saw a sneak preview of it this week and yeah, it's as good as the trailers & everything you've seen so far make it look.

first off, the kid who plays Max is great. Max is basically a brat, but you get a real sense of the loneliness and alienation he feels that drives him to act out. and Spike does a really good job of portraying a kid's perspective on the world which helps you identify with that.

then of course there's the world of the Wild Things. As strange and wild as it is, it always looks like it occupies a real physical place and you never get a sense of artifice that might distract you from just accepting that world at face value. Along with the seamless CGI animation of the faces on the Wild Things it really keeps up the suspension of disbelief. And the voice actors do a really good job of inhabiting their characters. At first I thought hearing Gandolfini's voice might be a bit distracting and make me think of Tony Soprano the whole time, but he does a great job of developing a personality for his character and after the first scene with him I didn't think of it at all really, he was just Carol.

I haven't read the book since I was a kid, but mostly I just remember Max romping around with the Wild Things, howling and having fun. There's plenty of that in the movie of course, and some very funny moments as well. But there's also an underlying sense of sadness that runs through it, and there's some strong tension that develops + a few really menacing moments as well. Screenwriter Dave Eggers was at the showing and said Maurice Sendak was very much on-board with having Spike Jones directing the project and that he encouraged them to "re-fang" the story for the big screen, and boy he wasn't kidding. I thought it was great, seems like the studios pretty much stayed out of their way on that stuff and let them do it the way they wanted and I think it really pays off.

I also don't remember if any of this was in the book, but several of the Wild Things seem to represent various aspects of Max' personality (or at least partly that and partly just different aspects of what it's like being a kid), and some of the situations with them reflect situations Max experiences with his family. So more than just an escape from reality for Max it's also an introspective look that lets him take a peek inside and figure out some stuff about himself. I thought they did a really nice job of that without being too heavy-handed with it.

So yeah, really enjoyed it. I just really wish I could see it as an 10 year old.

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

__________________________________________

artisticalliance.org
podcast: Freakin Awesome Podcast on iTunes.

I don't give a fuck though, I've been waiting for this forever.

____________
Twitter & IG: @rulerofmyself
SC: rulerofmyself17

Yes! She's on the drugs. (c) BoHagon

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

67% on RT is good but not good enough to be certified fresh...
but they gave my favorite film Four Brothers only 30% which isn't fair at all...

I'm checking out this film tomorrow morning...

On The Lookout 4:
some new music. WTF is going on this year?

I enjoyed it but parts of it dragged. I wasn't feeling the soundtrack either. Smoking a bomb ass L beforehand didn't help either.

------------------------------------------
America from 9:00 on: https://youtu.be/GUwLCQU10KQ

Saw it last night. Will go see it again this weekend. Thanks Spike.

.imageyenation.dot.com.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

was planning on it, then his grandmother told me she read some reviews that said it was probably too much for a 4 year old. Any thoughts on that? I might try to go see it myself and decide but in case I don't get that chance...
_________________________________________
www.SoTimeless.com
The new album "This Is The Year" out now!

nm.

dark spike jonze moments in there at times. not quite as dark as Coraline, but almost.

my biggest concern for a 4 year old would be that they'd lose interest 15 minutes in...

BAM BAM! i hope she makes another appearance on curb your enthusiasm cause she's so funny. anyway, great movie. reminds me of getting angry as a kid in parts and childhood in general.

karen o is that chick.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

i still count the LIEMAX showing of the first Transformers movie as one of the worst movie-going experiences of my life because it was so blurry and pixelated.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

I'm honestly having trouble articulating what it was about the movie that made me respond so strongly to it. It's a bizarre movie experience, but it fits the book 1000% and completely transports you back to your childhood. It's an honest, engaging, and beautifully strange movie.

I can't talk now. I'm gonna go curl up with a stuffed animal and go to sleep. Good night.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

>I'm honestly having trouble articulating what it was about
>the movie that made me respond so strongly to it. It's a
>bizarre movie experience, but it fits the book 1000% and
>completely transports you back to your childhood. It's an
>honest, engaging, and beautifully strange movie.
>
>I can't talk now. I'm gonna go curl up with a stuffed animal
>and go to sleep. Good night.

