Forest Whitaker Movie:

				Label: Warner Bros. Salesrank:
		MPAA Rating: Media: Theatrical Release

Editorial Review:
Through his handcrafted ode to the trials of childhood, Spike Jonze puts his own unique imprint on Maurice Sendak's enduring classic. In the prologue, 9-year-old Max (Max Records) stomps around the house, feeling neglected. When his mom (Catherine Keener) sends him to bed without supper, Max runs away (something he doesn't do in the book). He finds a boat and sails to a distant land where fuzzy monsters are raising a rumpus in the forest. Since his wolf suit allows him to fit right in, he joins the fray, catching the eye of Carol (James Gandolfini, excellent), who notes, approvingly, "I like the way you destroy stuff. There's a spark to your work that can't be taught." With that, they pronounce the diminutive creature king, hoping he can bring cohesion to their fractured family. After Max comes across Carol's scale-model town, he decides they should build a real one, but the project stalls as Alexander (Paul Dano) and Douglas (Chris Cooper) mope, Judith (Catherine O'Hara) browbeats Ira (Forest Whitaker), and Carol pines for K.W. (Lauren Ambrose), who prefers the company of owls Bob and Terry. Max realizes he has to make a choice: stay with the wild things or return home, where he has to keep his aggressive impulses in check. For readers of Sendak's slim tome, his decision won't come as a surprise, but Jonze ends the story on a lovely grace note. Until that time, the squabbling is a bit much--these monsters never stop talking--but Jonze, cowriter Dave Eggers, the Jim Henson Company, and singer/songwriter Karen O. have gone all-out to re-create the inner world of a child with as much empathy as was mustered for the inner adult world of Jonze's Being John Malkovich. --Kathleen C. Fennessy

Where the Wild Things Are [Theatrical Release] Reviews:
Explore the mind of a lonely, scared boy? Wild!
2009-11-30 - I never read Maurice Sendak's children's book as a child, so I had no sentimental or nostalgic attachments to the source material going into this film. However, I did squeeze in enough time to read the ten sentence children's book prior to seeing this Spike Jonze adaptation. Jonze's version is much darker in my opinion, but it really explores the depths of the mind of a pre-adolescent, lonely, scared, imaginative, and introverted young boy named Max. We see the problems in Max's real life then we spend the remainder of the film watching Max explore different aspects of himself that manifest in the form of monsters or "wild things" on a magical island he travels to by boat.

The cinematography and art direction are wonderful and make this a fun film to watch even as Max explores painful aspects of his life. However, the film's main flaw is perhaps it captures Max too well. Max is nine, and like most nine-year-olds he is prone to irrational thinking and sudden mood shifts. Since the film follows Max it also follows his moods, and this makes for some frustratingly languid scenes. The ending suffers from this especially as Max's great realization for why he needs to return "home" is only inches away from, "I'm bored with this now. I'm done." And essentially that's how the movie ends as well. This is indeed an accurate portrayal of a nine-year-old boy's mentality and totally keeps in line with the character of Max; however, it's not an entirely satisfying way to end two hours spent in a theater.


Playdate from Hell
2009-11-29 - My wife and I saw this with our 8-year-old. She hated it. We hated it. Most of the other kids in the theater ended up running around the lobby half-way through because it bored them.

The "wild things" are not charming. They are whiny and obnoxious. Imagine being cooped up for two hours with 6 kids from hell, and that's what you get in this movie. How anyone can find anything charming in this movie is beyond me.



A kids movie for the Whole Foods generation?
2009-11-24 - A kids movie for the Whole Foods generation? There certainly is a fundamentally organic feel to Where the Wild Things Are. No matter the scene, every frame feels pieced together from scratch, whether a messily orchestrated, doomed-from-the-start snowball fight or an intimate, get-to-know-you conversation about eating one's family. Still, perhaps such a fundamentally successful collaboration shouldn't be surprising, since all but the most basic narrative of the movie required writer and director to partner on an almost uni-cellular, pre-embryonic level to ensure the heart of this enduring story adapted successfully to the screen. A fitting metaphor might be the scene quite a ways into the film where a conception of sorts occurs, followed by an appropriately symbolic rebirth, complete with the requisite bit of goo.

