Where the Wild Things Are

[BlackCatWhiteCat]

Sadly I have NOT seen this yet, but it is one of the handful of movies this year that has made me actively want to get out and see it in theaters.

I'm not going to see this movie just because I read the book a lot. I did, as a child, and then was begged to read it constantly when I was a daycare worker. It's only ten sentences long, but speaks a much deeper story than could be accomplished no matter how many more words one was to add. This both makes me both cautious and uncontrollably intrigued by the idea of someone making it into a movie. The fact that it is an unconventional movie and so very gorgeous only makes me more interested.

Have any of you seen this yet? What did you think? Not going to see it? Why not?

[PoolMan]

I saw (and really enjoyed) WTWTA. I wasn't raised on it though - I remember it vaguely from when I was a kid, but it was never sacred to me.

I have read the book since, and it's true the movie is a huge extrapolation. However, I think it's a very, very good one. The wild things are all extensions of Max's personality or life, and seeing how he reacts to his own aggression, logic, etc is very interesting.

But it retains (and perhaps expands upon?) that heart of the story - that childhood is not only wild fun, but emotionally exhausting confusion and disappointment. The scene where Max's snow fort is crushed under the feet of invading teenagers almost made me cry.

Anyway, I'd totally recommend it, but I can't do it from the point of view of a lifelong fan.

[BlackCatWhiteCat]

I see that this is playing at the Naval Air Station closest to us on Saturday. The military movie theaters provide free admission, so it's time for me to see this already!

I don't think it will matter, Pooly, whether or not one has been a longtime fan of the book. I think it would be pretty difficult not to do justice to ten sentences and, from what you've said, it really sounds like it not only did justice but really expanded on the story for the better. I love the idea of the monsters being bits of Max's personality.

[TheOogieBoogieMan]

Eh, I really didn't like WTWTA. It had its moments (and it certainly looks good), but I found it to be long-winded and unsettling.

PARAGRAPH WHERE I ELABORATE: SKIP IF YOU LIKE
The psychological bent was muddled and awkward, to the point where I didn't even realize there was supposed to be a psychological bent to the movie when I first saw it; I had to read up on what was supposed to be going on later that evening. What each of the wild things is supposed to represent is never really clear (Carol, the main wild thing, is supposed to represent Max, but at the same time, Carol's relationship with a lady-wild thing represents his father and mother's divorce? What about the others? And why is the mother's boyfriend represented by two owls?), and there's no moral or life lesson or overall point to the wild things representing Max/Max's life. Nothing is learned from it.

The end result was a bipolar movie that is whimsical one moment and really bitter and hostile the next.

But, hey, if you get to see it for free, knock yourself out, Bacca.

[No Smoking]

I also haven't seen this. I am legitimately anticipating it to suck. But then, I don't want a movie where the kid is friends with the monsters. The way I remember it, the original book was about the monsters trying to ... well, someone suggested to me that they wanted to eat the boy. That's the movie I want to see. What the trailer looked like to me is too typical of most of these family fantasy adventure movies of the last 5 or so years. They think they're the new 80's. They're wrong. And... James Gandolfini? I can't stand that guy.