|
Showing reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 178)
|
|
 |
If you loved the book, you'll love the movie, funny and sad. Followed the story very whell.
8/10
10.12.2009 -
mentalbreakdown@ - age: 13-17
| | | | |
I'm quite certain this movie is an acquired taste. I'm also thinking that some of the people who are claiming it's genius are suffering from a bad case of the Emperor's New Clothes. There is no doubt Mr. Jonze has made some truly original, cult classics... this is not one of them. I'm guessing a lot of folks will say it's amazing because they don't want to look like they don't get the high artsy hysterics that are the meat of the film. I assure you, there is nothing to get, it's just a bloated, confused mess. Someone threw a lot of money at Jonze to do this because of his success with past efforts. It's sad to think this may be less likely to happen again because this film so missed the mark. I think he's a great director but he really screwed the pooch on this turkey (to put it mildly) A for effort, F for the end results. The only thing you would accomplish by bringing a kid to this movie would be to them tell you, without the pressure of some odd intellectual snobbery, that it is one naked mess. Go see anything else and if you're lucky, you'll never be stuck on a plane with only this tripe to watch.
3/10
10.12.2009 -
srbecca@ - age: 26-35
This is unlike any other move I've ever seen. Brilliant!!
10/10
6.12.2009 -
brettsicle@ - age: 18-25
It was so different from what I expected. I expected just a fun kids' movie, but this moved me and stayed with me long after I left the theater. It was such an honest and courageous portrayal of emotions and relationships. The wild things had such sweet expressive faces. The movie also had some clever lines. I especially loved the line "Happiness isn't always the best way to be happy".
9/10
29.11.2009 -
lisa892@ - age: 36-49
It helped to read the description and reviews prior to seeing the movie as I never heard of the book. So I could enjoy the movie more. I read the book afterwards, which is very short and not as interesting. Therefore the movie is much better than the book in my opinion. Plus the actor playing Max carries the movie completely. I recommend this movie to parents and children ages 6-10.
7/10
21.11.2009 -
fly_zenia@ - age: 36-49
I was so sure it could not live up to the book, I didn't want to see it. My friend 'dragged' me to it. I kept expecting to be bored, I mean, how do stretch such a skinny book into a full-length movie? I thought who can the wild things be beside big monsters? Spike Jonze and Maurice Sendak collaborated to create a masterpiece. It looks simple enough, like the book, but it contains much depth, humanity, and sheer genius. Unfortunately, its appeal to children is limited.
10/10
20.11.2009 -
mgendron@ - age: 50+
I get it, I get it, but I still hate it. I have read this book endlessly to my young grandchildren, but there is no way I can take them to see the movie. Who is the audience supposed to be? It's not targeted for young kids, and all the angst is a big bore for everyone else. The good part is the Wild Things look great, and their faces are very expressive. But, they are all whiny and needy and annoying, not wild and scary. Give this movie a miss, and enjoy the book.
2/10
18.11.2009 -
judy_cass@ - age: 50+
The original story shows that all of what happened was a dream; the movie, on the other hand, seems to suggest that the boy really escaped. For his worried mother to greet him warmly and lovingly without any anger is to encourage children that the child's behavior is acceptable. This is a very distorted message! It ruined the fantasy of the original story.
6/10
18.11.2009 -
mnz44@ - age: 36-49
The first movie I walked out on since Grease. I heard a SF critic compare it to the Wizard of Oz (so I went, and my wife fell asleep) To compare it to Oz is blaspheme. The main character was a totally unlikable kid. Dorothy he ain't.
4/10
17.11.2009 -
dmandich@ - age: 50+
This movie had my interest in the beginning, it had potential. The end didn't explain anything at all.
6/10
17.11.2009 -
ashleywareham@ - age: 18-25
One of the best movies I've seen. Period. I went with my wife and 10-year old, thinking that she was mature enough to appreciate it. She was, thankfully. What we expect is what happened: at the end of the film, half of the audience was blown away by an incredible adventure that is, for all intents and purposed, Jung's Red Book condensed into 90 minutes. Those who immediately caught on and understood the premise of the film, the symbolism, etc., all raved. It was unbelievable. Of course, the other half of the audience sat there scratching their heads saying "I don't get it. What was the point? " Sad, really. To summarize, if you barely have the cerebral capacity to tie shoes, or expect Muppets Take Manhattan, stay at home. If you want Jung meets Freud meets Lord of the Flies, this film will absolutely blow you away.