Esteemed author of the celebrated, double-platinum post: "Drake - Wu-Tang Forever".

------------------
One Hundred.

I promise I'm not just an internet troll.

Surprisingly depressing but you can see real emotions and feeling in this film.
Needs to be seen again but on DVD.

---
Stoicism and chill.
---
Stay +.
---

what the hell did y'all think about the "re-birthing" scene where max was regurgitated out of KW's mouth?

i'm assuming KW represented Max's sister (and maybe partially, his mom?), so him being metaphorically re-birthed from her mouth-vagina (and being protected from his own id inside her "womb")...what was the message there?

overall really liked the movie, despite the sad emo vibe (the general tone of this movie reminded of all the bullshit melancholy hippie-neuvo music that's so popular nowadays). but that one scene really threw me for a loop.

...and I agree, K.W. definitely represented his sister and the rest of the wild things represented the different facets of Max's personality.

Esteemed author of the celebrated, double-platinum post: "Drake - Wu-Tang Forever".

...and that Carol was the sister.

I don't know, I didn't get too caught up in the symbolic meaning.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

Slime = embryonic fluid.

I don't know if Carol represents his sister as well as he represents the stubborn/hard-nosed side of Max. We never see his sister act like Carol does, he's way more passive and less emotional. The only thing that really supports this is that K.W. becomes very protective of Max at the end, like a mother would when one sibling is bullying another.

I'd say if we're still going w/ K.W. = his mother, perhaps Judith represents his sister?

I wasn't really thinking about it too much, was kinda taking everything in. But I've had a lot of time to sit and collect my thoughts since I haven't been able to stop thinking about it since I saw it last night. It exceeded my high expectations. Beautiful film. It's funny, subtle and touching. Music was great, too -- especially during the rumpus.

Probably the most emotionally resonant theatre experience I've had in a long time, maybe since Half Nelson. I agree w/ you how it fits the book perfectly and how it transports you back into your childhood. Not as dark as I expected, but I think that's a good thing. The "wild things" are nothing short of amazing, and their little gestures and nuances never get old and are incredibly detailed.

Definitely gives Up a run for it's money for the best film I've seen all year...then again, you are talking to someone with a Where The Wild Things Are plush doll on their bookshelf -- so don't take my word for it.

Esteemed author of the celebrated, double-platinum post: "Drake - Wu-Tang Forever".

i am not sure but i got the idea that max's father was dead. which made me think carol was his dad because at the end where he was running up while max was leaving was representing max never being able to really say goodbye to his father.

Unless I misheard/misunderstood, I thought someone said they were going over their dad's house the weekend following whatever time period this took place.

____________
Twitter & IG: @rulerofmyself
SC: rulerofmyself17

Yes! She's on the drugs. (c) BoHagon

Carols is nothing but a ball of confused anger and anxiety.

that read "This world belongs to you, Max"

and then Carol tells Max the same thing when he's showing him around his kingdom.

I don't think Carol directly represents Max's father per se but I agree his father figures in there somehow.

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

Carol = Max's id
a jumbled ball of confused anger and anxiety. the inner core of most pre-teens. especially those of single parents

Douglass (bird) = Max's super-ego
the yin to Carol's yang. calm and organized. always aiming to maintain social order.

KW = Max's mother
always aiming to nurture and protect Max, but fed up with his uncontrolled anger (Carol). KW's new friends, Bob and Terry, could represent her boyfriends and Max's anxiety surrounding his belief that her loyalty/attention to him may be sacrificed (not sure what the symbolism of KW knocking the birds out of the sky is, though).

