Where The Wild Things Are

[lamradio]

Taking my kids to see it today.. One is 6 the other is 4.. I know everyone is saying its not appropriate for kids but it's my kids favorite book and we promised we would take them..

 

Is it really that bad? Worse than what kids see anyway these days on cable TV? We took them to see Star Wars the Clone Wars when it came out (has some violence of course) and they loved it.

[tongue-tied]

This movie was godawful.

[Dude]

I saw it last night also, it was a beautifully shot pic, and I'd give it a 10 out of 10 for visuals, but as an overall film, it's more like a 6 or 7 for me. And kids may not respond well to this, and not because of the darkness, scariness, or violence, but because the film is an emotional mess with a bunch of hastily characterized Wild Things, all not really fleshed out with personalities as much as they were saddled with neuroses and issues. Whether the wild things are conflicting emotions inside Max's brain or not, all they ultimately did was whine and bicker, which doesn't really make for an enjoyable movie for the last third of it. The wild things didn't need a king or a leader, they needed psychoanalysis. One review nailed it when they said it should have been titled Where the Whining Things Are.

[Sir Stewart]

Taking my kids to see it today.. One is 6 the other is 4.. I know everyone is saying its not appropriate for kids but it's my kids favorite book and we promised we would take them..

 

Is it really that bad? Worse than what kids see anyway these days on cable TV? We took them to see Star Wars the Clone Wars when it came out (has some violence of course) and they loved it.

 

The little girl next to me was no more than 4 and she did not seem disturbed - mostly bored.

[KevinG]

This movie was godawful.

 

I am interested in why. I really hate it when someone makes a statement like this and offers no statements to back it up. Not to say that your opinion is wrong, but it is invalid because you make no attempt to expound on your statement.

 

I am trying to get as much information on this movie as possible to make an informed decision on whether I should take my five year old.

[Spawn's dad]

I am interested in why. I really hate it when someone makes a statement like this and offers no statements to back it up. Not to say that your opinion is wrong, but it is invalid because you make no attempt to expound on your statement.

 

I am trying to get as much information on this movie as possible to make an informed decision on whether I should take my five year old.

 

 

I wouldn't take a five year old to see that. They're either going to be bored or freaked out. In either event it's clearly not worth the money for that. Once I got over the fact that tony soprano was an angry children's book character I found myself hoping Sil would make an appearance, KW would strip, and then they'd whack Douglas. Mostly I was bored enough to be enraptured by these thoughts so methinks it wasn't such a great flick. Spawn liked it though.

[TCP]

This was really bad. No one should take their child to see this movie, I can't see a kid liking this. In fact, I can't see anyone liking it. Nothing happens. It looks pretty good visually, but it's pretty much just 2 hours of character introduction and than the credits. Doesn't explain much of anything. Nothing is accomplished. Nothing is explained.

It's as if they got a cool director, the chick from the Yeah Yeah Yeahs to write the soundtrack, and Tony Soprano and then didn't bother making the rest of the movie.

Stay away.

[tongue-tied]

I am interested in why. I really hate it when someone makes a statement like this and offers no statements to back it up. Not to say that your opinion is wrong, but it is invalid because you make no attempt to expound on your statement.

 

I am trying to get as much information on this movie as possible to make an informed decision on whether I should take my five year old.

 

Invalid for your methods of movie-going, but it was godawful.

 

Concessions: Visually great shots, and however they did the costumes/CGI was well done, this movie could have held a strong tone with the design if it wasn't all over the place.

 

I was completely on board with this movie literally until Max meets the Wild Things, who aren't Wild but Morose, Neurotic and at times Sociopathic Things. I could tell Jonze/Eggers were really trying to get inside the head of a kid, and they almost did, which is admirable, but "horseshoes and hand-grenades", because coming close and failing is still failing.

 

Characters were superficial, they constantly refer to personal struggles that are never explained or resolved, they come and go for no reason, and disturbingly they're either hurt easily or impervious to pain. Terrible stuff happens to the Things, especially by way of main-character-Thing, and they don't seem to care, they just stand there.

 

I was receptive to the idea that quirks, discontinuity, or anything confusing about the film might be a function of "this world is in Max's head", but after seeing it, I call bullshit. It's half-baked. It's a banal and incoherent hour of good set/costume designs wrapped in a stock scene of childhood angst.

 

It was boring, and even a little creepy, but mostly boring. I blame Eggers.

[ih8music]

Taking my kids to see it today.. One is 6 the other is 4.. I know everyone is saying its not appropriate for kids but it's my kids favorite book and we promised we would take them..

