Review: Where the Wild Things Are
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Warner Brothers, Theatrical Reviews, Family Films

Next to the table of contents in the new book Heads On and Then We Shoot: The Making of Where the Wild Things Are, there's a list of songs that Spike Jonze says were influential and inspirational in the making of his adaptation of Maurice Sendak's children's classic. Among them are plenty of melancholy mood pieces, including The Smiths' "Cemetry Gates," "Maps" by Yeah Yeah Yeahs, whose lead singer composed original tunes for the film, and perhaps most obviously, Arcade Fire's "Wake Up," which ultimately appeared in Wild Things' theatrical trailer. But in my opinion, the most telling track included on that list was Langley Schools Music Project's devastating cover of The Beach Boys "God Only Knows" sung by a chorus of Canadian schoolchildren in the late 1970s, it captures the deeper sentiment of desperation and loneliness in Brian Wilson's lyrics even as it reverberates with the naïve, wholesome enthusiasm of voices unfamiliar with real heartbreak.
In the best possible way, Jonze's film also harnesses that contradiction: it feels like a grown-up story told by kids, where all of its emotional weight is buried in the story or otherwise ignored because nobody seems to know better than to emphasize it. Bereft of nostalgia, much less a cinematic style that lends itself easily to conventional spectacle, Spike Jonze brings Where the Wild Things Are to life in a way that no one could have possibly expected, but thankfully in one better than they could have ever imagined.
The film stars newcomer Max Records as Max, a sensitive, creative kid who's adjusting uneasily to his parents' divorce. After throwing a temper tantrum when his mom (Catherine Keener) chooses to pay attention to her new "friend" (Mark Ruffalo) instead of Max's latest flight of fancy, he runs out of their house and out into the night. Taking to the sea in a kid-sized sailboat, Max crosses the sea, finally landing on the rocky shore of a mysterious island inhabited by strange, monstrous beasts. But when he proclaims himself their ruler, Max decides he's discovered a place of refuge where he can create his own happiness – that is, until the problems of the real world begin to work their way into the supposed fun of his fantasy kingdom.
I joked with a colleague that an alternate title for the film could have been P.S. Divorce Is Hardest On The Kids, but the truth is I'm not sure I've seen another mainstream movie that better examines the way kids deal with a parental break-up, be it metaphorically or literally. Jonze, who adapted Sendak's book with the help of novelist Dave Eggers, lays the groundwork for Max's odyssey in the opening scenes, not only physically but emotionally: we not only watch him build an igloo, alone, in a neighbor's front yard, but see how he reacts when another kid smashes it in a snowball fight; or later, witness Max's misplaced outrage, his subsequent remorse, and finally, his redemptive creativity in between sequences where he literally constructs bedroom-sized universes where stuffed animals do his bidding.
There's a landscape here that doesn't just presage his physical experiences with the Wild Things, but demonstrates the depths of Max's emotional range – the breadth of which is certainly symptomatic of all kids, but something seldom explored in films about them. The reason this kaleidoscope of reactions is so important, so vital to the film's success, is because each of these individual feelings finds its physical representation later in the story, giving Max a unique and unexpected opportunity to look outside himself and see not only how he really feels, but how those feelings impact the others around him.
Of course, that choice might seem obvious, given the vast wealth of stories where fictional characters function as a stand-in for someone's thoughts or feelings, in both adult and child-themed tales. But Eggers and Jonze do something really remarkable with their realization of those thoughts and feelings by never quite explaining them, and even more importantly, allowing their various "definitions" (Max's petulant side, his nurturing side, his concilatory side, etc.) to commingle in ways that defy the sort of mathematical combination of his various impulses into a "complete" person, instead creating a more realistic (and thus compelling) one.
It certainly helps that Jonze hired a game cast of voice actors to bring life to Max's various sides. As Carol, Max's most dedicated but volatile companion, James Gandolfini (TV's The Sopranos) finds that perfect sort of inarticulate frustration, and that inability to understand - much less deal with - the deterioration of a friendship; as Carol's previous best friend, KW, Lauren Ambrose (Starting Out in the Evening) lends an oblivious sensitivity, a wanderlust to the character among the Wild Things who inspires the most dramatic reactions, even if she doesn't always provide them. And Paul Dano (There Will Be Blood), emerging as one of the most interesting and versatile actors of his generation, contributes a comically sad turn as Alexander, a diminutive goat who feels like no one ever listens to him, seldom provides a reason why they should.But even with so many talented crewmen and –women helping him, Jonze himself is the captain of this particular ship, and he manages to seem assured and confident in the execution of his material even when the film is at its shaggiest. Working with cinematographer Lance Acord, one of the director's longtime collaborators, Jonze makes a deliberate decision to forego hero shots and the sweeping imagery of so-called "epic" filmmaking, shooting primarily with handheld cameras to give each scene an emotional realism that often gets lost in films where spectacle is the priority. By focusing on the intimate and personal interactions between characters, Jonze not only creates a world that seems directly born of Max's imagination, but one where those feelings and thoughts are raw and immediate, seeming fun, scary, and strangely human all at the same time.
Because of that tenuous balance between the exciting and the exasperating, the scary and the sanguine, it remains to be seen whether kids will really identify with Max, since so much of what he goes through is so painful – and especially, because it's woven directly into his behavior rather than discussed and deconstructed. But that's also where it proves the most affecting; because Max's reactions and their motivations seem inadvertent as opposed to calculated, or even emphasized, there's a primal connection the audience shares with his sadness that doesn't need to be addressed in any direct way, and resonates long after he's moved on to his next adventure.
