Where the Wild Things are.

[Nivek]

Caught it this afternoon. It was a lot more downbeat than I expected, and where I got the subtle hints in the Wild Things representing different aspects of Max and his life, I think it will go over a lot of peoples heads. The young kids in the audience (about 40% of it) were very restless before it ended, kept asking questions through out the film. A good film, but it wasn't the "make you feel like a kid again" film I expected to see, it made me remember growing up in a family where you had to live inside your own head. Which (for me, at least) was pretty depressing. Effects wise, the creatures looked awesome, and the voice work was outstanding. The story progression and pacing (took a while to get moving, then stalled at certain points) just really kept it from capturing my heart. Not sure if I would watch it again anytime soon.

7/10

 

[cryptic name]

Saw this a screening this morning. Excellent movie, don't know if kids will like it though.

 

[Etienne]

Where The Wild Things Are over performing with $12+M Friday and Probable $38+M Weekend.

The P&A stressed Spike's pedigree, but not the fact that Jones took forever in post-production on his CGI + puppetry adaptation of Maurice Sendak's beloved little book. "He's a perfectionist and just kept working on it," a WB exec told me today. "But now we know that at the end of the day he nailed it. The numbers are shocking the hell out of me." That's because Wild Things is turning into a phenomenon. Midnight shows went way over the expected $150K grosses and came close to $660K. By Friday noon in Manhattan, the expected $12K take turned into $100K. Grosses looked to come in past $12M from 3,735 locations, including 145 Imax theaters. And now what even rival studios thought was at best a $30M weekend is "off and running" to go past $38M.

 

[CFE]

I'll have my review of the film up soon enough.

8/10

 

[Double Down]

New ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ Featurette (it's almost seven minutes long)

 

[Etienne]

New pics from imdb

 

[Sarge 2.0]

Loved it.

The gutsiest kids movie/children's book adaptation ever made. Little kids will either find it confusing or instantly relate to it, depending on their own level of introspection. Jonze deals with feelings that are difficult for little kids to understand sometimes, but they're feelings that all children experience. He manages to project the characters various issues clearly (and somewhat boldly) without hammering them home in a trite, Sam Mendes sort of way. The sparse narrative - which is focused more on emotional development than plot - might make some children antsy. But I admire Jonze and Eggers immensely for what they pulled off here, it's the most challenging, engaging and emotionally complex children's movie ever made.

 

[xwolverine2]

7 out of 10... it dragged a bit in some parts, but its the ending that couldve been better.. it was nice and heartfelt but not as much as the books which i'd hoped they somewhat kept.
great movie though

 

[Tissues]

Saw it yesterday morning. Liked it. A lot. Two kids at the showing. One little girl asked to go home.

 

[terry78]

They're waiting for the squeakuel.

 

[8wid]

Just got done seeing this! 2/10. I think some parks are inappropriate for children.

 

[Sarge 2.0]

You should uh, probably elaborate on that insanely low score.

 

[XxDelta09xX]

I thought it was a pretty good movie 8/10.

 

[8wid]

You should uh, probably elaborate on that insanely low score.

There is absolutely no character development, some of the scenes with Carol may be too terrifying for younger viewers, huge plot holes, the ending does not end the plot, many pointless, or unused characters, for some.

Plus the creatures b**** about the king making things worse on the island, when it was always the same!

 

[JTStarkiller]

I couldn't disagree with those remarks more. Oh well. Guess it's not for everyone.

 

[cabel]

The movie got dark and intense at parts, but in my opinion no more than Gremlins, Secret of NIMH, An American Tale, or Land Before Time. All of which I first saw between ages 4-6.

 

[bullets]

Just got done seeing this! 2/10. I think some parts are inappropriate for children.

I guess it's how they marketed this thing. That's not good though

 

[cabel]

There is absolutely no character development

,

The movie is about Max sorting out his pent up emotions, and the Wild Things were the physical manifestations of those emotions.

some of the scenes with Carol may be too terrifying for younger viewers,

Like I mentioned before, no more than any movies I watched at a young age.

the ending does not end the plot, many pointless, or unused characters, for some.

Yes it does. Max gets over his feelings and returns home. Could you explain the pointless characters.

Plus the creatures b**** about the king making things worse on the island, when it was always the same!

The Wild Things were extensions of Max, the emotions of a young child. Simple, intense, and at times illogical. Not too dissimilar from Max's behavior at the begining of the movie.

 

[Drizzle]

There is absolutely no character development

Excuse me? There was practically nothing but character development throughout the whole movie.

 

[8wid]

,

The movie is about Max sorting out his pent up emotions, and the Wild Things were the physical manifestations of those emotions.



Like I mentioned before, no more than any movies I watched at a young age.



Yes it does. Max gets over his feelings and returns home. Could you explain the pointless characters.



The Wild Things were extensions of Max, the emotions of a young child. Simple, intense, and at times illogical. Not too dissimilar from Max's behavior at the begining of the movie.

If the Wild Things are Max's pent up emotions, they make no change to resolve the feelings. They stay the same when Max arrives on the island and even after he leaves. There is no sign that any of them changed, but just started the cycle of emotions over again in a repeat, and didn't learn anything in the first place. A big example is when Max acts out and does something wrong, his mom reacts as if he did not runaway at the end of the film to. All of the characters are like this.

The pointless characters are ones like the giant dog, Richie, The Bull, Bob and Terry, possibly Douglas all appear to not have any purpose to be in the film. Even Bob and Terry after Carol gets upset they're there, why did he not do this with KW?

I don't know if pulling off someone's arm or actually physically having eaten someone is the same, just for a few examples.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Plus the creatures b**** about the king making things worse on the island, when it was always the same!

That was the whole point. Looking to some "outsider/king" to fix your internal problems is futile. The act of not eating him like they did the previous kings was the character development you said wasn't there. The Wild Things all realized this now, especially Carol.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

The pointless characters are ones like the giant dog, Richie, The Bull, Bob and Terry, possibly Douglas all appear to not have any purpose to be in the film. Even Bob and Terry after Carol gets upset they're there, why did he not do this with KW?

Bob and Terry represented Max's feelings towrads the new people like his mom's boyfriend and his sister's friends. They talked in a language he didn't understand just like how his sister no longer wanted to talk/play with him.

 

[8wid]

That was the whole point. Looking to some "outsider/king" to fix your internal problems is futile. The act of not eating him like they did the previous kings was the character development you said wasn't there. The Wild Things all realized this now, especially Carol.

The problem with arguing that is the Wild Things would have returned to their original ways regardless of Max. They came to like him is a fact, but because he left was an alternative to eating him. Plus, Alexander and Douglas seems to already know that the kings are already futile, or they do not exist. They only keep it on for Carol to believe in, nothing new happened to them.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

The problem with arguing that is the Wild Things would have returned to their original ways regardless of Max. They came to like him is a fact, but because he left was an alternative to eating him. Plus, Alexander and Douglas seems to already know that the kings are already futile, or they do not exist. They only keep it on for Carol to believe in, nothing new happened to them.

Carol was the agression Max needed to learn to control. The fact that Carol came back to say good bye was the growth. The group no longer has to pretend for Carol(or the others besides Doug and Alex if they didn't know) so by the very definition, things will be different. The look Carol gave KW was to parallel the scene with Max and his mom at the end.

 

[Bond]

Great movie. Watching every character was like going back to my childhood. I loved pretty much everything, especially the soundtrack. Just an incredibly well-done movie and in my top 10 favorites of the year.