Where the Wild Things Are - Don't take your kids.

Cyre2067

The Living Force
Just wanted to get this up - don't take your kids to this movie.

A brief synopsis from IMDB, highlighting some points:

Max (max records) is a young boy who feels misunderstood and wants to have fun all the time. After making a scene in front of his mother's boyfriend, He bites his mother and runs away.

What they left out of the IMDB symopsis was there's a really nasty scene where Max builds a snow fort and then has a snowball fight with his older sister's friends. They end up chasing him into the fort and then jump on it, destroying it, and Max pops out crying. That's like, the very very beginning, which really sets the tone for the rest of the movie.

He keeps running through a forest until he stumbles upon a small boat, he gets inside and sets sail. After a few days on the sea, he arrives on a strange island at night. He leaves the boat on shore and walks to where he hears voices in the woods.

Max eavesdrops on a few creatures arguing. One of them, Carol, is destroying the huts and screaming. The other wild things are yelling at him, telling him to stop, when Max runs out of the trees and joins in with Carol in destroying the huts. The wild things are angry about this and want to eat him, But Max tells them that he was the king from where he came from, and he has "special powers", so the wild things can't eat him. Carol then crowns him as the king of the wild things and the island, and claims that Max "Will be a truly great king".

Max's first order of business is to "let the wild rumpus start!" so the wild things and Max dance and run around the forest destroying things. The wild things introduce themselves, Ira, Carol, Douglas, The bull, Judith, and Alexander. Carol shows Max his "Kingdom" and shows him his secret hideaway, where has built a miniature of the island. Carol says "There should be a place, where only the things you want to happen, happen".

Max thinks with effort from all the wild things, they can build a place like that. Over the course of the next few days, Max and the wild things build a large fortress. Tension grows between Max and the wild things when Judith starts to think Max isn't a good king. They have a dirtball fight and many of the wild things get hurt.

K.W and Carol argue and K.W takes Max to see her friends "Terry and Bob", who turn out to be owls. They go back to the fortress and the wild things (minus Carol) greet them with open arms. Carol throws a fit and is angry that they are letting two outsiders into the group. KW runs away with Terry and Bob. Max and the wild things are sad, sitting in the rain.

Judith demands to see Max's "special powers" and wants KW to come back. The wild things discover Max isn't a king and that he has no powers. Carol is angry with Max, telling him he didn't keep everyone safe,and that he is an awful king. Max runs away with Carol pursuing him. KW hides max inside of her (she literally swallows him and hides him in her stomach) until Carol leaves. Max then decides its time to go home.

Things seem to be better when he and the wild things all go to the beach, where Max's boat is. Carol is in his secret hideaway crying, when he realizes he is being stupid and sees a heart with his initial that Max made for him, (like he made for Max on the fort earlier) he then runs to the beach. Max goes into his boat, is saying goodbye to the wild things and KW told him that she could eat him up because she loved him so much and then Carol finally runs in. Carol is unable to speak, and is crying so hard because now he realizes how much Max meant to him. Because Carol can't speak he decides to howl, remembering that Max had taught him that not long after they first met, when Max reminded all of the wild things how to have fun and the other wild things howl, and Max howls back. Max goes back home and his mother greets him with open arms and feeds him.

Wah wah wah :cry: :cry: :cry:- Basically this movie is a HUGE Downer. Honestly when I went to see it I was already feeling a bit low, and I was hoping for a light & fluffy kids movie to help me cheer up. Didn't get that at all, in fact I felt worse after leaving the theater. I also heard some kids crying at various parts, other's asking their parents why everyone was so upset. I cannot believe this movie is being touted as a kids movie, it deals with some heavy issues on a subtle level including emotional abuse & neglect, dissociation, YCYOR, & domestic abuse.

As you can see from the above synopsis, there's a lot of conflict, a lot of tension, sadness and overall bad-vibes throughout the film, it's not something I'd taken young children to see, and I myself really didn't enjoy it. Granted the visuals were pretty impressive, the monsters were stunning and the acting well done. Just taken with the heavy subject matter, and the 'blah' feeling it leaves you with I would not recommend this movie.
 
I came across this interview with the author and the filmmaker:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/books/interview-with-maurice-sendak/article1324599/

A wild ride

Jake Coyle

New York — Associated Press Published on Thursday, Oct. 15, 2009 10:03AM EDT Last updated on Thursday, Oct. 15, 2009 4:39PM EDT

About the hoopla surrounding the film adaptation of Where the Wild Things Are, Maurice Sendak is characteristically gruff.

“I kind of want it over,” he said. “I'm not used to this invasion.”

But that speaks more to the 81-year-old author's fondness for privacy and quiet than his feelings about Spike Jonze's film, co-written by David Eggers. In a recent phone interview from his home in Ridgefield, Conn., Mr. Sendak said he considers both Mr. Eggers and Mr. Jonze to be good friends, and believes the director has done a “spectacular” job with his most famous work.