The Bull = Max's dad
distant, quiet, a foreboding figure. helps out now and then (broke the stone off the side of the mountain to build the fort), but otherwise not in the picture.



the other interesting thing was the recurring shot of Max looking down a tunnel into the open world (once in the igloo, again at the bottom of the dog pile, and a third time as he was hiding in KW's belly). i assume this was Max needing to be "reborn" to address his anger problems, with the tunnels representing birth canals.

the first time, in the igloo, he escaped his sister's friends and found, what he thought was safety inside the igloo. but his trust in the "womb" was shattered when they broke the igloo.

the dogpile started off scary as all of the wild things piled on, but Max warmed to the idea of everyone creating a sort of makeshift womb around him...until his ankle was caught under the weight of the pile. KW/Mom comes to his rescue and pulls him out of harm's way (but not fully out of the "womb").

in the last scene, Max is literally protected inside KW's belly (protected from his own anger, in the form of Carol) and is "reborn" when he's "delivered" from her belly, ambiotic fluid and all, after his anger (Carol) has been been properly soothed.

Carol, Douglas and Alexander = all aspects of Max
Judith & Ira = His mom and her boyfriend
KW = sister
The Bull = His father

I wavered on KW until Bob & Terry which represented Max's feeling about his sister choosing her friends over him. I got the impression they were extremely close when she was younger from the Valentine's day gift Max made for her and destroyed after the igloo incident. But there was definitely something maternal about KW so she might have been a combo


-------------------
<--- Not like this!

http://blog.melanism.com
http://twitter.com/Melanism

That his sister is more a mother figure than his actual mom? I didn't get that sense but could be wrong.

I think that maybe KW represents female nurturing (Both his sister and mother) but not necessarily his mother. Bob and Terry represent both his sister's friends and his mom's boyfriend, he can't understand either.

I mean, there was a raccoon named Charlie in there.
-------------------
<--- Not like this!

http://blog.melanism.com
http://twitter.com/Melanism

Wokka wokka wokka

>Carol, Douglas and Alexander = all aspects of Max
>Judith & Ira = His mom and her boyfriend
>KW = sister
>The Bull = His father
>
>I wavered on KW until Bob & Terry which represented Max's
>feeling about his sister choosing her friends over him. I got
>the impression they were extremely close when she was younger
>from the Valentine's day gift Max made for her and destroyed
>after the igloo incident. But there was definitely something
>maternal about KW so she might have been a combo
>

interesting, but i think KW is too protective of Max to represent the sister. and they're too close right now. and Bob and Terry representing the boyfriends would make sense, cause he doesn't necessarily seem UNWILLING to accept the boyfriends/owls, he just doesn't understand them and is hesitant to change.

although to your point, he never seemed to have a problem with her friends/bob and terry, just how they changed the brother-sister relationship. and KW does at least consider moving on/becoming distant from the family, and a mother wouldn't do that but a teenage daughter would.

his creative side seemed pretty jumbled at that point too though, so the characters could have each been a mixture of things.

It seemed as though they were more like KW's captives than her friends. I mean, she had to knock them out of the sky with rocks, then hold them in a headlock... Any significance there?

>
>The Bull = Max's dad
>distant, quiet, a foreboding figure. helps out now and then
>(broke the stone off the side of the mountain to build the
>fort), but otherwise not in the picture.
>

and he was surprised when the Bull reached out to him at the end.

Specifically the attention/affection/protection he desires from his mother and sister. You can see it in Max's face anytime KW interacts with him. It just means the world to him. Carol is the one Max bonds with the most, but I got the sense that KW is the one he really *wants* to bond with. And look at how all the monsters adore KW, especially Carol. And they're all terrified that they're losing her.

And KW's "new friends" would be those people Max sees as a threat to his relationship with his mom and sister. Maybe that's why there were 2 of them...One owl for the sister's friends and one owl for the mom's new boyfriend(s). Would also explain why he couldn't understand their language - they were 'grown ups'

I thought that Carol clearly represented Max and gave him a chance to see his own bad behavior from the outside.

The Bull being the father figure is interesting and something I could buy.

Personally I thought that KW represented what Max had hoped his older sister would be. Someone that really loved and cared about him, was protective and gave him good advice. Doesn't he specifically say to KW before leaving, "You guys could really use a mom" (?) I thought that was part of Max's realization that he needed to go home that he did have a mom that loved him and despite her lack of attention he knew this.

