Where the Wild Things Are (2009)

I suppose I like WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE precicely because I can't quite put my finger on it. Is it a brilliant masterpiece? Is it a one-tone, one-level piece of art direction? All of the reviews I'd read of this film seemed to indicate that you would either love the film or hate it. So why do I find myself somewhere in the middle?

Regardless, that's where I do find myself. On one hand, I could sense the profound philosopical subtext of Spike Jones' film and grasp the fact that it's simplicity allows for a complex reading for those who look for it. But then there's the other hand, the one that isn't sure he's okay with the way Jones brings the storybook's Max into the wild world differently from Sednak's original tale. The one who found the narrative a little flat and even found the beautiful imagery to level out after a while. Hmm.

As much as I think I bought into it, there's a part of me that feels that Jones and co-screenwriter Dave Eggers used WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE as an opportunity to simply impress upon us their interpretation of the story. The morals and deeper meanings about childhood, after all, are far easier to detect in this film than in the sparcely-written children's book. In a sense, the film is lower on imagination, which is crazy because Jones is one of film's boldest dreamers of late, and there are plenty of reasons why visible here. But the message is SO heavy-handed. At times, it's like he's yelling at you: this is what you missed when you were reading the book! Childhood is cruel!

The film puts a key twist on the book, having its protagonist, Max, run away from his house and into a world where the wild, shaggy beasts he encounters are hanging out. From a cinematic narrative standpoint, I think I understand why Jones made this change. It raises the dramatic stakes. Now, the whole time he's gone, Max is literally lost in addition to being figuratively lost. The change also all but destroys the book's lighthearted elements, which I also think was intentional. In the book, Max retreats to his bedroom...conjures up this world in his imagination and makes something special out of a boring day. Jones doesn't address this aspect at all.

So what happens now is it becomes the director's clear interpretation against the ones we formed over the dozens of times we've read the book. This makes it a tough sell, and though I certainly admired this film greatly, my strong feelings about what the book has to say are assaulted by Jones here. And I don't want him to "win." Sure, what Jones has to say about childhood is a small component of how I interpret the story. But it's not all I think about it. Jones is far too heavy-handed.

Visually, WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE is charming. It's beautifully shot, even when it's intentionally dingy. Max Records, the boy who plays Max, is phenomenal. It's probably the best performance by a kid I've seen this year. Only James Gandolfini, who is hearbreaking as the voice of the monster Carol, really gets as much screen time as Max to have a strong impression on you. Other wonderful actors like Catherine Keener and Mark Ruffalo make brief appearances and remind you that Spike Jones has major cache and clout. He's a creative force that hip actors will want to work with. But the other characters are sidebars to this story.

In the end, WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE leaves the viewer with unsettled feelings and unanswered questions. If Max escapes to this magical world, why are the monsters so unhappy? If it was necessary to make his excursion a true journey rather than one in his imagination, why does surprisingly little seem to happen in this film's narrative? If this is one of the best-loved children's books of all time, why not make a film for that audience? It's hard to find satisfaction from the film in any of these areas.

And yet, when it's all said and done, this is a movie that masterfully, maybe even brilliantly captures tone. And, for as labored as the message is, it is also deeply affecting and moving. I found myself choked up at the end, not knowing exactly why. Ultimately, WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE fits nicely in the ecclectic, head-scratching canon of Spike Jones films, and it's saying a lot to say that I did like this movie but it might be my least favorite of his. That's how good Jones is. I am curious to see how a little time gone by will treat this film...how it will be regarded by audiences down the road. It's one of those movies that really could turn out to be regarded as a modern masterpiece. But for now, it wasn't quite wild enough for me.

3.0 out of 4