I really like it too actually and it’s quite touching.
Well I wasn’t too big a fan of the cinematography as regards the camera movement, there was one shot especially where the camera was obviously purposefully shaking back and forth like the cameraman saying “No”, but otherwise I did, indeed, like this movie a lot. I saw it more as a movie about child rage than the escapist movie most people, even the indie kids, wanted. It was sort of funny but when I was leaving the theatre one guy was complaining, “Hey, there weren’t any Arcade Fire songs in the actual movie! I think it would have been better just to watch the commercial over and over for an hour and a half!”
When I left there was an immediate disagreement among me and my friends, I was the only one who seemed to really like it. A lot of people found Max annoying and again, the cinematography didn’t help. But I remember when I would get into dirt clod fights that turned out exactly like the dirt clod fights in this movie… always the one kid who got hit and would yell about, “I said pause! I don’t want to play anymore!” and how sleepovers would turn into arguments like Max has with the Wild Things… I think a lot of the characters in this movie are very real, when viewed from a child’s perspective.
I think the same about Bridge to Terabithia, both movies made me feel like if I was the kid in the movie like I was a kid in real life, I would have reacted and done the same sort of things. It’s also similar to how I felt about Tideland , where I don’t think I would have done the same things or perceived the world in the same way, but from the perspective of my childhood I can understand Jeliza’s character a lot.
In the end, Where the Wild Things Are actually got criticized for being “a cerebral kid’s movie”. Ah well.
—PolarisDiB
I loved it (although I’m not sure I’d say it’s underrated). I may not have been a giant box office success but it got generally positive reviews and made several critics’ top ten lists.
For me, it was my favorite film from 2009 (in addition to Antichrist and The White Ribbon), which is saying something because there were sooooo many great films that year. I don’t know – it just struck an emotional chord that no film ever has with me. Everything was perfect – the tone, the acting, the cinematography, the music. I’ve talked to plenty of people who found it annoying and phoney but that sucks for them because they missed out on a wonderful cinema experience.
Santino, I agree. It captured the experience of being a child. I think people don’t like movies that may make their children talk and play even more. Heaven forbid we should have something better than Unaccompanied Minors at the theatre.
Exactly! It completely encapsulated what it feels like to be a child. People who thought Max was an unsympathetic brat must’ve had a pretty rosey childhood.
OK, if I’m raining on the parade just let me know, but I wanted to offer some dissenting opinions. First of all, I didn’t think this was a bad film, and I was quite enthusiastic about seeing this. I want to comment on something DiB said:
In the end, Where the Wild Things Are actually got criticized for being “a cerebral kid’s movie”. Ah well
I had two main criticisms that relate to the quote above:
>I thought the psychological aspects of the film were a little too pseudo-psychoanalytic and a little too explicit. I’ve been reading the book to my children now, and I have to say that I prefer the book, mainly because it doesn’t really try to explain very much at all, and because of that, there’s a kind of mystery, magic and power to the book. Now, I like the concept and direction the filmmakers took—reading the book, I think the idea of exploring the issues in the book have merit. I just thought the filmmakers were a little too explict and a little too clinical (maybe, too pat). The book sort of deals with some of these dark issues, but does so through a story and images; here the filmmakers move toward more psychologist-speak. I just wished they stuck more with the former.
>In a way, I thought pre-teens or younger teenagers would be best able to appreciate the film. That’s not a bad thing, but it would’ve been interesting to make an adaptation that would resonate with elementary aged children (say, 6-9 year olds).
On a positive note, I loved the costumes and I loved the look of the film. I didn’t mind the dark elements of the film, and I didn’t think Max was a brat. I have a son who is not unlike Max.
I loved this film too, although I think it has some significant flaws. There are segments of it that do feel a bit too music video-y, and I love Karen O’s music but I think the film sometimes uses it as a crutch. I agree that it is one of the few films to really capture what it’s like to be a child (The Tree of Life is another), especially the darker sides of childhood (in this way it’s almost an anti-ET). I don’t really think it works as a kid’s movie, because it doesn’t offer much escapism (in that way it is inferior to the book, but I think it’s a little silly to compare the two).
“here the filmmakers move toward more psychologist-speak.”
I don’t remember that anywhere in the movie, where is psychologist-speak?
I couldn’t say who this movie is for, really. I could see kids enjoying it and hating it, teenagers enjoying it and hating it, and so on. I think it works for a particular mindset, I don’t want to make it seem too banal, but either the Eggers fans or future Eggers fans of the world. Those that like to confront their own confusion.
—PolarisDiB
yea, really great. good vibe.
@DiB
Well, “psychologist-speak” is not entirely what I meant. (I was fumbling to articulate what I meant.) My memory is now hazy, but I looked over some comments I made about the film. I think I felt there was some child psychologist consulting the film or that the filmmakers had a read a bunch of books on child psychology and translated some of those ideas in the film. That’s not necessarily bad, but the handling of it seems a bit…I don’t know obvious, blatant, etc.? For example, I thought one of the obvious “messages” or “lessons” that Max learns is that being the parent is difficult—having the responsibility, but not all the answers or resources. As I recall, this is the lesson that Max seems to learn. There’s also a little more too much fleshing out of the idea of using the wild things as manifestations of darker impulses in Max (or human beings in general). This kind of use of symbols and metaphors seemed to lack subtlety (if I remember correctly).
I think a lot of that derives from Dave Eggers’ self-awareness (sometimes considered self-involvement, depending on the critical perspective). As an adult he probably intellectualizes his memories of being a child like many adults do, but I see in Eggers’ writing a sort of “This is my relationship laid bare,” and in this case his relationship to the book is probably one of familiarity he has with theme that you state funneled through his memories of childhood. I think you got the theme right, I do not know if I agree with the child psychologist vibe of it. I do not discount or disagree with what you are saying, though.
—PolarisDiB
Adam Bishop
This is one of my favorite films! When the time came it got little of the recognition it deserved.