But the relationships in the film are a little skewed. The monsters are a rag tag family without any clear deliniations. There is no father or mother figure = hence why they need a "king". I couldn't tell if Carol and KW were supposed to be romantically involved or needed each other in a family brother/sister way. I'm not really sure it matters but that makes drawing the lines to Max a little harder.

I'm stunned really. I was entertained, but you can't call this a "kids" movie. What sort of kid would love this? It's deeply depressing at times, and the few fun moments are repeatedly offset by a scene about jealousy or an argument. Maybe it's me Who doesn't get it? I don't know, I consider myself a pretty sophisticated movie watcher, if such a thing exists, and for my money UP preached the importance of trust and family way better than this did with a much greater sense of humor and awareness of audience.

(SPOILER!!!)

How did the bird lose his arm and how was it actually funny that he had a stick for an arm?

Given the amount of kids in the audience and how tragic losing an arm can be I was shocked that I came back and they revealed he had a stick for an arm, I imagine whatever happened couldn't have been hilarious.

.

goes apeshit and rips his arm off. Honestly, that shit kept bugging me. I was half-expecting someone to put it back on him.

---------------------------------------
So it goes.

sand came out instead of blood and Douglas didn't really react, other than saying "oh...why'd you do that? that was my favorite arm..."

so they played it for laughs.

...like the movie made me feel for Douglas. If you could painlessly get your arm ripped off, but it wouldn't grow back, and you'd miss your ability to use it...

...lol, I dunno. I felt kinda sad for dude when he lost his arm, even though I laughed at the stick.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

even the scenes that could've been straight up joyous usually ended badly or had a tinge of sadness (the dogpile, the dirt clod fight).

it's like an ode to slapstick comedy.

The vibe and the way it was shot kinda put me in the mind of "Eternal Sunshine" for kids.

____________
Twitter & IG: @rulerofmyself
SC: rulerofmyself17

Yes! She's on the drugs. (c) BoHagon

i "got" it. the whole parallels between the real/fantasy world, the realization of fault, the need to change.

i just didn't really care.

i know someone saying they don't care about any of the characters in a movie is kind of a cop out, but i really didn't give a fuck about the read-between-the-lines approach they took for the film.

i honestly gave not a fuck about the vague, deliberately unexplained complaining of the "things," and instead of taking me into the mind of a 9-year old, i just wanted the mom to slap the shit out of Max.

that and the crowd for opening night was damn near infuriating.
it was all a bunch of college kids dressed up in american apparel max costumes with capes, crowns and glitter.

>i "got" it. the whole parallels between the real/fantasy
>world, the realization of fault, the need to change.
>




>
>i honestly gave not a fuck about the vague, deliberately
>unexplained complaining of the "things," and instead of taking
>me into the mind of a 9-year old, i just wanted the mom to
>slap the shit out of Max.



©


dough ray me
but I don't sing mothafucka

i mean, Max is a little shit. he has serious anger issues and he's a bit of an attention whore, but that was the same character in the book...

I am forced to agree. The film was very boring to me. I am also afraid that the scenes where Max is being chased by the monster may be a bit much for kids.

Sites that I contribute to:

http://www.livefrommemphis.com

http://www.geeksofdoom.com

The movie was maddening start-n-stop repetition of this pattern:


We’re wild and having fun
My fun goes too far
We bicker and get emotional
We decide to have fun again

We’re wild and having fun
My fun goes too far
We bicker and get emotional
We decide to have fun again

We’re wild and having fun
My fun goes too far
We bicker and get emotional
We decide to have fun again


Somewhere around the 5th go around of this I closed my eyes and nodded off. I haven’t fell asleep in a movie since Twister. My 11 year old daughter and her buddies loved it, one of them cried although I couldn’t tell you which emotional breakdown caused her to squirt a few. Beauitfully shot and the kid is a special actor but this movie is slower than frozen molasses.



©


dough ray me
but I don't sing mothafucka

Not a great film but it wasn't boring.
__________________________________________

artisticalliance.org
mindself.tumblr.com

©


dough ray me
but I don't sing mothafucka

a very sad movie.

the kid was great and voice acting was fantastic but although I liked the movie something prevented me from loving it.

It's good but not great/incredible. It's a weird and interesting film that deserves to be seen. I can see people have very different reactions to it.