 

Is it really that bad? Worse than what kids see anyway these days on cable TV? We took them to see Star Wars the Clone Wars when it came out (has some violence of course) and they loved it.

How did it go? I'm kinda in the same boat - promised my 5 yr old that we'd go... but I can easily tell him he'd be too scared. Even though he loved every other Star Wars movie, The Phantom Menace freaked him out. I think he doesn't do well with scary-looking guys (e.g., Darth Maul) doing bad things. Sounds like this movie is pretty dark and sometimes violent.

[TCP]

Nothing in it should be that bad.

Then again, I saw Predator when I was 5 years old and I had nightmares for a good 7 years after that (no lie). So it might depend on how well your child does with large, furry, monsters.

What would bother me, if I had kids, would be what a downer film it is. Kids don't like sadness... do they?

Personally, I'd take my kids to Zombieland, in case there is a Zombie apocalypse and I don't survive... you know, so they can figure out what to do.

[jmacomber68w]

Nothing in it should be that bad.

Then again, I saw Predator when I was 5 years old and I had nightmares for a good 7 years after that (no lie). So it might depend on how well your child does with large, furry, monsters.

What would bother me, if I had kids, would be what a downer film it is. Kids don't like sadness... do they?

Personally, I'd take my kids to Zombieland, in case there is a Zombie apocalypse and I don't survive... you know, so they can figure out what to do.

 

That or The Road

[lamradio]

How did it go? I'm kinda in the same boat - promised my 5 yr old that we'd go... but I can easily tell him he'd be too scared. Even though he loved every other Star Wars movie, The Phantom Menace freaked him out. I think he doesn't do well with scary-looking guys (e.g., Darth Maul) doing bad things. Sounds like this movie is pretty dark and sometimes violent.

 

I loved the movie, and so did the kids. The only time they got a little scared was a short part at the very beginning, but other than that they loved it.. There were times I thought they got a little bored, but after the movie they started telling me about all of their favorite parts so I knew they were paying attention.

 

This was really bad. No one should take their child to see this movie, I can't see a kid liking this. In fact, I can't see anyone liking it. Nothing happens. It looks pretty good visually, but it's pretty much just 2 hours of character introduction and than the credits. Doesn't explain much of anything. Nothing is accomplished. Nothing is explained.

It's as if they got a cool director, the chick from the Yeah Yeah Yeahs to write the soundtrack, and Tony Soprano and then didn't bother making the rest of the movie.

Stay away.

 

SPOILER ALERT

 

Nothing happened? Nothing is explained? You must have missed the whole point of the movie.. It's very metaphorical. It's about a kid that is making the transition from a child to an adult and all of the confusion that comes with that.. The whole movie is seen through Max's eyes.. The monster island is a dream world that Max created. It's just like when you dream, you will see little bits and pieces of things that have happened in your day. For example; the snowball fight at the beginning is represented on monster island with the dirt fight.. Seeing the giant dog in the desert, that's Max's dog.. When Max is in the in the "monster pile", it's the same as when he was in the igloo and the kid jumped on it to cave it in. It's a very deep film and I thought it was brilliant.

 

 

[Sir Stewart]

Since seeing this Saturday morning, I can't stop thinking about it.

Maybe my strong connection to the book (I read it over and over as a kid, staring at the wild things, fascinated endlessly), and my age (mid-30s), made me the ripe candidate for Jonze/Eggers' vision.

[M. (hristine]

Because of the overall tone of most reviews it seems unlikely I will see this film. I am curious though why 'dark' children's films are inappropriate. Children's imaginations are rife with dark things.

 

From the Brothers Grimm to Edward Gorey to Disney to Lemony Snicket to Tim Burton, child noir seem safe outlets for the id of a child. Obviously a parent would be the best judge of a child's age and sensitivity, but to say that all children's art should be bright and cheery seems to vastly underestimate the psychology of a child (I am mostly talking about the 5 to 10 year olds here).

 

Matilda is my favorite kid's movie, and it's underlying themes are very dark.

 

I love these lines from Andrew Bird's Measuring Cups:

 

when you talk about the hand of glory

a tale that's rather grim and gory

is it just another children's story that's been de-clawed?

when the tales of brothers Grimm and Gorey have been outlawed

[Good Old Neon]

Because of the overall tone of most reviews it seems unlikely I will see this film. I am curious though why 'dark' children's films are inappropriate. Children's imaginations are rife with dark things.

