Where The Wild Things Are - Movie Review

By June Williams On December 1, 2009 In Reviews: Movies 12 Comments

Where The Wild Things Are - Movie Review

Director: Spike Jonze
Writers: Spike Jonze, Dave Eggers
Stars: Max Records, Lauren Ambrose, Chris Cooper,Paul Dano,James Gandolfini
Drama / Family

Going to a film like Where the Wild Things Are was a bit of a stretch for me as I neither read the book when I was a child nor read it aloud to any of the children I babysat when I was a teenager. Not that I wasn’t aware of it or hadn’t read it as an adult and certainly found myself touched by the gentle delicate story of a young lonely boy who is freed by his boundless imagination. Maurice Sendak’s illustrations of this as well as his numerous other works for children have permeated popular culture. How, I wondered would the film makers handle the touching, wistful nature of this 48 page picture book and turn it into a 90 minute movie?

Sadly the answer is they threw out the things that made the book so dear even as they spent millions on getting the visuals correct. Who could argue that the “monsters” weren’t done perfectly? It was a tour de force of animatronics.

A book, a film, a play may have the best sets, costumes, lighting and even acting but if the story is off then no amount of money and craftsmanship can save it. So it is with the film of Where The Wild Things Are. The main character of the book is a sensitive little boy of perhaps 5 or 6 years of age. He has been naughty and was sent to bed without supper. When in his room his imagination soars and he creates a world from the bits and pieces of his toys and furnishings. He sails upon a sea of discovery, a sea of his making and discovers the wild side of his innermost being. He experiences triumph and self actualization but in the end yearns for home and the love of his parents. When he emerges from his land of make believe he is a little wiser and has learned to appreciate his family.

In the film on the other hand the boy is older, perhaps 9 or 10 years old. He is more than naughty, he is angry and spiteful. His father is absent because of death or divorce and his family consists of a mother and a sister There is an incident at the beginning of the movie where he is treated poorly by his teenaged sister. He is hurt and he runs to his mother to tell her how he was mistreated but doesn’t say that he provoked the whole incident. The boy had started the fight that led to his heartbreaking loss of his snow fort hideaway. His anger appears to be related to having no one with which to share his dreams. There is a moment when his mother indulges him by having him tell her a story but she has a grown up life to live and too little time for his special temperament. When faced with the loss of his mother’s attention he acts out in the most dreadful defiant fashion. He bites her. Then he runs away into the darkness, leaving her terrified for his safety. What ensues is his flight from responsibility and a journey to a land of his making. This new world is a place where at first he lies to save himself but soon he attempts to make the inhabitants believe he is someone that he is not, bosses them around, and treats them as subjects. He damages all those around him and when the proverbial chickens start coming home to roost (one missing a wing replaced by a twig) he runs away from this place that he has smashed and the people he has hurt to return back to the comfort of his mother’s arms. She gives him hugs and chocolate cake and milk and he never says he is sorry for anything he has done. That is the most disturbing part of the tale told in this way. No growth, no acknowledgement of responsibility for harming others, no remorse and in fact being rewarded for dreadful behavior. What a wonderful message!

So if you are hankering to revisit childhood or even dally for a few hours in a childhood you never had I would say see Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs, Planet 51, The Fantastic Mr. Fox or UP if you can still find it playing in a theater somewhere.


by June K. Williams
Shop Buzzy Tees!

The Raven
by Edgar Allan Poe		Real Gots Don't Wear Black.
They Sack Rome.
The Dice Giveth &
Taketh Away		Cleverly Disguised As A Responsible Adult
Don't Annoy The Crazy PersonBooks, Cats, Life Is Good
Shakespearean InsultsThe Gamer's Brain
Einstein ShirtMy Brain Has To Many Tabs Open

Summary
Where The Wild Things Are – Movie Review
Article Name
Where The Wild Things Are – Movie Review
Description
Going to a film like Where the Wild Things Are was a bit of a stretch for me as I neither read the book when I was a child nor read it aloud to any of the children I babysat when I was a teenager.
Author
BuzzyMag.com
Get FREE Buzzy Mag Email Updates!
June Williams

June Williams

June, also known affectionately as Buzzy Lady #2, has been with the company since it began. She was born in Manhattan, raised in the Bronx (the first 12 years in the heart of the south Bronx) and spent most of her adult life living in Westchester County N.Y.

Always a Science Fiction fan and dabbler in writing she had thought herself too practical to pursue a career in the field. Before coming to Buzzy she spent over 30 years in the travel industry, then one day decided it was time to spread her wings and plunge into publishing. Everyone she knew thought she had gone slightly daft but as this was not the first time they had expressed that opinion she took the red pill anyway and now spends all of her time putting together projects that make each day a pleasure.

