Too many fans seem to be blown away

ridiculous rating

A Brilliant Conflict

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

When watching this movie, I convinced myself not to like it and to shame upon it for being dark and depressing, unlike Sendak's book which I grew up with. After reading "Heads On and We Shoot: The Making of Where the Wild Things Are" I fell in love with the movie. The amount (many years, in fact) of time that went into making this movie along with the minimal cast and crew diced in with some fresh and unique storytelling, neat cinematography, and a wonderful director who created bonds and friendships with almost everyone on set made this movie so enjoyable to watch again and again, although my family did not necessarily like the constant tidbits of awesome information that I spewed out throughout the film the third time I watched it.

Visually stunning for the first 2-minutes of the introduction of the Henson inspired CGI/puppetry later seamlessly meshing into the dreary background of bland colors used in the film. From director Spike Jonze "to make a movie about childhood rather than to create a children's movie." with a niche idea the end result was a drawn out one- dimensional gloomy film with a self-fulfilling ending all pitched to who?

If you haven't yet read Maurice Sendak's classic book, you can go ahead and do that now because its only 347 words long. This review I'm typing ended up being almost twice as long.The point I'm making is that the original book didn't have much of a plot; its charm is in the imaginative illustrations. So the task of adapting the book to a 1 hr 41 min feature film was very ambitious, to say the least.Let's complicate matters. In the original story the main character, Max, isn't a very likable protagonist. In almost every drawing he is shown with a malicious smirk on his face as he causes mischief such as chasing the family dog around with a fork, and then later commanding others to do his bidding with a tyrannical ferocity. I won't go into a discussion of Sendak's book, but let's just say it's not your typical cutesy fable or morality play.Quirky and ofttimes cynical director Spike Jonze (known for the excellent "Being John Malkovich") was well suited for the job. During production, Jonze consulted Sendak himself, so we can guess that the author's original intent was mostly preserved. The result is that this is definitely no Disney flick. If you're looking to take your kid to a "Beauty and the Beast" entertainer, hmm, you might wanna look elsewhere.Great, so if that didn't scare you off, let's talk about what's good about this film. One: they didn't corrupt the original bratty concept of Max. Although he's considerably softer around the edges than the fork wielding demonchild in the book, he's still not exactly likable, and so he's almost an anti-hero. Of course he's still a cute kid, so you can view him as that, but I like to think he's a troubled juvenile with some serious psychological issues brewing.Two: the visuals & special effects are primo. The master puppeteers of Jim Henson's group (Henson himself died a few years prior to filming) provided amazing 7ft tall animatronic puppet suits with actors inside which were augmented by subtle cgi. In other words, to all my fellow cgi haters, this was done very tastefully. Sets and landscapes are jaw dropping, having been filmed in the majestic forests & deserts of Australia.Three: the music is pretty cool. Composed and performed by Karen O (The Yeah Yeah Yeahs), the score and songs are edgy but still cinematic enough to blend with the film. Most of the songs are simple haunting melodies with an alternative rock vibe. If you're not familiar with Karen O, think of maybe Bjork.Four: it has a pretty complex message that may be lost on young kids, but adults may get it. It's the idea that life's problems aren't so easy to solve, even when everyone does exactly as you say. You might even sense socio-political overtones as Max attempts to create order in his imagined kingdom while learning that you can't please everyone all the time. This is where the film deviates from the book where Max is a tyrant who imposes his rule over obedient and mostly mindless subjects. Here, the creatures have individual personalities and opinions. So in the film, Max faces the reality of making mistakes. He isn't so sure of himself, and his choices often lead him to deep regrets. I count this as a big plus, even though it may confuse young kids who are expecting a simple, digestible fairytale. Don't be surprised if your child comes out slightly confused, if not disturbed. (Note, there's a bit of violence... no blood, but a character or two might get slightly maimed).I would categorize "Where the Wild Things Are" with other fairy tales for grownups, like "Willy Wonka" (as well as the recent remake "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory") and an obscure 70s gem with Gene Wilder "The Little Prince". This film is probably closer to the children's side than those others which were clearly skewed toward adults. That's probably where it lost a little punch in my opinion. But it's still a great flick that does a nice job honoring a classic book. By the way... wtf? Did I just use the word "socio-political" to describe a children's flick? I need to get out more :/

Where the wild things are is directed by acclaimed film maker Spike Jonze, based on the novel by the same name. One must really admire the director's take on the novel, because it is truly beautiful, emotional and an intellectual study on the potent mindset of a child's psychology. What does that mean? Well, first let's look at what we got. We know that the kid, Max, is a hyperactive child with deep imagination. He always wants to play, but his mother and family have no time for him. And due to this, he creates an imaginary world where he interacts with imaginary beasts and desires to stay there forever. This is where people get heavily divisive: they complain for the lack of story. And in some respects, they are correct. The film in the beginning starts off traditionally as any movie, with introducing the characters, constructing the story and all that good stuff. It's when the child starts to go to the imaginary island that things get tricky. It's true that there is no story as in normal movies do, but then again, it doesn't need a story to tell. Think back when you were a lonely child, when you had no one but your own imagination. You probably created a world with your favorite characters to interact with. Now think of this: did your world had any plot story, or any sort of logic? Of course not. And this is exactly what the movie is, it is the boy interacting with his own world, telling his own story in his own unique way. He doesn't want to give you a plot, but for you to understand his emotions and what he is going through. It's his way of dealing with loneliness and understand things. In short, his world is run purely on emotion, and not logic. The child actor in this film is phenomenal. He gives an emotionally potent performance and you understand what he feels. This is also supported by beautiful direction from Spike Jonze, who clearly knew what he was supposed to do. The film is also beautifully as captivating as the writing, giving a very gritty and dark, but majestic world.The cinematography is also unbelievably well shot and focused. As for the music, both the musical numbers as well as the composed songs are very emotional and play their purpose when needed. It's a bold and risky movie that might not be for everyone, especially for young kids. If you want a typical movie with a flowing narrative then this is not for you. However, if you want a movie that dives deep into its characters in hope of understanding yourself, then this is the right film for you. a 10/10 masterpiece