Wild Things

Well, as everyone at all interested in children's film knows by now, Spike Jonze's adaptation of Maurice Sendak's Where the Wild Things Are is finally--finally--in theaters. It was a long and turbulent process, as has been well documented, but the result looks worth it. I haven't seen the film yet, so I can't really comment on it personally (I haven't even seen Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs yet!), but this is a book that has a lot of resonance for me. I loved it as a child, enough so that in my senior year of high school I proposed it as the theme for our week-long homecoming celebrations and wound up drawing eight-foot pictures of all the creatures to adorn the hallways and editing my first videos of clips of various "wild things" (wildlife films, Muppets, etc.) to the song by the same name by the Troggs. Suffice it to say that I gained new respect for Sendak's artistic abilities, something that has quintupled since I started really getting into book illustrations.

Anyway, the film. It's getting mixed reviews and the main complaint seems to be that it's not exactly for kids, i.e. that it's too scary or morose. I'm glad that--evidently--Jonze and co-writer novelist Dave Eggers did not drag Max and his friends through the psychoanalytical wringer like, for instance, Ron Howard did with the Grinch a few years ago, ruining that film. What we have, according to Jonze, Sendak, and everyone involved is a movie about childhood, one that doesn't soften the blows or tie up all the loose ends, one that can be kind of dark but which is appropriate anyway, because childhood is kind of dark sometimes. As a parent of a young-ish child I'm cautious about whether it would be appropriate for her, therefore, but for anyone over six or seven I think it would most likely be a great experience.

Anyway, lots of reviews and articles are out there about it, but I'll link to a few to avoid making people google it themselves. There's a mix here between praise and condemnation--I guess viewers will just have to figure it out themselves.

Roger Moore at the Orlando Sentinel

Sharon Eberson at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (on Sendak himself)

Reuters that was right there on Yahoo's homepage

Saki Knafo at the New York Times on the production

Patricia Cohen at the New York Times on Sendak turning eighty last year

And finally Manohla Dargis at the Times with the actual review

Frank James at NPR reviewing the reviews (with links of his own)

Kenneth Turan at the Los Angeles Times basically giving it a thumbs down

And, placing the best last, David Denby's not-so-positive review at the the New Yorker, which they thankfully put online and which has garnered, I think, the most discussion--at least it has in my own little circle. Plus I like the picture. But besides reading every New Yorker review for the past two years I've been reading old Pauline Kael reviews as well, and I just think The New Yorker is a fun place to briefly talk about film.

Here, by the way, is Sendak, who is fiercely defending Jonze's film.

And here is Jonze, trying to get one of his recalcitrant actors into character. 

Now, speaking of The New Yorker, for New Yorkers I've saved the best little bit until last (even better than Denby's review). There are still a couple weeks left (through November 1) in which to see Sendak's original illustrations on display at the Morgan Library. This is worth going to because it's not just the finished illustrations in the book but earlier drawings and sketches as well, plus drafts of the story. It's an amazing opportunity that everyone here in the city should rush to. (Plus there's some William Blake there to boot!) Check it out on the Morgan's website. Here are two examples.