Related Posts

  • Betty Dent

    I think your review is very harsh. Every time a book is made into a movie I hear similar complaints. The movie is not the book. The general consensus about WTWTA as a movie is that while the boy’s time with the wild things ends badly he knows he can go home and have his mother love him unconditionally. We all need someone to love us unconditionally especially when we are growing up.

  • Lomax

    I think that taking a 12 page children book and trying to make it into a 90 minute movie was doomed from the get go. Giving Max a back story cuts down on the broad appeal of the book. Adding an older sister cuts it down even further. Was there anyone out there who actually thought that this was going to be a good movie?

    Having someone to love you unconditionally is a wonderful thing, but not the point of the book. The movie sounds as if it continues to ride the “I-am-not-responsible-for-my-actions” bandwagon and that everything will be hunky dorie in the end.

    In the book there were consequences for Max’s actions. He was bad by his own devices and was sent to his room without supper. when he returned from his trip (woke up) his dinner was there but his mother was not. She fed him but withed affection, consequences. And not cruelty but rather a traditional method of parenting. Now it is in the child’s hands to come to her, submit and apologies.

  • Juliet

    I saw it and it was awful. It was so bad that for the first time in years I walked out of a movie.

    I came here cause I saw you on twitter!

  • John Winn

    June,

    I agree with Betty. I believe you’re giving Spike Jonze (?) way less credit than he deserves. Okay, it’s not The Everlasting Story, it’s not even Bridge to Tarabithia. But Jonze has been directing great films long before Wild Things. Remember the John Malkovich movie? That was arguably the most absurdist/surreal sci-fi film ever made (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind being the other, which IMO sucked far worse). After 10+ years in the biz doing music videos and indie movies not unlike Wild Things, I think he knows how to do movies-he even got Sendek’s blessing!

    What I think it all comes down to is, a generational thing. People in my generation (25-30) are in a nostalgic mood right now (Think: hipsters). They are also unsparingly unsentimental and gritty. Wild Things offers them a little bit of that (see James Gandolfini/Carol’s explanation of divorce to Max). I don’t know what it’s like for your generation, but we’re definitely more open to experimentation, in film, in music, and even in our own lives. That may not have been the case even 10-15 years ago. I can easily see how someone could pass judgment on a film or even an entire scene that didn’t even exist when they were younger.

    My verdict still stands on Eternal Sunshine, though.

  • Charity

    The movie was terrible. I felt nothing towards Max, but a feeling that he was in need of some serious discipline. The movie was bleak and dark, and I found it nearly impossible to care about any of the characters. They were childish, and selfish, and greedy, and moody, and sometimes downright hateful to each other. I haven’t read the book, so I’m basing it solely on what it is: a bad movie. My own child is mentally ill, and I would never dream of allowing him to behave like Max, and I wouldn’t want him to have friends like him either. Also, being 30 myself, I fail to see how a person’s age has anything to do with their perception of this movie, or the book it was apparently extremely loosely based on.

  • John Winn

    Charity,

    I get where you’re coming from-a bad movie is a bad movie. At the same time, I think you can not like a film and still have respect for the people who brought it to life, the directors and actors and puppeteers and so on. I would not dream of watching the Mario Brothers movie, but I happen to like Dennis Hopper as an actor. The same thing would apply with Aeon Flux, Beavis and Butt-Head, The Maxx, etc. If they ever get around to making a film out of The Head, I’d hope they’d not screw it up.

    What’s happening is, you have one group of people who are very, very devoted to one particular facet of their youth in particular (Wild Things) and likes it just they way it is. They’re purists-they don’t want anything to be done with it.

    Then there is this second group, who really don’t care, and would rather have a Wild Things movie with or without the heavy gritty stuff in it. What most people don’t consider is that a lot of thought (and energy) went into the film. Sendek’s book, for example is 30 pages, from beginning to end. Not even a novella. I doubt it was his first draft either. Now imagine if you’re Spike Jonze and you’re trying to make a three hour movie out of 30 pages of illustrations and text. You’re going to need a lot of filler, right?

    Here’s the thing about Spike. His entire CV is full of dark stuff. Think Adaptation, Malkovich etc. So a film with Jonze attached to it is going to be somewhat dark and moody-even if it’s a childhood film like Wild Things. One may question why Sendek chose to collaborate with a director of his caliber, but that’s neither here or there.

