As this CNN article mentions, the release of “Where the Wild Things Are” last weekend has engendered mixed reviews from parents. Some called it “dull”, some thought it was “joyless”. One critic in particular thought it accurately depicted the immediacy of a child’s emotions, while another seems to be blaming the movie for her daughter’s subsequent temper tantrum. But while everyone is expressing a different opinion on the film, it’s apparent that this is a work of art that’s more than justifying itself by the sheer wide range of feelings it causes.
At the same time, however, there is something to be said for giving the audience what it wants. By choosing to call this movie “Where the Wild Things Are” and featuring its iconic characters, Spike Jonze was purposefully trading on its popularity among adults and kids alike to generate interest. So perhaps it wasn’t fair to take the story in the wildly divergent direction it has, because expectations were set by the mere use of the name.
The book is very simple: Max has a tantrum, is sent to his room where he either falls asleep or simply imagines that his room changes into the wilderness (or perhaps actually experiences true change; it’s up to the reader to decide), travels to an imaginary land where he is the master of a horde of gigantic monsters, has a wild party, then decides to return home to the life and mother he misses. That’s it. It’s that very simplicity that resonates so strongly with generations of readers over the years, and it is that simplicity that audience members no doubt expected from the movie.
Instead, it offered a ruminative experience meant to explore some fairly heady concepts. That’s Jonze’s wheelhouse; probably we all should have taken his involvement into account when considering whether or not to see this film. But if one wanted to make a case for being let down by the promise of a fun kid’s movie but being instead treated to a decidedly adult piece of cinema, I can’t really argue against that.
Comments
No comments.