Salt Lake Tribune Review
There's no question "Where the Wild Things Are" is a beautiful and heart-touching movie. Director
Spike Jonze, co-writing with novelist
Dave Eggers, adapts
Maurice Sendak's classic children's book to take an insightful look into a small boy's imagination -- the most adventurous place there is.
The question comes in figuring out whether this movie about children should be watched by children.
The movie is rated PG, but that only indicates there's nothing in it that's inappropriate for young children. Nothing in the MPAA's rating system discusses whether a movie is appropriate for children. If ever there were a movie where the words "parental guidance" should be taken seriously, it's this one.
Certainly kids will thrill to the scenes in which 10-year-old Max (played by
Max Records), dressed in a furry wolf costume, sails the wide sea to the land of the Wild Things. They'll smile knowingly when Max meets the Wild Things: the suspicious Judith (voiced by Catherine O'Hara), the meek goat Alexander (voiced by
Paul Dano), the lovable KW (voiced by
Lauren Ambrose) and particularly the hypersensitive Carol (voiced by
James Gandolfini), whose creativity and hot temper match Max's. And they'll laugh when Max is crowned king and commands, "Let the wild rumpus start!"
But kids may have a harder time watching Max's real world: being ignored by his teen sister (Pepita Emmerichs), or crying because his sister's friends destroyed the igloo he built in the front yard, or fearful when his teacher describes how the sun will someday burn out, or angry and jealous when Mom (
Catherine Keener) is giving attention to a new man (
Mark Ruffalo). It's this raw anger that prompts Max to run out of the house and into the Wild Things' world.
For kids, these domestic scenes may hit too close to home, and be too emotionally raw to be entertaining. Asking kids to watch these moments -- reliving on film the worst experiences of real life -- could be like asking a laid-off auto worker to watch
Michael Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story."
On the other hand, kids will also meet a boy who's just like them.
Max Records is an astonishing find, a boy who goes through all of Max's wild emotions -- from fear to anger to joy -- in a completely authentic way, without a trace of staginess or self-consciousness.
For grown-ups, Jonze's exploration of Max's imaginary world is a wonder. Jonze hired Jim Henson's Creature Shop to build tactile versions of Sendak's magical drawings (augmented with computer graphics for eyes and mouths). This approach puts the Wild Things in a world as real to us as they are to Max. And being in a real world means the Wild Things' community has the same problems as our world: misunderstandings, arguments and anger.
"Where the Wild Things Are" would best be seen by parents and children together. Children can lead the adults into the world of the imagination. When things get dicey, though, parents can guide their children safely back home.
-- Sean P. Means
What a boring waste of time.
Submitted by: McLovin2
I can't remember the last time I looked at my watch so many times hoping that this get over with soon. If you like watching a whiny kid have tantrums and his whiny fantasy friends have tantrums then this movie is for you. I'm glad it was only a dollar movie.
Excellent
Submitted by: AlwaysRight
One of the most moving and emotionally compelling movies of the year. Perfectly captures the angst of an adolescent boy trying to come to terms with his anger over the loss of a parent. If you think this movie is about a boy destroying things with a bunch of monsters, then you missed the point.
Lousy
Submitted by: Zovox
Terrible movie. Don't waste your time or you poor little ones time! By the way, the Trib reviewer, Sean Means, rated this higher than Avatar... He must have tenure...
Unexpectedly Dissappointing!!