 

From the Brothers Grimm to Edward Gorey to Disney to Lemony Snicket to Tim Burton, child noir seem safe outlets for the id of a child. Obviously a parent would be the best judge of a child's age and sensitivity, but to say that all children's art should be bright and cheery seems to vastly underestimate the psychology of a child (I am mostly talking about the 5 to 10 year olds here).

 

Matilda is my favorite kid's movie, and it's underlying themes are very dark.

 

I love these lines from Andrew Bird's Measuring Cups:

 

when you talk about the hand of glory

a tale that's rather grim and gory

is it just another children's story that's been de-clawed?

when the tales of brothers Grimm and Gorey have been outlawed

 

Good point. With few exceptions, the entire cannon of children’s literature and film is pretty damn dark – and the stuff that isn’t, well, it’s usually not very good.

[Dude]

SPOILER ALERT

 

Nothing happened? Nothing is explained? You must have missed the whole point of the movie.. It's very metaphorical. It's about a kid that is making the transition from a child to an adult and all of the confusion that comes with that.. The whole movie is seen through Max's eyes.. The monster island is a dream world that Max created. It's just like when you dream, you will see little bits and pieces of things that have happened in your day. For example; the snowball fight at the beginning is represented on monster island with the dirt fight.. Seeing the giant dog in the desert, that's Max's dog.. When Max is in the in the "monster pile", it's the same as when he was in the igloo and the kid jumped on it to cave it in. It's a very deep film and I thought it was brilliant.

 

ANOTHER SPOILER ALERT

 

This may be true, but I personally think that for great metaphorical art to work, it has to work on multiple levels. It may be a great psychological exploration, but it also needs to be entertaining as a straight up narrative as well. In other words, you shouldn't have to think too deep about Max's id to appreciate it, nor should 7-year-old kids who are seeing it.

 

I didn't find the Wild Thing interactions to be ultimately satisfying or entertaining. I thought if the film were to work, I was supposed to be extremely moved when Carol (Gandolfini) ran out sobbing to say goodbye to Max, yet I wasn't moved at all, nor was I moved when Max was reunited with his mother. These are usually the "break out the kleenex" moments of good cinema, but I didn't really get a sense I was dealing with fully developed characters, so I had very little emotionally invested in them.

[Edie]

I saw the trailer a few weeks ago and was largely unimpressed. I think we will not see this one in the theatre anyway.

 

In other cinema news, Jake saw The Great Escape with my mother on PBS a couple of weeks ago. He loved it and asked her all kinds of questions about WWII -- really good ones (she reported to me later). That's what good movies will do.

[Good Old Neon]

ANOTHER SPOILER ALERT

 

but I didn't really get a sense I was dealing with fully developed characters, so I had very little emotionally invested in them.

 

From what I understand, the suits mucked with the story a bit, which might explain why the back story related to the emotional state of the monsters feels somewhat truncated.

 

http://www.chud.com/articles/articles/13720/1/WHERE-THE-WILD-THINGS-ARE-BEING-COMPLETELY-RESHOT/Page1.html

 

With that said, perhaps the monsters symbolize those parts of Max’s psyche that are not fully formed or developed. Keep in mind I haven’t viewed the movie, and so I’m probably talking out of my ass.

[Sir Stewart]

I didn't find the Wild Thing interactions to be ultimately satisfying or entertaining. I thought if the film were to work, I was supposed to be extremely moved when Carol (Gandolfini) ran out sobbing to say goodbye to Max, yet I wasn't moved at all, nor was I moved when Max was reunited with his mother. These are usually the "break out the kleenex" moments of good cinema, but I didn't really get a sense I was dealing with fully developed characters, so I had very little emotionally invested in them.

Hmm - I was bawling by the time Max was running away from home. Like I kinda said before, I think I might be the one guy they made this movie for.

[Lodestar]

I loved the movie, and so did the kids. The only time they got a little scared was a short part at the very beginning, but other than that they loved it.. There were times I thought they got a little bored, but after the movie they started telling me about all of their favorite parts so I knew they were paying attention.

 

 

 

SPOILER ALERT

 

Nothing happened? Nothing is explained? You must have missed the whole point of the movie.. It's very metaphorical. It's about a kid that is making the transition from a child to an adult and all of the confusion that comes with that.. The whole movie is seen through Max's eyes.. The monster island is a dream world that Max created. It's just like when you dream, you will see little bits and pieces of things that have happened in your day. For example; the snowball fight at the beginning is represented on monster island with the dirt fight.. Seeing the giant dog in the desert, that's Max's dog.. When Max is in the in the "monster pile", it's the same as when he was in the igloo and the kid jumped on it to cave it in. It's a very deep film and I thought it was brilliant.