My book of poems The Starving Artist: http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/the-starving-artist/6151056

that I found the music extremely obnoxious

The Yeah Yeah Yeahs are alright, and I don’t dislike Karen O, but I hated the soundtrack.

Maybe it’s just my aversion to all things “sweet” or “precious,” but it just grated on my nerves the whole time.

The fact that the American Apparel Maxes were playing it on a boombox while waiting in line for tickets probably didn’t help.

I’d also like to mention that her shameless bite of a paul mccartney lyric made me laugh far too loudly and inappropriately during a pretty serious part of the movie.

I mean not just the music it's self but also how it was placed, I found it way too abrupt and took me out of the movie. It's "oh he's running so let''s put fast music on but not build it up or transition it in, just throw it at them".

There were some good parts with the soundtrack but yeah over all I think Spike needs to work on his use of music (which is kinda ironic seeing as he's one of the best music video directors).

interesting side note: Spike used to date Karen-O.

Esteemed author of the celebrated, double-platinum post: "Drake - Wu-Tang Forever".

just because of how sad the whole thing was. great acting, voice acting, and the wild things looked great. i know what spike was going for, but i was disappointed that it wasn't more wild rumpus-y.

My worst fear was that I'd be walking into an overly angsty hipster-fied approximation of childhood rather than a movie that was *actually* about childhood... I think it managed to avoid that, but only barely.

But let's face it - The book is really short. Rich in subtext, sure. But SHORT. And Hollywood could have fleshed it out one of two ways - Go the artsy, psychological route, which they did, or go the cutesy pandering kids film way where all the 'wild things' represent various ethnic stereotypes and dance around to that "I Like to Move It Move It" song. So I give the move points right off the bat for taking the high road.

But I was disappointed in how the movie managed to be deep without being all that layered. It's basically a Freudian anatomy of a temper tantrum, which is cool I guess, but where's the actual story? Like, conflict and stuff. The subtext is only subtext when it's beneath the text. And I felt the film lacked text. As a result, the movie is weird (good), but the symbolism feels a little too on the nose (bad)

Visually, obviously, the film kicked ass. The Wild Things were fun, scary, creepy and expressive as hell. About halfway through the film I noticed the chicken guy had human ears, and I'm still freaking out about it a day later. I LOVED the miniature world that Carol built. When I saw that, me and the kid sitting behind me simultaneously let out an audible 'wow'... Oh, and the landscapes were spectacular. I may just rent the DVD for the 'Making of' featurette.

And I love how there was always a sense of danger - These weren't Disney Pixar monsters, these motherfuckers were emotionally imbalanced and could very well turn on Max at any given moment. That was some great tension, and I think kids will appreciate that approach as well. I remember being vaguely afraid for Max when I read the book as a child.

So I guess it did what it set out to do, which is commendable. But on an entertainment value level, this was kind of the filmic equivalent of watching your nephew eat too much sugar and come completely unhinged for an hour before his inevitable crash. Set on the island of crying muppets.

Personally speaking it's the worst out of the 3 Spike Jonze's films but by no means did he squander his talent. I love how there is so much analysis that comes after the film, what this meant? why did he do this? who does this monster represent? As much it's far from a perfect film I feel that it points to greater things that Spike will hopefully accomplish in the future.

While I thought the film was decent, I can't really say it truly crossed the threshold into greatness. I found some of the technical aspects (i.e. the wonderfully constructed monsters) to be the most brilliant things this film had to offer.

For some reason, I just couldn't fully make that connection to Max's story. While I'm all for not talking down to kids and presenting them accurately, it seemed as if some of the empathy was lost in the translation. I really would've loved to see a little bit more between Max and his mother. IMO, those were the best scenes of the film. Catherine Keener was awesome in her role as Max's mother, as she always is (why hasn't this woman won an Oscar yet?) Those scenes were very well done in regards to showing how a child would interact with their parent and they definitely weren't one-note or stereotypical in their depiction. I wish more family films did that. And the monsters (all of which expertly voiced IMO) were great until their whole story started getting heavier and heavier. I guess I understand why everything is like that--if you're looking at the monsters as reflections of Max's psyche as he copes with his anger while he rummages through the woods. But I think there's a little too much to them. If they represent facets of Max's psyche, why does their baggage not feel like it really fits in with Max. The monsters seemed like they had been through more drama amongst themselves than Max and his mother would ever go through, which only provides even worse implications for Max. Does Max really imagine monsters with this much internal baggage regularly?


The music, for the most part, seemed rather odd in this film. I find that strange because I really like the soundtrack as a standalone album. Actually I really, really like the soundtrack as an album. But in the context of the film, however, it only works sparingly for me. I think there were a couple of off cues.



Long story short, like another poster said already, I 'get it'. This story intends to be a family tale that presents characters as truly three-dimensional people with problems that aren't cut-and-dry. I get that this film wants to pay more attention to the subtle motivations behind Max's actions (and the monsters). What I don't get, however, is whether or not an actual child, one who is accustomed to a regular diet of Disney and Dreamworks, is going to pick up on all of this and relate to it. I don't truly see any of the charm that accompanies beloved children classics on this film at all. Actually, I think this film may ultimately be a little too strange and off-beat for some. Of course, I like Spike Jonze for that, but, along with Spike's other films, there's something about this film that doesn't make it the grand slam I thought it would be. And, just like Being John Malkovich and Adaptation, I can't quite put my finger on it yet.

I felt like I was watching a Charlie Kaufman movie for kids. I can't call this a bad movie, just an interesting one that has hints of brillance.



P.S.
And as far as the 'rebirthing' goes, I halfway expected something that bizarre to happen since it is a Spike Jonze film but, in a way, I still didn't see it coming because it is a movie that was somewhat marketed toward children and parents alike.

I really would've loved
>to see a little bit more between Max and his mother. IMO,
>those were the best scenes of the film. Catherine Keener was
>awesome in her role as Max's mother, as she always is (why
>hasn't this woman won an Oscar yet?)

i definitely felt the most connection to max in the beginning scenes because it set up the conflicts in his life quickly but well, and then even quicker than that it was off to the wild things, never to return until the end of the movie. i was actually expecting him to go back and forth in between the real world (where the conflicts would be set up) and his imaginary world (where the conflicts would be resolved or forgotten about because he was too busy "rumpusing") and for us to long for him to go back to the imaginary world every time he was in the real world. that might've taken too long, but one of my problems is we never really got to see how he adjusted to the real world, it only hinted that he's learned something, and at that age (and with his behavioral problems) that's not a safe assumption.

I think there were minor things you could complain about. Some pacing issues, some music cues, etc. but overall I think Spike did a brilliant job of capturing and translating this world. The kid - Max is absolutely perfect in every frame. I can't remember anything being this creative and visually inventive since "Eternal Sunshine". There's just so much imagination coupled with real life emotion. I'm someone who can't watch science fiction, most animation or even 90% of the CGI action stuff so for me to not only tolerate but enjoy the monsters is a feat in itself. I thought there was alot of nuance in the writing as it was kept simple enough for kids of a certain age to follow the story but had plenty of complexity for adults. For me this movie was a triumph and will almost definitely be at the top of my year end list.

The one metaphor that I was left wondering about was that of the other "kings". So Max was the first king that they didn't eat. Was that because he taught the monsters something as well as learning a lesson himself? Who were the other kings? Other kids using their imaginations who fell victim to the anger and discontent of the monsters world? I thought that was a somewhat strange inclusion by Spike/Eggers since my impression since reading the book as a kid is that this world is an invention of Max's own imagination. Other kings seems to imply that other kids have visited as well. What do others think?

as buckshot said above "I love how there was always a sense of danger - These weren't Disney Pixar monsters, these motherfuckers were emotionally imbalanced and could very well turn on Max at any given moment." I think the bones of the other kings they ate was just a further illustration of that point.

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

I feel that those kings represented all the times in the past Max's emotions/Wild Things got the best of him, and he lost out and was consumed by them.

.imageyenation.dot.com.

>I feel that those kings represented all the times in the past
>Max's emotions/Wild Things got the best of him, and he lost
>out and was consumed by them.

