Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Haven't seen it yet. Hope to on Saturday or sooner. Someone requested that a thread for reviews be started, so here it is!

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

I saw it on Monday night, I liked it, very imaginative, but I think it will be a love it or hate it kind of movie for some people. It will be interesting to see how well it does at the Box Office.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Seeing it tonight at 12:01!
:banana:
Let the wild rumpus start.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Any Box Office Predicitions?


i'm going to say 120 million.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

In the long run? Yes. I really would like for this thread to be about the movie and not its financial performance.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

yikes,

so sorry sir. it's your thread after all.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Dr. DVD, for future reference, you might want to include a 0 to 5 star poll in your review threads. I'd like to see it this weekend, but I imagine the matinees will be chock full of screaming brats. I'll probably wait a couple of weeks.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

im saying >100 milllion

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Ugh, I have to wait til Monday to see it :(

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

It's not a real review thread unless scott1598 starts it.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

And sets the rules!

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

I know you can't HUG a movie, but if there were ever a hugable movie.
I'd say this would be it.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Wait, there's no rules? Let the wild rumpus begin!

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Just came back from a midnight screening. I'm exhausted, but I can sum up my thoughts in the following statement:

What a boring, pointless piece of shit. It's nice to look at, I'll give it that; but I don't see this film grossing $100 million.

The theater I caught it at played it on three screens, all sold out, but I heard not one single positive comment walking out. Everyone's comments all related right back to the single point that it's boring. This film is going to have a hard time making money after it's opening weekend as children are going to downright hate this film. If I can't sit still for 100 minutes, I don't think a ten year old will.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

In what way was it boring and pointless?

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Okay, this is the first time I have done one of these review threads, so I apologize for not doing the whole star system deal. If you wish to include one in your review go right ahead. (Let's make it a five star system for control variable's sake.)

Also, if you did or didn't like the movie, it's nice to know why. I have read many reviews on these threads where people just come in and either say : "it sucks!" or "it rocks" with no real explanation. If it the movie delighted you, tell what it was that delighted you, if you thought it was a boring piece of shit, please say why you found it that way. It doesn't have to be in depth, a sentence or two will be fine. This actually comes from reading a lot of reviews from Rolling Stone's Peter Travers who either relentlessly gushes on or relentlessly bashes a movie but never gives reasons why.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

There's almost no plot is the main reason most people seem to find it boring.

The movie looks fantastic, but if it stayed true to the book, it really doesn't have enough material to fill 30 minutes, much less 3 times that.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

If any of you read the initial post of mine, I also said that I was exhausted. I was up all morning and only went to the midnight screening on a last minute whim.

Rich nailed it, the film has no plot. It's similar to the book in that Max causes temper tantrum, gets grounded, lets his imagination get the best of him, and comes back to reality in time for dinner.

When I go see a narrative feature, I like to see some sort of structure, maybe some character development, conflict, a protagonist, an antagonist; but this film has absolutely no rhyme or reason to it at all. Don't get me wrong, I get the similarities that Max and Carol are similar to how they react and take out their actions upon others; but that's not enough to fill 100 minutes. I get the book is only a few sentences long, but time the film more appropriately. If the film clocked in 70-80 minutes and had a much faster pace and maybe an actual goddamn storyline, I would've liked the film and I could've came back here and told you all how great it was. Instead, the film is just an unlikeable kid and a bunch of unlikeable monsters running around for too long.

I'm sorry to state this as a film major, but this is the second time I feel a studio should've taken all control away from the director as originally intended (the first being Across the Universe). I love Spike Jonze's last two films, but this was a mess.

EDIT: The one redeeming quality this picture has going for it, besides the cinematography, is Karen O's score. One of the rare times that a film's soundtrack is light years better than the film it came from.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

What is the book, about 10 sentences long?
This was my biggest question when I heard they were making this movie. How to fill out the rest of the film. I will end up seeing this because the girl wants to see it.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Rotten Tomatoes has this as 67% fresh right now.

By comparison, Zombieland is 88%.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

Positive reviews or not (and it sounds a bit mixed), I can't wait to see this.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

But so what it doesn't have a plot. It seems clear there was no intention to have a plot. And there has been plenty of positive reviews too, and those almost all love the feel and emotion of the film. It seems Jonze wanted to capture the feeling of being nine (at least from his perspective). Having not seen it, I can't say whether it's a success for what it aimed for, but I don't think "no plot" is a reason to say this is a bad film. It seems to be a film that will not appeal to people who like plot, but I don't think there is anything bad about that.

It polarizing for sure, but that sounds like a positive to me. It at least has a very strong singular vision and I hope that that works for me.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

I thought the movie was amazing. From the jolting start to the tearful conclusion, it was everything I had hoped it could be. The cast (live action and voice acting) was great. Jonze packed so much in there and really expanded on the book in a great way. The parallels between Max's real life and the Wild Things was masterfully done. And I don't just mean him being so similar to Carol, but rather the aspects of his personality in all of them. At times it was obvious, but other times it was very subtle.

I don't understand how anyone could be bored during this movie with so much going on. The scenes were intense. When they were running through the woods and had the dog-pile, I was very nervous that Max was going to get hurt, but enjoying the fun of it all. The whole atmosphere of everything being good and everyone being happy to everyone getting angry and thing starting to fall apart was a great contrast. Carol obviously exemplified this best, but I think the scenes where he lost his temper were genuinely scary, but he was sympathetic because he was just scared and alone. When he ripped off Douglas' arm, I almost lost it. The final scene on the island was so sad and really broke my heart. It left me feeling optimistic that things would change around there; that KW wouldn't run away when things got tough, that Carol would learn to control his anger, that the rest of them would listen to Alexander, and the Bull wouldn't be so isolated. Speaking of which, the part where he spoke was probably one of my favourites of the entire thing.

And even when there wasn't a big emotional scene or some action, it still held my attention and I enjoyed it. The entire mood and atmosphere Jonze cultivated was top-notch. The interactions between Max and the Wild Things were cute and funny, but also sad and sometimes troubling. This kid (ironic his real name is Max) did a great job making me believe he was Max and was actually on the island with the Wild Things. The times when Max would walk just be walking with one of the Wild Things and talking or when they would all start arguing were great and very realistic. I believed the discussions, I believed the bickering and the fighting. It was smart, charming, imaginative, and adventurous. It, like the book, does a great job of showing that while sometimes children can be very immature, there are other times when they are capable of real thought and are very aware of what is going on. Again, I just loved how so much of Max and Max's life was reflected in the Wild Things and that Max himself recognized all this.

Visually, the movie was a dream. I really hope when it is released on DVD/Blu-ray that we get some extensive behind-the-scenes features. I know there were real people in the costumes and that the faces were CGI, but I would like to see how the actual filming was done. The Wild Things were wonderfully realized; the CGI was so good that at times I had to remind myself that the faces themselves weren't really moving. They blended in wonderfully with the scenery and Max; it felt very organic.

Needless to say, I loved the movie and will probably see it again in theaters. Probably Spike Jonze best movie to date and definitely in my top 5 for the year. I'm sorry to hear that people think it's boring and I can't imagine it will do great numbers after this weekend; as much as I liked it, I can't picture parents and kids sitting there watching it.

EDIT:
Seriously? That's all you think the book is? In the other Wild Things thread we were talking about this, but that isn't the only thing happening in the book. There is a lot more going on in the book and this movie did an excellent job of actually showing it. If at the end of this movie you left thinking that Max came back to reality because his imagination got the best of him, then I really don't know what to say...

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

If Where The Wild Things Are is as shamelessly self-indulgent, stupid, and cloying as Across The Universe I think I may shoot myself.

Edit: As long as there isn't a sequence where Bono, singing "I Am The Walrus" drives a school bus full of stoners to a field where somebody says "Do you hear something?" only to walk over a hill to find Eddie Izzard butchering "Being For The Benefit of Mr. Kite," then Where The Wild Things Are automatically has to be better than Across The Universe.

Re: Where the Wild Things Are-Review Thread
 

I was coming more from a structural standpoint. I know the book is about childhood and dealing with anger. The book also happened to be a lot more impacting for me rather than the movie as the movie just didn't engage me.

If Jonze was going for seeing the film out of a nine year old's eyes and how he deals with anger, that's great. Maybe he succeeded there, but as an entertaining motion picture that gets the viewer engaged, I would whole heartedly disagree with that.