Submitted by: mom of 2 girls
I ultimately made the decision to take my little girls to see this film based on the culmination of reviews I read, yet now wish I hadn't. This film ruined the charm we felt over the lovely Maurice Sendak book of the same title. (I'm actually surprised that he was a co-producer on this film. And I wonder if he was ultimately happy with the outcome.) Where I disagree with Sean is in which elements of the film were the most damaging to a child's sensibilities. I don't think the scenes where Max is treated unfairly at home are anything out of the ordinary for normal children. The film tries to show that somehow Max is different. He is the product of a split family (not so different from many), his sister is heartless (not so unusual for many siblings), he has a temper problem etc. Yet, Max does have a very loving mother. And the fact that he is so bent out of shape over other compounding events (his teacher's declaration that the sun will burn up some day, or the fact that his mother offers him frozen instead of fresh corn for dinner) that he decides to bite his mother, scream at her and run away from home, only goes to show Max's profound immaturity, selfishness, and lack of self control. We can all understand the mercurial dispositions of childhood with their many ups and downs, tears and fears, ebbs and sways. What I find difficult to understand is why Spike Jonze attributed such violent, evil insinuations, cruel words and behaviors to the "wild" characters Max meets on his journey. The incorporation of these elements was absolute over-kill. It ruined the book for our family. This film was not at all what I expected. Not even close. It intertwines violence and sentimentality in disturbing ways. I kept feeling that it was a inept attempt to portray the importance of meaningful relationships in our lives despite the fact that sometimes they may be difficult to attain. (And despite the fact that we all have "dysfunctional" families.) Yet the ways this was shown seemed unnecessary to me, not something my children relate with. These adult themes are not appropriate for children who have been raised in loving, respectful homes and who are not accustomed to encountering these types of selfish, angry, juvenile forms of communication. We don't treat our children (or each other) this way, and though they will most surely encounter others in their lives who do, there is plenty of time for them to discover the juvenile imperfections of human beings and life's sometimes depressing nature at a later date. Bottom Line: If you want your child to have a wonderful imaginary experience that will lift, amaze and transport them, don't take them to see this particular film. It simply doesn't offer the kind of entertainment I was hoping to give my children. And to the reviewer in the comments section who felt that this film would encourage children to "think" instead of being mindless, and who said, "It's entirely appropriate for children, unless you think your children are idiots," I reply that my children are very intelligent, artistic, cognitively-mindful people, who ask many questions, are open to life's complexities and have an innate understanding that they are cherished. They didn't enjoy the film. They went hoping to feel joyful, but came home feeling depressed.
Where the wild kid is
Submitted by: finnegan
We have had the book in our home for years. Since the story line is so vague in the book (people mostly buy it for the pitures with the interesting looking creatures), I wondered how the storyline would go in the movie. In the end, I was quite disappointed. We rate movies among family members, and I gave it a 3 out of 10. The only movies that get below a 4 for me are the ones that make me angry for wasting my time and wasting my money. The only other move for me to get a 3 in the last 10 years was Paul Blart Mall Cop.
The producers did an interesting job of making you not hate the kid (who is a brat in the book), but he is difficult to relate to and the end comes so abruptly, that it is difficult to see any major change of heart for this kid. For his mother to sit and watch him with great admiration at the very end, after his abuse towards her earlier in the movie, pretty much sealed the deal for me. Hated it!!!
The rundown: Spike Jonze adapts
Maurice Sendak's children's book into a thoughtful look at the imagination of a boy (
Max Records) that's more for adults than children. 104 minutes. (SPM)
Synopsis: The adventures of a young boy named Max who, after being sent to bed for misbehaving, imagines that he sails away to where the wild things are. Max is loved by the wild creatures who make him their King, though he soon longs to be back home with his family.
( 5 reviews )
To jrn (and, a bit, to DrGT):
So you missed the part where I wrote "Jonze's exploration of Max's imaginary world is a wonder." And the part where I praised Max Records as "an astonishing find, a boy who goes through all of Max's wild emotions -- from fear to anger to joy -- in a completely authentic way, without a trace of staginess or self-consciousness."
You also missed the point in the discussion of the movie's appropriateness for young viewers. I do not think children are idiots; on the contrary, they are usually more aware and intuitive than other viewers.
It has been my experience as a movie critic, though, that some parents are idiots about children's movies. They think of children's movies as the electronic babysitter, to be left on so the parents can be engaged elsewhere.
"Where the Wild Things Are" doesn't work that way — it is a movie that should be a shared experience, so parents can experience the authentic emotions of childhood that they may have forgotten.
I never said kids shouldn't see "Where the Wild Things Are." I only said the emotions are real and honest, and parents should be there for their children.
Read the last paragraph again: "'Where the Wild Things Are' would best be seen by parents and children together. Children can lead the adults into the world of the imagination. When things get dicey, though, parents can guide their children safely back home."
Sincerely,
Sean P. Means
[ Report Abuse ]