 

I'm a big fan of the book as well, but sadly I don't think it translated well into a feature-length movie. At all. And I really fail to see how it's "very metaphorical." All of the examples you give are valid interpretations of the book/film/story, and all are probably correct, but they're also pretty easy to see and don't say a whole lot. I won't object to your calling it "brilliant", since that's an opinion, but "very deep"... eh, I don't know. Other than portraying the frustration/wonder of being a child, there isn't really much going on at all. Nothing that happens with the wild things seems to matter in the end, or even in the present. The final 80 minutes or so felt very stretched thin to me.

 

I guess the biggest fault I found was that for a 100-minute movie, absolutely nothing appears to change. None of the characters change, neither of the worlds change. Like one poster said, characters are introduced, but I don't think a single one of them is every truly developed.

 

I should clarify that I wasn't actually disappointed by the movie per se, and I'm trying not to seem too jaded about a movie based on a 10-sentence kids book that relied predominately on the reader's imagination. I had few expectations for what Eggers/Jonze would do with the material, and it doesn't surprise me that they ran out of real estate rather quickly. My only real "hope" for the film was that it would make me feel young again, and while it had some of that in the beginning, I just lost interest when it become clear that nothing in the imagined world was going to affect anything or anyone.

[isadorah]

I think 'dark' is fine for childen's stuff, but this was just angry. filled with anger. no it wasn't terribly violent, although i am bothered by one monster ripping off the arm of another monster in the midst of a fight. there doesn't have to be all sorts of physical violence for something to still be violent, the whole verbal abuse thing.

 

then again, i was expecting magical fantasical and sweet.

 

 

it is interesting to me what is deemed acceptable and where lines are drawn in the sand. a movie can be filled with sexual innuendo and blatant vulgar sex jokes, but carry a PG-13 rating because there isn't actually any nudity or sex in it. is it really still appropriate though? i feel the same way about Where the Wild Things are, it isn't really violent, but good grief there was a lot of anger, strife, and anxiety. something i wouldn't want a young one to see. a pre-teen / teen sure, but yeah...i am starting to think i am a prude.

[Sir Stewart]

When the credits rolled, I turned to my wife and said "Hell of a way to tell kids there's no God."

[Spawn's dad]

I'm a big fan of the book as well, but sadly I don't think it translated well into a feature-length movie.

 

Other than a kid in a wolf costume the movie had nothing to do with the book. I mean, christ, it was a, what, 15 page picture book? In fact, most of the posts in this thread had significantly more words than the book.

[Spawn's dad]

I loved the movie, and so did the kids. The only time they got a little scared was a short part at the very beginning, but other than that they loved it.. There were times I thought they got a little bored, but after the movie they started telling me about all of their favorite parts so I knew they were paying attention.

 

 

 

SPOILER ALERT

 

Nothing happened? Nothing is explained? You must have missed the whole point of the movie.. It's very metaphorical. It's about a kid that is making the transition from a child to an adult and all of the confusion that comes with that.. The whole movie is seen through Max's eyes.. The monster island is a dream world that Max created. It's just like when you dream, you will see little bits and pieces of things that have happened in your day. For example; the snowball fight at the beginning is represented on monster island with the dirt fight.. Seeing the giant dog in the desert, that's Max's dog.. When Max is in the in the "monster pile", it's the same as when he was in the igloo and the kid jumped on it to cave it in. It's a very deep film and I thought it was brilliant.

 

 

how old is Max? Spawn thought 3rd or 4th grade. That isn't a period of transition into adulthood. So if that's what it's about it's no wonder it missed the mark.

[lamradio]

I'm a big fan of the book as well, but sadly I don't think it translated well into a feature-length movie. At all. And I really fail to see how it's "very metaphorical." All of the examples you give are valid interpretations of the book/film/story, and all are probably correct, but they're also pretty easy to see and don't say a whole lot.

 

Well what else are they supposed to say? They should be easy to see... It's supposed to be a dream seen through a childs eye's. It's bits of pieces of what he saw in his day.

 

I really liked the whole uneasy feeling of the movie. This side of it was very characterisic of Spike Jonze (see Being John Malkovich).. I always felt like something really bad was going to happen the whole time, but it never did. I think some of you were just expecting more. Yes, it could have been better but I think it was done very well and I personally enjoyed it very much.

 

how old is Max? Spawn thought 3rd or 4th grade. That isn't a period of transition into adulthood. So if that's what it's about it's no wonder it missed the mark.

 

I was thinking 11 or 12.. Not really adulthood, but from a kid to a pre-teen.. Those years when you are still a kid, but you starting to experience more adult things.