The movie is a long time coming. Mr. Sendak originally co-founded a production company in the mid-'90s. Two directors earlier tried their hand at adapting the book, but their visions didn't impress. And it took Mr. Jonze years to finish his Wild Things, a process all the more arduous because of widely reported arguments with the studio, Warner Bros., which wanted a lighter approach.

“The people I dislike, I've never gotten to meet, so I can't say anything bad about them,” says Mr. Sendak. “And they're all in Hollywood, where they belong.”

The beloved illustrator has always had a complicated relationship with Wild Things. When it was published in 1963, Mr. Sendak, a son of Jewish immigrants, was an up-and-coming children's book author. His life was irrevocably changed by the success of the book.

It won the prestigious Caldecott Medal and has since sold more than 10 million copies. The story of Max, a misbehaving boy clad in a white wolf suit who's sent to his room that soon grows into a forest, resonated with children — an impact all the more remarkable because it was done in just 10 sentences. But as much as it elevated Mr. Sendak, it also overshadowed much of what he's done since. He's not only written other classic children's books like In the Night Kitchen and Higglety Pigglety Pop! but also collaborated on operas (Mozart's “The Magic Flute” with director Frank Corsaro, “Brundibar” with playwright Tony Kushner), illustrated adult books (Herman Melville's Pierre) and co-founded the Night Kitchen Theatre.

Mr. Sendak says he no longer feels tied to Wild Things.

“At one time, that was a bitter, bitter pill. It no longer is,” says Mr. Sendak. “ Where the Wild Things Are is no longer an enemy. It's now Spike Jonze's and lots of nice people who have become friends.”

Wild Things caused quite a stir in its day. It was revolutionary in its honesty about childhood: Max misbehaves and his mother loses her temper. The Wild Things, based on Mr. Sendak's aggressively affectionate relatives, scared some children. For a time, many libraries refused to stock the book.

Max, Mr. Sendak says, “wouldn't be invited to Winnie the Pooh's house — and if he had been, he wouldn't have gone.”

Much in Wild Things can be found throughout Mr. Sendak's work: the power of the imagination, the always looming threats of childhood. Mr. Sendak urged Mr. Jonze to remember those qualities.

“I advised him to make more mischief, and he made more than most,” says Mr. Sendak. “In plain terms, a child is a complicated creature who can drive you crazy. There's a cruelty to childhood, there's an anger. And I did not want to reduce Max to the trite image of the good little boy that you find in too many books.”

Mr. Sendak clearly sees something of himself in Mr. Jonze — he notes Mr. Jonze made the movie at roughly the same age he wrote the book: his early 30s. Mr. Jonze has also made a moving, intimate documentary of Mr. Sendak, Tell Them Anything You Want.

“Maurice was our sort of mentor in this whole thing,” said Mr. Jonze. “He was the one person that I really wanted to please. The thing that's so great about him is he wanted me, early on he said, ‘You need to make this your own. Don't worry about me, don't worry about the book, don't worry about what anyone else expects. You have to just make something bold and not pander to children and make something that's as dangerous for its time as the book was in its time.”'

Whatever the problems of children's literature, they're probably worse for children's movies. Mr. Sendak says you'd never “catch me at a kiddie movie.”

Instead, he credits Europe for producing films faithful to childhood, like Francois Truffaut's The 400 Blows and Lasse Hallstrom's My Life as a Dog.

“They broke that sound barrier a long time ago,” said Mr. Sendak. “We've always been the prissy country.”

Speaking with Mr. Sendak, it quickly becomes apparent how much he simply feels — how deep his passions run for writing, for children, for those close to him. In recent years, he's lost several very good friends — “like leaves falling off trees” — including his longtime partner, Dr. Eugene Glynn.

“I could not read, nor hear music,” says Mr. Sendak. “Grief completely overwhelmed me.”

His brother Jack and sister Natalie — perhaps the two people most important in forging Mr. Sendak's creative life — are also gone now. Mr. Sendak recalls his own childhood as sickly and unlooked-after, but extremely lucky for his siblings. Jack, older by five years, often created things — drawings, toys — with his younger brother, sitting with him while he was sick in bed.

“I will never get over their loss,” says Mr. Sendak. “I don't want to get over their loss.”

But just a week earlier, Mr. Sendak says, he began to come out of his depression. It started by picking up Great Expectations by Charles Dickens, one of his great loves, and was followed by listening to Mozart's “Don Giovanni.”

“I'm coming back to life — and the movie of Wild Things and everything is life-enhancing,” says the author. “One looks for signs and symptoms of what is good and what is bad, what is pulling you down and what is holding it up. It's Mozart, but I haven't listened to him carefully for a long time. Now he's back in my life with a vengeance. ... And there's Charles Dickens.”

