I really dug Where the Wild Things Are.I’ve seen it twice.I love it when there’s a lot of hype about a movie and it still turns out to exceed expectations. Of course, I can only speak for myself.
A lot of my friends and random people I’ve talked to (and that sourpuss film critic from Salon.com who is utterly committed to never liking anything good as long as anyone else likes it) said they thought it was “alright” or just plain bad. Some of you people are probably even reading this right now, so I’ll try to be delicate.
I didn’t think it was sad. At least, no more than being a kid is sad. I guess if you didn’t grow up in a broken home, you might think that Max’s outlook on life was sort of bleak, and his reactions somewhat tough. I thought they were portrayed pretty accurately.
As for Max leaving the monsters on the island without solving any of their problems? Not sad. They were figments of his imagination, so you can only feel so sorry for them. At most, they were manifestations of different parts of his underdeveloped emotional makeup. He abandoned them at the end, because he realized it was time to leave them behind and grow up.
So he left behind his made-up, fucked up family and went back to his real, fucked up family. And the smile he gives his sleeping mom at the end says it all: utter love and acceptance for her flaws and her inability to be perfect for him all the time. That was the moment when Max realized that his mom was just a person too, and that she was simply doing her best to love him, just as he is. That brief moment spoke to the pivotal instant in childhood when we all grow up, suddenly.
Aside from all the emotional analysis, that kid was a pretty spectacular little actor. And the sets, music, cinematography et al were all just so well done. And different. It’s so nice to see a movie that doesn’t try too hard to be like other movies, but also doesn’t try to so hard to be different that it’s dull and endless.
I thought it was spot on.
I had the luck to see the movie after a long separation from having read the book. then a student brought the book in – & I was even more impressed by Spike Jonze’s interpretation of Maurice Sendak’s original work.
the key word is interpretation.
the book is very vague – which is why it appealed to so many people.
Spike Jonze added more detail which only thins down the audience that is connected to the subjects, and widens the door for opinions from all spectrums.
maybe all of us should look deeper into the bigger picture rather than just throwing out an opinion and closing off others from being allowed to have thier’s – without judgement, ownership, or righteousness.
we can start with movies & then see how well that same philosophy might pertain elsewhere.
just thoughts.
I have to admit, I was left feeling unsure about how I felt about the movie when I initially walked out of the theatre.
I, too, had a memory of the book….and was interested to see how my own memory had misled me (yet again).
I was also one of the few people (at least in my circles) that loved this movie. I thought it was gorgeous and creative and so so awesome. In fact, I think I may go watch it again. 🙂