Needless to say, this isn't your Mother's kids film. While the best modern children's films (like the Pixar oeuvre, most noticeably) often provide a few sly winks to the parents sprinkled amidst kid-friendly slapstick, Wild Things does just the opposite -- it's an adult film with a few winks to the kids just to keep them from becoming too antsy in their seats. Most of the film deals with quite weighty themes like, anger, alienation, jealousy and forgiveness. It's not hard to believe that Freud or Jung would have had a field day with this one. You get the feeling it might have been tempting, even easier, to create an r-rated film tackling the same ideas, rather than to package the product in a pg-rated bow that ensure the kids and their dollars come along for the rather adult ride.

The acting is outstanding. My favorite moment was early in the film, when mother and son write a story together, and then share a glance almost too private, too wondrous, and too bittersweet to have been put to film. I'll take that scene with me to the Oscars, even if the film is snubbed at nomination time.

And it might be. For although I loved the film, understood its message and marveled at its originality, I left the theater feeling as though there was something missing, and it took me a while to figure out what left me feeling unsatisfied -- I was hoping for a misty eye. This is the guy who balled like a baby after watching Cameron's Titanic -- multiple times. Today, I needed some catharsis. I wanted to leave the theater feeling as though Jonze and Eggers managed to get a piece of me up on that screen. I wanted to feel like a bit of the boy in me was in the boy on the screen.

But somehow, I didn't. Whether or not my experience is anomalous or the norm, I can't help but recommend this movie with at least some reservation. Sure, the ending is moving, the goodbyes and the hellos poignant as much as they are expected, but I didn't dwell on this film. My thoughts had moved on to lunch at Five Guys before I was 100 feet from the movie theater.

While Where the Wild Things are may feel organic in the best possible way, for me it's still missing some vital ingredient that I need to call this movie great, rather than merely very good.

A pessimistic and manic-depressive interpretation of a children's classic
2009-11-23 - I saw this in IMAX and was disappointed. Spike Jonze took a simple and beloved children's book and turned it into a long, adult-themed character study filled with cynical, chronically-depressed, bickering monsters. This version of "Where the Wild Things Are" is definitely not suitable for kids.

Firstly, it changes the story from Max being sent to his room where he conjures up an imaginary land filled with beasts to Max running away from home, getting onto a boat and sailing out to sea. In the book, all this happens in his imagination and the creatures are a manifestation of his mind. In the film, he physically runs away to a fantastical island where he encounters the frightening monsters. Secondly, the beasts are not cute at all. In fact, I hated all of them because they were a bunch of annoying, self-centered, chemically-imbalanced and violent jerks, perpetually arguing and destroying things. They had adult voices and adult mood disorders, yet children's personalities and temper tantrums. I had no expectations about how the beasts would sound, but I did not expect them to speak in full English sentences with unprocessed human adult voices. Whereas they were lovable, beast-like, and almost entirely silent in the book, they wouldn't keep their mouths shut in the film. The book (and famous 1988 animated adaptation) was one of a mood of jubilation and childlike innocence. Jonze's vision is dark, brooding, and at times scary.

They get into a lot of fights, verbally and physically. We see them rough housing and destroying trees both in jest and in anger. One beast beans two owl characters flying overhead with rocks. We see a very violent dirt clod fight suggested by Max, and as they say, it's all fun and games until someone gets hurt. This is exactly what happens to Alexander (the goat), who gets clocked in the head with a dirt clod and gets very upset. He then withdraws inward and says he doesn't want to play anymore, causing more bad feelings among the beasts, then anger from Carol, the gang's leader (shown on poster). He says Max was supposed to come and make everything all better. In the ensuing argument, one of the beasts gets his arm violently and unexpected ripped off. This film is classic, textbook child psychology on display and rather depressing to watch.