Mr. Sendak has two books in the works — the “old thrill” is back, he says. One is, at this point, purely text and a tribute to his brother. The other is illustrated and about a boy who “unfortunately for him happened to look like and be a pig.”

Max, of Wild Things, would at this point be around 50. Mr. Sendak has previously joked that he imagines him still living with his mother and in therapy. He notes, though, that he's perfectly free to revise that vision.

“If I had a preference, he would be an artist,” says Mr. Sendak. “He would be an artist and it could be in any profession — in painting, in illustrating, in writing, in music. Oh, God, if he were a great pianist, I would be so happy!”

There's a second interview here: http://www.nycgo.com/?event=view.article&id=206419

It seems that Sendak wasn't interested in making a movie for kids.
 
Thank you for your post. Am acquaintance went to see the movie and gave a similar review. She too noted its beautiful visuals and slow pace (which is rare now in movies, everything always moves fast), but said the subject matter is definitely not for kids.

The original book is a favorite in our house, and I wouldn't say it's "light and fluffy" either. Still, it's main ideas, I always thought, were the power of child's imagination, including for psychological healing, and the comfort and safety of ultimate unconditional acceptance by a parental figure.

The movie appears to be about something completely different. The idea my acquaintance got out of it was that it is wrong, in a face of adversity, to treat children as perpetually immature beings. Otherwise they grow up just that, clueless and immature, and never learn to understand non-verbal language of distress of another, let alone do something about it. The other idea is that eventually they'll have to go out into the world, interact with others and figure out how much responsibility to take for them -- figure out all by themselves.

This is, IMO, pretty heavy for a child audience, by may be appreciated by a thoughtful parent. I will probably skip, because it always irks me when a movie adaptation change the book so much as to make its spirit unrecognizable. OSIT.
 
We saw it yesterday and we really liked it. It is definitely not a movie for kids. We actually thought it was pretty close to the book (Max misbehaves, runs away, discovers the island, stays there for a while, becomes the wild things' king and comes back to his house/mum at the end). The time spent on the island where the wild things are is extended compared to the book (well, otherwise, you would basically have a 10 minute movie, since the book is so short). And that's where people begin not to like it, i guess: Max is among monsters and they behave as such. But interestingly, they behave so when they are pushed by Max to do so.

To us, it was clear that the monsters are different facets of Max: the one who feels he is not understood, one whose anger destroys everything around him, one who is never happy, one who is unsure of himself. And it's only through his interactions with these monsters/facets that he understands his behaviour, his violence. A lot of the things he tells Carol (the angry monster), are in fact what his own mother tells him ('you're out of control', etc.). And although he is fond of these monsters, he understands that he needs to leave them behind, because, ultimately, they destroy everything around them. He understands that he is not a king, not the center of the world, but a small boy.

I think it was beautiful, not only visually, but also in its message: violent behaviour hurts people around us but also oneself. It's about introspection and facing one's anger. I did not think it was a downer at all.
Just my thoughts, anyway..
 
Just a thought about Islands. . .

It's interesting that this movie should come out now when the series, "Lost" is going through its final motions.

I haven't seen the "Wild Things" film yet, but now I might. (I just read the book again a few weeks ago).

It sounds like there are a lot of similar themes going on here when compared to the other big island story currently broadcasting into the Western psyche, "Lost". --Those themes include magic and altered states of awareness, anger, fear and love and trust issues. . . Leadership and violence, escapism and identity crisis. Which I suppose are common themes in any story, but they appear to be singularly focused on with great specificity in both of these tales. Whenever things line up like this, I can't help but think that something is up or that some facet of human consciousness is revealing itself somehow.

Hmm.

I took a look at a couple of other Island films when exploring the idea of recurring patterns. (My thought was that since everybody is on a recurring loop, and that expressive projects allow a sort of 'hand-writing analysis' of the people behind those projects, that one could gain some insights through this. With "Lost" fresh in mind, (after a friend played much of the series for me over a long week-end), I took a look at, "Joe v.s. the Volcano" and "Castaway". --Both Tom Hanks films made at two points 10 years apart on his personal cycle, both involving islands and both dealing with very similar themes. (Basically both "Joe" and "Castaway" are the same film at the soul, but completely different on the surface, if that makes any sense. I found them helpful to look at, anyway, in determining how life repeats almost exactly on a cycle, but all the landmarks dress themselves differently, and the various emotional potentials adjust themselves to express across the spectrum of available people.)

Sorry. These are just some drifty thoughts. I'll have to watch the "Wild Things" film when I get some clear time in order to contribute properly. Right now it's just a fog of, "Hmmm! Interesting! I wonder what it all means?"

Cheers!
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom