‘Where the Wild Things Are’ is an Exercise in Allegory
-----Springing from the classic children’s book, ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ had lots of ambition in the hands of Director Spike Jonze. Undeniably bold in its filmmaking, the question remained whether or not the small picture book could extend into a feature film. At times the answer is no, but with a consistent allegory and a few saving scenes, ‘Wild Things’ remains just intriguing enough to constitute a rent.
-----The story is fairly simple. Max, a child living with his Mom and sister, yearns for attention from those too busy to heed his call. During his most recent outburst, Max has gone too far, embarrassing his Mom in front of her date, and consequently fleeing out of the house. His imagination then takes over as Max finds himself sailing to a world full of strange creatures, of which he becomes King; ruler of all the land.
-----Max Records plays protagonist Max, in a role sometimes a bit too obnoxious for its own good. Audiences may tire over the whiny selfishness that seems to consume the child, but just when you’re on the breaking point, he reels it home with some genuine scenes that remind you of childhood. If there’s one thing that ‘Wild Things’ does manage to do effectively, it’s to capture the turmoil of childhood, happiness and sadness walking a line crossed only in leaps and bounds. By the end of the film, despite however upset Records occasionally made you, the bottom line is he gives a strong performance, teeming with heavy emotions. James Gandolfini plays the only other character with substantial screen time in Carol, Max’s best friend in his imaginary world. With a deep and believable monster voice, Max’s own inner feelings and ideals are reflected in the big fuzzy beast played astutely by Gandolfini. A few key scenes between the two form the cornerstones of ‘Wild Things,’ making it anything more than a dull allegory, entering into the territory of something excellent, if not fully realized.
-----The struggles that keep ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ from maintaining the momentum of its greatest scenes are found mostly in the lack of source material. The film is a relentless comparison to Max’s real life, but once this routine is tapped into, it can get very dull at times. All of Max’s real-life scenarios are played out in the film’s first 15 or so minutes, and the rest of the runtime is taken up by an extended execution of these occurrences in Max’s dream-world. One thing that is certainly unsettling is the darkness of the story, with everything but the protagonists’ struggles and perhaps the occasional sequence of Max interacting with the wild things sure to shoot right over children’s heads. This is not a fault in the film; it should just be known that the movies’ only significant feats in entertainment or storytelling will be irrelevant, and maybe even boring, for younger audiences. What is a fault of the film however is the dawdling pace that rarely picks up any sort of steam, with only superb visuals and a striking musical score to keep the audience going.
-----On that note, the musical score may well be one of the years’ best, perfectly synchronized and fitted with the many visuals and moods of the story. Not a scene goes by without Max’s mood mirrored in the musical notes reverberating through the theater. Also excellent are the wild things themselves, combining 80s-style physical costumed monsters, with a solid blend of CG that makes them feel far heavier and much bigger than purely CG concoctions likely would. Some may mock them as mascot-esque, but in reality they’re fitting interpretations of the images in the original children’s book. Also featured is splendid cinematography that perfectly frames the exotic and extreme variation of locations used in the film. By and large, Jonze has certainly made a statement from behind the camera, even if the story itself doesn’t always hold up.
-----Initially I did not like the film. An overbearing melodramatic exercise in allegory seemed to be the films function; that and the fact that the movie felt a lot more like a drawn out three-hour session than a ninety-minute family film. Then suddenly, a few hours after the viewing, I had an epiphany. I was no longer angry. Acting as the source of my rage was one of the worst crowds imaginable for a theater viewing. In my row of seats alone (close to the screen, only a couple of moviegoers in front of me), I witnessed three cell-phones taken out, heard two cell-phones start ringing, and was relentlessly bothered by the children next to me that continuously talked to their parents, including one burping contest. No doubt my negative reactions toward this audience did not aid the quality of my experience. As time passed, the film’s strongest scenes stuck willfully in my memory, and its technical prowess stood true. In light of my cinematic experience, you may want to rent ‘Where the Wild Things Are,’ despite the advantage of big monsters on the big screen. This also corresponds with my overall placement of the film, occasionally boring, occasionally brilliant, and always good looking; you should rent ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ if you harbored any prior interest in it. For those prefer the atmosphere of theaters, a balance that must be struck, weighing your personal excitement for the film against the possibility of dealing with noisy children and cell-phone prone adults. Ultimately, the stunning visuals, stirring musical score, and a few strong scenes including the films’ last, make ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ a film that should be rented by fans of filmmaking, if shunned by those looking for a more conventional, albeit more entertaining movie experience.
-----Oscar Watch: 'Wild Things' Art Direction, Costume Design, Cinematography, and Musical Score may have a shot with the Academy this year.
|
