Where The Wild Things Are, Thoughts on the new movie

I'd call this a very difficult movie. Personally I didn't like it much at all. Beautifully done, I'll grant you. But dark and gloomy and depressing. I went with a 17-year old. She thought it was a downer. I can't imagine taking younger children to see it - I think they'd find it boring. I kept hoping it would end. And the characters were all dysfunctional. But then, I didn't like "Up" much either.

Maybe if you're in a happy place this movie would make you remember that times aren't always good and your happiness could be enhanced by recalling how far you've come. But if you're not, well, you might just end up feeling poorer and sadder by the end of this movie. I know I did.

Peace,
Suzdal

P.S. I'm really curious to see how others of my associates found this film.

Is this related to the picture book by Maurice Sendak?

I mean, they didn't make a movie out of that magic book, did they? Tell me they didn't!


edit: Oh, okay. They did. ARGH.

Thank you for the review. I was looking forward to seeing it since I loved the book so much. I'd seen a review by Media Max on the Today Show, and she loved it. But I don't like down movies. :(

Rotten Tomatoes has it running at about 68%. Maybe it's only me. I'd really like on of my associates to chime in here because sometimes I miss true wonder the first time around. That was the case with "Napoleon Dynamite" - I didn't appreciate the movie until the second viewing. But words like "bleak" and "regret" have been rolling trippingly off my tongue today. I just don't dare go see it again. Don't let me rain on your parade, Arcadia-ji. It just might have hit me where I'm particularly vulnerable.

Peace,
Suzdal

You beat me to it, Suzdal. Visually, it was stunning. Otherwise it was one of the most relentlessly depressing movies I've ever seen. And it ended with a sense of futility rather than resolution. The characters felt lonely, rejected, abandoned, a sense of not belonging anywhere, general unhappiness, discontent, helplessness, and other emotional pain. They responded by lashing out with a variety of angry words and destructive actions. They continued to push away the people they most want to keep close until there was no possible happy ending. It was just unending, hopeless misery until the credits rolled. Once it was over, I had a really hard time shaking it.

Then again, I'm battling my own depression and hopelessness, so it could be me. Although, it seemed really clear to me that one of the main messages of the movie was that no matter who promises that they will take away sadness and loneliness, sadness and loneliness will always be lurking just under the surface of whatever happiness you are able to find. Another message could be that family is family and will always be there regardless of how dysfunctional and miserable those interactions are.

Either way, it's not the Where The Wild Things Are that I grew up loving.

Where the Wild Things Are always was a sort of a delightful cautionary tale--but cautionary none the less.

Its been a long time on this one, but isn't the theme supposed to be: its okay to be angry, its okay to hang out with the wild things, so long as you come back when its all over. And home where somebody loves you is not such a bad place after all?

Well, no surprise then the movie turned out like it did check out the screen writer they picked--authors with agendas---

I'd say he lacks.

Lacks in the quiet things of the heart. Lacks in the softness childhood has. Lacks in the empathy the experience of tragedy can bring.


The Little Prince always makes me bawl my eyes out.

The Mouse and His Child stayed with me for years and years.

Velveteen Rabbit... the examples are endless.

Tragedy for reason. Mixed feelings at the end. Even this theme is okay IHMO for children's stories:

But stories like these need a certain elegance of truth to them. Even small children can feel that, even when its beyond their personal experience. I never thought this particular story had that to start with--but it seems they went even further afield that that!

I didn't see it. But starwoman took 6-year-old stargirl to see it. I can't speak to the details, but starwoman liked it very much. She wants to see it again, which is rare for her. In fact, I don't remember the last time she had such a strong reaction to a movie. She is a big Sendak fan, I should mention. Though she mentioned that liberties were taken. One of the things that she found powerful about the film was a lot of "raw emotion" (her term). She thought Gandolfini was very good. Stargirl seemed to like it OK, though a few parts were "scary". I'm guessing, but I think she would have given it a 5 or 6, if she was up to rating movies. Which she isn't.

I have a vague memory of having read the book sometime in the dim and distant past. I can't even remember whether or not I liked it.

It's a popular book in our household.

star-ji:

Thanks for the report. As I said, it might have a lot to do with how happy/unhappy one is. I was hoping for more rainbows and sunshine. The emotion was raw indeed. Just too skewed toward negative raw emotions. I could have used a little more raw love and raw happiness.

I'm with Bet-ji. "I'm battling my own depression and hopelessness, so it could be me." I need explorations into an unhappy mind to get someplace happier. Maybe it is just me. I certainly appreciate starwoman's response.

Peace,
Suzdal

I love the book and so did our children, but the trailers of the movie that I have seen have not compelled me to go, and it is hard to see how they could make a movie of that slender book without adding a lot of stuff that wasnt really in Sendak's mind. I always thought it was the kind of story that enabled small children to permit themselves to feel powerful emotions, to be powerful, and to indulge their great curiosity and sense of adventure and exploration, while at the same time knowing they are safely loved. It never seemed to be me to be about regret, rejection and loss. I always had a very upbeat feeling about it.
It sounds as if the viewer's response depends on their emotional states when viewing.
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs is also a slight but lovely book, and the movie had to elaborate and embroider quite a lot to achieve a viewable length. It isn't a whole lot like the book but we enjoyed it. Entertainment with a message you can take home with you, as Lily Sabina once said.

This is good to know. I've gotten quite wary of "beloved children's books" that are made into movies. Although I've never read the once most recently movie-ized, I found the movies themselves to be quite depressing and don't understand how, if they actually were faithful to the original source (a debatable point), they could have been beloved.

Bridge to Terebithia -- I missed most of it, but it looks like the whole thing was an imaginative boy's fantasy, and he actually brought his kid sister into his imagination. It wasn't real, was it? It was just a fantasy?

Pan's Labyrinth -- ghastly, I thought.

Or am I just an old grouch?

Pan's Labyrinth...I rented the unrated version. Regret, regret...intolerably violent.

I really didn't like it. My priest and his wife loved it. It represented some kind of redemption, martyrdom, Christian sacrifice...who knows what they saw in it. They have no children though. I had a child about the age of the protagonist and an infant in my house at the time. No two second shiny ending can balance out a couple of hour's worth of despair and senseless violence.

I've been debating whether to go see "Where the Wild Things Are" and you guys certainly haven't helped me make up my mind!

It sounds to me that, like "Bridge to Tarabitha" and "Pan's Labyrinth", it's a movie about childhood, but not a movie intentionally designed for children to see. I think one could consider these films to be examples of a particular genre of film making, although I don't know of any formal name for it. Certainly "depressing" is one good description for it. :(

Considering the setting, I don't know what else you were expecting.


I thought it was a brilliant film. I must make time to rent it again sometime.