I thought the movie dragged on and was very boring, with the only conflict on the island being the interbestial relationship problems between the beasts and Max, jealousy, and their collective desire for happiness and need for a feeling of security. Visually, the costumes, CGI, set design, and animatronics are top notch and spectacular. There is no arguing the level of attention, artistry and craftsmanship that went into making this film and bringing Maurice Sendak's creations to life, but that doesn't excuse what I felt was a slow, plodding narrative. I enjoyed the soundtrack (provided by Karen O. of the Yeah Yeah Yeahs and film industry veteran Carter Burwell), but rate the movie experience as average on the whole. I wanted to like this film a lot, but I just couldn't get past the annoying arguing monsters. I had plenty of this growing up with parents arguing incessantly and didn't want to relive it onscreen.

Definitely not one for the little ones, despite the cute-ish posters and juvenile literary origin, so be forewarned. Former kids may derive more entertainment value from this film than I did, however. This was just not for me.

don't forget your hankies and child psychology textbooks!
2009-11-22 - well--i absolutely loved it, and yes ma'am, i cried STREAMS throughout. the book made me sad when i was little too. i remember being very sad max had to leave the wild thing land and return to his ordinary room where he seemed so unhappy. it reminded me, stylistically, alot of the gene wilder "little prince" film from the seventies. (another book which DEVASTATED me when i was a little girl)

here is what i think. this film is an exploration of how children treat each other and how they are treated by adults. spike jonze is known for his alternating points of view, and sometimes the wild things and max interact like kids on a playground governing themselves, but most of the time the wild things are large , towering creatures, who loom over confused little max and talk about things he doesn't understand, vacillate wildly in their emotional state, treat him with inconsistent and unpredictable love, or ignore him, doing whatever they please, paying attention to him when they choose too. WHICH IS EXACTLY HOW ADULTS TREAT CHILDREN

there is an interesting thread about the K.W. "wild thing" character who has tumultuous relationship with the angry (yet sometimes gentle and talented) Carol "wild thing." their relationship is a prototype for an abusive mother-father dynamic. you have a "mother-protector" and a "father/friend." the "mom" keeps trying to leave the "dad" who is consumed by sorrow and rage- he is miserable, misunderstood, and deeply unhappy. her attempts to leave serve to make him increasingly destructive and angry, which just makes her want to leave him even more, despite their profound love for each other and flashbacks depicting both reminiscing of happier times. at 1 pt, K.W./"mom" brings home some of her new owl friends, who can do nothing but squawk wordlessly and squirm under her heavy arms- drawing her much-desired and needed affection & focus away from max and carol. i saw these two as metaphors for younger siblings entering "the nest"-another reviewer noted they could also be metaphors for what adult friends of parents seem like to kids... incomprehensible rivals for their parents' attention. there are oedipal overtones and an interesting "birth imagery" scene.

the "wild things" themselves- with their growls and roars and dog-like sleep "piles"- hearken back to an earlier evolutionary time, when man was less civilized and more an "animal" being. jonez uses them to comment on the hidden, oft-ignored animal nature inside us all.

the dialogue is simple and without flourish, and i think dave eggers was really trying to capture how four and five year olds speak, very directly, with little room for deception or nuance. max and the wild things speak directly about exactly how they feel, trying to learn how to govern their feelings and protect themselves, much in the way children do.

there is a joyless sorrow to this film- even when the wild things celebrate max's arrival to the island, there is always a menace and a fear permeating their fun. it mirrors the out of control world of the young human being , both an animal and a mental creature, both utterly dependent on others to sustain its life and yet possessed of it's own intense free will.

it's very metaphoric and symbolic and not really for children, unless you are a depressed, preternaturally intelligent child growing up in a dysfunctional or fractured family or with a general sense of unease. then you'll love it.

i'd also like to note the lack of CGI and wonderful sets and costumes and fantastic music make this artistically quite an enjoyable film, as does the absence of Disney grindingly cheerful, feel good rah-rah- ism and looking at childhood through some sort of ridiculous, distorted rose coloured lens. this is a real movie about a real child, giant jim henson puppets notwithstanding, and that child's very real emotional struggles.

there's a lot going on in this movie.

i enjoyed it. but bring some handkerchiefs!