    IMO his portrayal of Max was intense, but I think he handled him as sensitively as he could without making him two-dimensional or worse, a stereotype like Gilbert Grape. That’s more than can be said for some directors in Hollywood, who probably would’ve made that kid go full retard on screen. But as a fan of the books (who has written a few stories himself) I think the film is as good as it’s going to get without dumbing Max down and turning the creatures into cartoon versions of themselves.

    But that’s my .02 cents.

  • Juliet

    John,

    while a person’s age has nothing to do with a movie the book was very popular for us 25-30 year olds when we were kids.

    A bad movie is a bad movie and is apparent to anyone of any age group. a good movie appeals to everyone. Lots of kid movies are watched and enjoyed by adults, like UP! and Cars and Toy Story.

    Just because someone did a bunch of hip-hop or music videos or whatever dose not mean he can make a movie. I can get a box of betty crocker cake mix and whip up a batch of cupcakes but can I host a cooking show on the food network? If enough money was thrown at me, yea I could but it would be as awful a show as WtWTa was a movie.

    Jules!

  • John Winn

    Juliet,

    I think it’s really a matter of taste. There are movies I like, there are directors I like. I think Martin Scorsese is one of the greatest directors of our time. Clark Johnston (“The Wire”) is IMO one of the most versatile actor-director-screenwriters. I could go on and on.

    What it comes down to for me is, being able to appreciate someone’s work dispassionately-yes, critically-without having to resort to knee jerk emotional arguments or reject someone because they “suck”. I’ve reviewed books and CDs for almost a year now. If I think something is bad, I’ll call BS on it, and have on more than one occasion. But I don’t dismiss something out of hand, if I don’t like it I’ll let you know why, and I’ll at least try to be reasonable about it, and if I can’t even do that I’ll let you know why too.

    We can agree to disagree. But in my view this is rather like what Potter Stewart said about obscenity: I know a bad film when I see it. And in my opinion, this is far from bad.

  • Lomax

    John -
    I didn’t see the movie and never would have to begin with. I think you did a fine job critiquing the movie and have done adequately so for Buzzy for a while now. I think your only problem with this movie review is that you were the only person in America who was able to glean anything of value from it and to boot- you that you like it.

    No matter how high brow or artsy or innovative or “breakthrough” it may or may not have been, it sounds like it failed as movie in that those who did see it left the theater unfulfilled, displeased and overall annoyed with everything about it.

    You mention nostalgia at some point above and it sounds like the movie messed with the basic story line and premise. From the day it was published everyone loved it. Kids, moms, teachers, even churches didn’t have anything bad to say about it. It’s like this book was imprinted on 3 generations of humans. When childhood warm-fuzzy memories are messed with people get angry. Those memories are precious and irreplaceable. Watching this movie sounds like it at the very least marred if not out and out destroyed the remembered love of a dear childhood possession and memory.

    That sucks and that is why people are venting at you.

    Glad I didn’t see it, I loved that book as a kid and ya know what? I still do today. Still have my copy from when I was a tot, crayon marks, ripped pages and all.

    Don’t take it personal. The critics’ /HATED/ “Star Wars” when it came out but the people loved it. I saw it in the theater no less than 7 times when I was a kid. Critics do not make or break movies, movie-goers do.

  • John Winn

    Lomax,

    Thanks for the support. I guess I’m not as sentimental as everyone else. I guess people are more protective of their fuzzy memories of the actual facts. Sendek gave his blessing for the film 10+ years ago. Jonze labored over it all that time, produced two Oscar-worthy films, collaborated on a internet video site and I’m sure a lot more to boot. You’d think that would be enough to quell the dissension, but I guess the facts don’t matter when it comes to art.

    (well, everyone _knows_ that. But this goes far beyond just issues of taste.)

    I always wonder what it would be like if people were to find themselves on the other side, as writers and artists. I’m sure the criticism would look very different from that lens.

  • Maarten Bouwman

    After having read this review, my son(10) and I went to see this movie last Sunday to form an opinion of our own.
    Animations are great as stated in yr review but that was the only thing supportable. My son was annoyed by the story. After having seen Coraline, Up and even Me & Marley as last movies, “Where The Wild Things Are” was realy boring.
    My son is more a Lord of the Rings/Harry Potter/Narnia/Inkheart type. Let’s hope that “Avatar” (next on the list) live’s up to the trailers in circulation.

    Ciao,

    Maarten
    Italy

  • John Winn

    Maarten,

    I’m sorry your son didn’t like it. While I haven’t been able to catch a glimpse of the Avatar trailer,I hear it is the most expensive movie Fox has ever made. Here’s hoping the money was well spent.