That's an interesting theory and most in line with the book. Not sure I buy it 100% but could be convinced after giving it some more thought.

As in your inner demons (the monsters) can eat you up if you succumb to the negative side of your personality.

>The one metaphor that I was left wondering about was that of
>the other "kings".

maybe his sister? she's older now and no longer wants to deal with Max. Could be his mother and father as well...through Max's eyes they've all abandoned him in some way.

may be a stretch, but I think it fits.

tryin to describe just how incredible and rich the plot was, but how accessible it is.

I think a lot of people are too fixated on the names that were attached to this film during production and how much hype was placed on it. Like, I feel a lot of you are jaded because of how Spike usually handles his films and the moment it got "Freudian", y'all was like "dude is trying way too hard..blah blah blah..this isn't accessible, it's too dark and complicated for kids, etc."

Honestly, I give Spike points just for even attempting this sort of thing. Not a bit of subtext was lost to me and nothing was shoved down my throat, like Pixar films do at times. It wasn't bright and colorful, like a Pixar film, which is probably why you guys are saying it's not accessible.

This shit was fantastic and I applaud Spike for being original, while not pretentious.

And, Karen O's beats is hot.

"Jesus died at age 33. But what he didn't do is forget his niggas." (c) Sir Bumpy of Knuckles

and i think most people understood that it wasn't going to be a kid's movie in the traditional sense. i also think most people understood what he was going for as far as the monsters being symbolic of max's actual life (even if we disagree on what they symbolize). it still seems like it was a bit too much.

look, he had to make it his own project because the book wasn't big enough, but there's no excuse for the movie losing a lot of the sentiment of the book. the place where the wild things were changed from a place to forget about the problems of the real world to a place to hash out the problems of the real world. that's not to say the movie should have been ALL fun and games, but there could have been a middle ground there, and i think in that middle ground they could have sold the movie to both kids and adults (which so many movies have done successfully this past decade or so).

Or rather you douchebags who were like "Ugh, this just screams hipster movie, this is gonna suck" - because anything indie = hipster - tarnished this movie.

I honestly can't tell you how much this word is being thrown around in regard to this movie and it's upsetting because people are automatically assuming that this is just a pretentious indie movie with a big budget, due to the "hipster formula" of Spike, David Eggers, & Karen O.

That or people can't appreciate it because it had a big budget and Spike worked the way he wanted to and disregarded that aspect to a degree.

And, the gripes with pacing are really something I'm not getting. It definitely held my attention throughout the whole movie and I didn't even want it to end when it did. I actually thought he kinda left things a little unresolved with the Wild Things when Max left the island.

Anyway, this jawn definitely needs to be watched more than once, but this initial hate is disturbing.

"Jesus died at age 33. But what he didn't do is forget his niggas." (c) Sir Bumpy of Knuckles

wanted this movie to be great. Maybe our expectations were too high based on how great the book was when we were kids. People here might have had a problem with the people they saw it with, but i think everyone gave the movie a fair chance. I seriously went in thinking this would be one of my favorite movies of all-time (in a sense the trailer was TOO good).


>And, the gripes with pacing are really something I'm not
>getting.


Well it seemed like every fun, wild scene that was fast-paced ended with sadness, which killed the mood (purposefully) but also killed the timing to a certain degree.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

I don't recall there being all that much wild and fun scenes between the Wild Rompus part and the Dirtball fight part.

But, if I'm not getting something, feel free to tell me.

"Jesus died at age 33. But what he didn't do is forget his niggas." (c) Sir Bumpy of Knuckles

then that ended with jealousy on the part of a couple characters. the point is there were zero scenes that were PURE fun. in other words, they took the spirit out of the book. i'm not really a person that complains about a movie being different from a book, and like i said i appreciated what spike went for (and i like his other movies), but to suck the fun out of a children's book that is VERY fun in the name of art... cmon.

removed more of the conflict that the movie had and had been more faithful to the book?

I mean, Maurice Sendak gave a pretty emphatic cosign, but i guess that's kinda irrelevant.

