. Carol, for example, represents the side of Max that cannot control his emotions, emotions that are intricate and baffling even to him. I cared about Carol because I cared about Max and I cared

Well, I guess we were bound to disagree about something eventually! Just finished watching the new The Last House on the Left, which is abominable. I'm actually not a fan of the Wes Craven version, either, but the original take, Ingmar Bergman's The Virgin Spring, is one of my all-time favorite movies.

I finally saw the movie today, and came away astonished by the artistic achievement on multiple levels. I'm a little stunned by all the negative reactions in this thread. Most of the criticisms strike me as honest, perhaps, but baffling, too. When I have more time I'd like to offer a defense of the film and a rebuttal to many of the criticisms listed in here, but right now time is short so all I'm going to add is the glib pronouncement that Where the Wild Things Are might be the best movie I've seen so far this year.

Indeed! Kidsmoke isn't just a top-notch moderator, she's a top-notch human being.

I'll echo GtrPlyr's comments: Funny, inspiring, moving.

I was just thinking the same thing.

At the time, I would have said Nirvana and Smashing Pumpkins. Not sure I can stand behind those now, though.

That's the moment I was totally won over. After that, I was willing to forgive the movie's occasional excesses. They are a small price to pay for the movie's other rewards.

Yes, they were. I was in college at the time, and they were a big deal. I actually remember where I was and what I was doing when I heard the news that he was dead.

I think it tells us something about how far gone some people are... if that post was not instantly recognizable as sarcastic, it's only because even crazier things are often asserted by people who actually mean them.

I usually can find something to like about any given movie, but The Unborn is total crappity-crap.

I have met Lou several times and can safely say he is not anything like Glenn Beck. He's more like Jesus, if Jesus was really into jazz.

That's up there for me, too. I never had that flush of intense excitement with it--at least not the way I did with some their earlier stuff--but the record has somehow managed to have more staying power than a lot of the albums that did grab me out of the gate. I still listen to The Mountain a lot.

ikol and I often disagree on policy, but I definitely don't think he's a heartless bastard. I think he's a conservative who actually listens to and hears the other side, and that's a pretty rare, and appreciated, thing.