Ultimately, Where the Wild Things Are is most effective because it faithfully recreates the dimensions of childhood experience, but it filters them through the realities of adulthood. As an understated work of spectacle, or maybe a spectacular work of understatement, Jonze's latest film is not only his best to date, but a monstrous achievement in its own right - with or without the big furry creatures.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-15-2009 @ 10:41PM
Matt said...
Nearly every positive review for this sounds glowing, some even calling it a classic and a masterpiece, so thank you for adding another one to that pile. It seems the Rotten Tomatoes rating is bouncing all over the place, which would normally worry me, but the *negative* reviews too make it sound like a work of art. Oh everything they say seems to be on the negative side, but what they're saying, to me, would all be *positive* things. I love that the film isn't action packed, that it's dark and in some cases depressing, that the kid is a brat, that this film might not appeal to kids as much as adults looking back at childhood, etc. etc. Yet so many critics are listing these as negatives, it's so weird. I can't wait to see it on Sunday and judge for myself, but thanks again for another wonderful review of what is sure to be a landmark achievement for Jonze.
Reply
10-16-2009 @ 12:21PM
Dan L said...
Watched it last night, loved it - but you're right Todd - not to put words in your mouth(or use a kinda douchey word), but it might be too "meta" for kids.
Too much of a reflection on those feelings - like you said, through adult eyes - for children to really 'get'.
It's very obviously being marketed to more than just today's kids - evidenced by the extended preview airing during South Park's first commercial break this weak - which is obviously a good thing, but I hope they don't miss out on today's kids appreciating it because of the movie's focus on so accurately asking "Hey, remember what childhood was like?".....to a bunch of still-children audiences.
It so accurately portrays them, but does that quality resonate with kids, who might not recognize that as a feat in itself?
It's the best kids movie for adults in a long time. I just hope kids like it.
Reply
10-16-2009 @ 8:05AM
Wellred said...
The cover of the beach boys song is available here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6aNvT3nJes
Reply
10-16-2009 @ 11:20PM
Rick said...
I'm looking forward to seeing it tonight. You know what I liked the most about this review? It didn't rely, as it seems most or all of the other reviews I've read do, on comparisons to the book. It acknowledges it as an adaptation while judging it completely on its own merit. I've never read the book and don't plan to, so I appreciate that.
Reply
10-16-2009 @ 8:43PM
King Skylark said...
Just wanted to add my two cents and see if anyone had the same reaction I did.
Saw this last night, thought the movie itself was good, not great, the best part being Max, the "men-in-suit" wild things, and some of the visuals. However, what ultimately knocked this movie down for me was the absolutely atrocious music by Karen O. Every single time one of her songs came on (which happened far too frequently), I inwardly groaned. Her yips, squeals, yells, etc, all served to take me out of the movie, not to mention the fact that the music was poorly placed and, in the case of the dirt clod fight, had Karen seemingly trying to be in on the action, all to the detriment of the scene.
The Karen O-less music cues worked FAR better, and the movie itself would have been so much more enjoyable had they not hired her on.
Anyone else have the same experience?
Reply
10-16-2009 @ 9:36PM
Five Hens said...
Although this is being heavily marketed as a kid/family movie, I would seriously caution parents of children under 10 (and probably under 13) to avoid this movie or at least be prepared to deal with the issues it raises. The serious adult themes are confusing and inappropriate for little ones. As an adult I found the movie to be quite depressing and a big departure from a beloved children’s classic. Two words: highly disappointed to say the least.
We wrote a full review of the film from a parents' perspective right here: http://www.fivehens.com/where-the-wild-things-are-movie-review/
Reply
10-18-2009 @ 2:26PM
Gab and Dad said...
Although a sophisticated, mature film, WTWTA has something magical and meaningful to offer everyone....
See three generations of our family review it together, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM_lyUWDrKo
Reply
10-19-2009 @ 1:17PM
Mike said...
I'd be hard pressed to come up with a film in recent memory that disappointed me more than this one. I can understand why the reviews are all over the place- it's an artsy kid's movie for adults only. While the visuals were terrific (love the creatures), I found the movie depressing and extremely boring. The "message" went way above the heards of every kid in the theater and even though I understood it, it didn't seem like the main character got it either. The most entertaining part of the movie was watching the flood of families bail out in the middle. The manager of the AMC I saw it at said they were selling a lot of tickets, but issuing a record number of refunds as well.
Reply
10-21-2009 @ 1:55PM
Brian said...
I found the first 15-20 minutes to be the strongest. I was deeply moved by the scene in which a sad Max lies in bed playing with a little wooden boat. I thought from the opening to the point in which he sails on the sea to 'where the wild things are' was a beautiful short film within the larger piece.
I agree with King Skylark--hearing Karen O's distinct voice really took me out the film.
Also, I'm not a CGI fan, but the Wild Things had moments that really resonated with me. Not the entire time, but still...
Reply
10-23-2009 @ 3:49PM
Alison said...
Funny that the review jumps to the conclusion that Max's parents are divorced. I watched the whole movie thinking his father had died, but i don't beleive it is clear at any point in the movie why Max's father is not present.
Reply
12-08-2009 @ 1:43PM
yani said...
Actually there's a reference very early on where Max's sister Claire is on the phone to somebody and she says something along the lines of "I'll be at my dad's place that weekend".
11-04-2009 @ 7:48PM
Stephen said...
I felt Jonze did a good job in capturing Maurice's inspiration to the book, which is a story about a child trying to understand and make sense of this world. Of course the movie explicitly reveals this and it may be confusing for younger viewers in that stage of trying to figure things out. Be ready for plenty of questions if you take a child, preferably 8 and older.
Reply
12-14-2009 @ 4:43AM
D Patel said...
this is the worst film I have seen in 10 years. I walked out after seeing only half the film. it just wasn't getting any better. Warning to all parents, do not take your children to see this as it will give them nightmares.
Reply