"Jesus died at age 33. But what he didn't do is forget his niggas." (c) Sir Bumpy of Knuckles

we are aware of Sendak's role, that doesn't excuse Spike making this movie that moody and removing ALL the fun from the book. after all, if the wild things are just gonna be representative of childish/moody humans, what's so "wild" about them really?

I'm not simplifying your arguement. I'm relating to the points you made by posing a question.

I swear you niggas think you gettin' points for faceless arguing of opinions across the internet.

Anyway, I'm trying to figure out how Spike could have still introduced some conflict in the story without detracting from the fun that book had.

Maybe the dialogue could have been less heavy, like when Carol showed Max his model of the ideal island. I think Carol was a little too cerebral at times, compared to everyone else.

KW was too, but much less than Carol.

Still, I really can't disregard the sentiments placed around this movie by the studio, film critics, and cinephiles. I feel like they all committed too much into making this movie out to be an adult film that kids can watch too.

"Jesus died at age 33. But what he didn't do is forget his niggas." (c) Sir Bumpy of Knuckles

Carol damn near had me in tears at the end.

Great discussion in this post & I don't have much to had that hasn't been said already. I thought the score was fine tho & all the voice actors were cast to perfection

I did find it kind of odd that the name Carol was used for the main male monster though. I thought maybe it represented Max getting in touch with his feminine side then also noticed it translates to free man. I figured Max/Carol was basically free to do whatever they pleased in this fantasy land but in reality there's always consequences & reprecussions. I couldn't help but think back on all those emoments Tony Soprano had with his shrink & dreams too but that was probably the shrooms*

On a lighter note I cracked the fuck up when Max was showing his special powers & Judith said she didn't get it. Then said she did get it & it was stupid. I just eneded a relationship with a girl who had a son the same age as Max & he was just as bad/imaginative. Several times I had a similar sentiment of Judith but refrained from sayin it.

Max Records is gonna be a stud tho. I knew I saw something in his limited screen time in The Brother's Bloom & now I'm convinced.



















* no shrooms were consumed during this movie but it might've been a lot cooler if they were

I couldnt believe they didnt give him more credit for doing the robot. he made it snow!

------------

One who wish to think like me, must find his way to OKP

OKP since 511BC

And the score by Karen O and The Kids was outstanding...

________________________________________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/punannydiaries

also on Facebook

I enjoyed it too, but I don't believe it deserves the bad rap it's getting.

Shit, maybe I was defensive because this movie is really risky and original, but this movie isn't as depressing, emo, and pretentious as people say.

I only mentioned Pixar because their work is considered the golden standard of accessible children's films, while I still believe they can be a little formulaic.

Whatever. Take it as you will, but I hope you have something worthwhile to say.

"Jesus died at age 33. But what he didn't do is forget his niggas." (c) Sir Bumpy of Knuckles

i really liked the movie
Did any one else find it kind of creepy/surreal?
Especially Paul Danos character.
I was baked, but some parts had a really weird vibe
it was good

i'm soooo not a dave eggers fan. when i heard that eggers was on board with this project, i cringed. still. i had hope. before i saw the movie, i thought it was the coolest concept ever. i still think it's the coolest concept ever. just. it didn't work for me. why?

1. no joy.
2. no joy.
3. no joy.
4. no joy.

i wanted this movie to be about kids and i wanted it to be for kids. my fear was that the movie would be about a generation of kids who read sendak's book and their narcisstic need to work out their issues as adults. it was. so many things about this movie were right. but. to me...it missed a huge emotional mark.

i saw the film with a small audience-- 6 people. a father and his son were in the theater with me. the son gave unedited, unashamed, precious commentary during the movie. he was maybe 4 or 5. he didn't connect with the film. i'm not sure if he understood it.

to carol and max: "dirt comes after dust!"
to his dad, whimpering, (more than once): "i'm scared!"
to his dad, whimpering, (more than once): "this is the scary part."
to his dad (more than once): "why ______?"

i don't think the movie had any magic, either.

and "Heartbreaking Work..." I'd like to blame the movie's mistakes on Eggers. I'm fine with that theory actually but I enjoyed 90% of it.