Monday, October 19, 2009

What?


So apparently movies can have absolutely no point or meaning these days.

Did anyone see Where the Wild Things Are this weekend?

All of us who did should engage in one gigantic group hug.

Or go to therapy together

or in the least make a big fat pan of brownies, pass out the forks and eat them right out of the pan.

What did this movie mean?

After thinking about the movie all night, the only thing I could think of was maybe it was a two hour advertisement for Ritalin.

I'm pretty sure some brilliant advertiser made a two hour advertisement, and I paid money to sit through it.

10 comments:

Garratts said...

People on the radio were saying how wonderful this movie was, but it was more for adults than kids.

I thought it was based on a childrens book. HA HA

UW said...

We watched it last night, all I can say with certainty is that it did not follow the book at all.

In the book he was bad and got sent to his room, while in his room he went to this place in his imagination, actually conquered them by just staring at them, then got lonely there and wanted to go back home.

The best I can figure about the movie is that the boy went there and found all his personalities, the good ones and the bad ones, in the "wild things".

I guess that what happens when you try to make 2 hour movie out of 10 sentences.

Hendrick Family said...

After saying about 100 times to your brother, "WHAT DID THAT MEAN?". He said maybe all the "Wild Things" displayed different traits of the boy's behavior. I thought about that through the movie, but some just did not line up. There wasn't enough about his life prior to him leaving home to make me understand who he was before going away. So, if that was the point, it was so vague that it irritated me.

Argh. This movie is turning me into a monster. Does anyone know Spike Jonze? Could you call him?

Heather

The Mengers said...

Movies made from simple children's books never do well. Consider Polar Express and The Cat in the Hat. They have to stretch the story out so much to make it movie-length that the story gets lost in all the fluff.

One Crowded House said...

We thought the same exact thing....

WHAT????

We were thankful we went to the cheap theater to see it.
We even brought my husband's grandparents.... they were equally confused. I am sure they thought we were nitwits even thinking that was going to be a good movie.

Big waste of time if you ask me.

And yes, I thought the biggest monster was supposed to represent the boy- but seriously? kids wouldn't get that!?

Rachel Webb said...

Hey Heather,
I haven't seen the movie, but a friend of mine did and wrote a blog post about it (he liked it and saw a lot into the story line). It's just his artistic take on the movie, but maybe it will help make some sense of it! www.chriskinsley.com

Hendrick Family said...

Thanks Rachel! I just read his post. Very good.

I wanted the movie to be about those things too...that's what I was looking for in the movie, but just felt like the whole thing was weak. I wanted to be swept away in the movie...in the struggles of childhood, but wasn't. I wanted to enter into a child's imagination and feel that need for community...but again...it was all too vague. I had to work too hard during the movie to make connections. I had to force myself to go along with the ideas in the movie, instead of being taken there through artistic expression.

I liked the guy's review. They should have had his help when writing the movie!

Heather

Lisa said...

Heather, I totally agree with you about the vagueness and wanting to be swept away in the little boy's imagination.

I saw it with my boyfriend, and I was SO thankful because he completely saw the Lord in it! I had a hard time because we studied the book in school all week (I'm student teaching in 2nd grade). He also thought that all the "wild things" represent a part of the little boy, Max. Looking back, I see parts of the movie that portrayed amazing Scriptural truths, but I agree that it kinda hurts to think that hard. He was selfish the entire time, but his selfishness was a flawed and broken way to live. When he first arrived to "Where the Wild Things Are," you see that KW had fled because she didn't like how things were run there. Max had also just fled his own home. In the end, his kingdom was not sustainable because of selfishness. In the book, the Wild Things want Max to stay (and I loved in the movie how they longed for him to stay!) But Max said "No" to himself, and left to be "where someone loved him best of all" (book quote)--back at home with his mom.

I also really liked the line "Happiness isn't always the best way to be happy."

Lisa

Mandy said...

I haven't seen the movie because I was so disappointed in Maurice Sendak in this interview:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/216997/page/3
He sounds so mean.

Lacee said...

So I'm going to assume it would be more beneficial for me to just... not go see it and waste my time and just rent it. That way I can watch like 10 minutes and decide whether or not to return it.