10/10
16.11.2009 -
jhwilson@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
Reading all the negative reviews that people are giving has convinced to put in my input, which is pretty much the opposite. People are first off definitely missing the point of the film, it is something that talks a lot about love and how it is unconditional, but the meaning to that idea is going to be different for everyone no doubt. I can agree that it is not really a film for children, it is guided more towards the audience that grew with the book of only 10 lines and wanted to re-live that childhood memory once more. Being in that group of people, I found this movie touched me on such an emotional level and it really was something beautiful for me and to those who don't get that connection to the film then that is honestly your loss. The art and soundtrack was definitely amazing in itself. And yes, I do believe that everyone should see the film and if you are not the type who is walking into that theater with a positive outlook, I would suggest looking at the movie from a different angle (figuratively of course!)
10/10
16.11.2009 -
savannamariasmith@ - age: 13-17
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
If I could give it a higher number, I would. Max is a little boy just hitting the age where his ability to think and reflect are expanding exponentially. He is only just beginning to to see the world as being populated and not simply an extension of his needs and whims. At the best of times, this is a turbulent time in life, with grief, and confusion and frustration. During this time a person has great internal conflicts and no tools or reference point for resolving them. The voyage to monster island, away from the external world of events, to the internal world of feeling and sorting and understanding is so ingeniously portrayed, with each of the monsters being an amalgam of parts of himself, parts of the people in his life and parts of the experiences he is processing. I think some viewers were troubled by the violence and personalities of the monsters, and wondered what they were supposed to be teaching Max. But Max isn't on a hero quest, with helpers who show up on the way. Max is growing. Max is the island, and he is all it's inhabitants. The raw emotions of a troubled child, whose world is in constant flux, are violent and chaotic. This movie is heavy, and not to be mistaken for a fluffy child adventure. It is intense and complex and unresolved, after all, it is a single day in the densely packed experiential world of a child. It's really a must see.
10/10
16.11.2009 -
somerled@ - age: 36-49
Terrible Movie! I CAN’T see any Good Point from it. People dressed up in furry suits, acting stupid around a boy... Don’t tell me the great point is using monster’s anger to reflect kid’s anger... If I made this movie, I would never dare to let it play in THERATER!!!
1/10
16.11.2009 -
dominiqca@ - age: 18-25
I really don't know why anyone would rate the movie any lower than a 7. I suppose if you are expecting a silly, cheesy, children's movie than your disappointment might fuel you to rate the movie poorly. The fact is that "Where the Wild Things Are" is a good movie, period. It remains true to the book, while adding depth. The acting and directing is good, and the plot is basically the same as the book: An imaginative boy rebels, looking for attention, and goes on an imaginative journey. By the end, he learns that no matter what happens, his family's love for him is strong and remains the most important thing in his life. The movie had my fiance and I shed genuine tears at the end. Watch the movie!
8/10
16.11.2009 -
sirbenly@ - age: 18-25
I loved it. It is so good when it comes out I know i'll buy it.
10/10
15.11.2009 -
myckymouse99@ - age: 1-12
Many people dont understand the utter brilliance of this emotional movie. Think again at the metaphorical parts before you go rating it 1/10. - This movie is awesome :D
10/10
15.11.2009 -
kimmodude@ - age: 1-12
Great special effects. Dumb storyline. What was the point of this movie? There was none. I did not expect much from this movie and got even less than that.
4/10
14.11.2009 -
rodneywareham@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
This movie explores uncomfortable territory. Do NOT bring young children; it's not for them. The lead character is a psychologically disturbed young boy. Feeling unloved, he runs away from home. He arrives in a land populated by monsters who each represent archetypal developmental personality issues. The lessons learned are subtle and understated. Many negative reviewers clearly missed them altogether. If you're unwilling or unable to look deep inside and confront the beast you find there, don't bother with this movie. But if you can manage honest reflection upon a less-than-perfect life, you might discover this movie's richness.
8/10
14.11.2009 -
spoxox@ - age: 36-49
I went there on a class trip and it was sooo boring and stupid that most of us got lost in the first half hour. I enjoyed the pre-show trivia much more. The big Monster's name was Carol- what kind of a guy' name that? It was a waste of space, time and money. It sucked $#! + and the worst part is when a guy has a mental spaz then K.W was all hide in my stomch what the heck.
1/10
14.11.2009 -
cunningham@ - age: 13-17
This is a great movie for children and adults who enjoy slower-paced story telling. It is a metaphor of the human relations told is a fairy tale way. Angry kids might profit from watching this, but they have to be at least 7 or older.
8/10
14.11.2009 -
liliconnellan@ - age: 36-49
All the "1/10'ers" must be those same people that see a child in a movie preview and big furry monsters and automatically assume a childrens movie. ****Please research your movies before you make bad choices**** Of course your children will not like this movie as it is based on books from before their time and is vast beyond the maturity of children. This was a fantastic movie based on the books. Before you see this movie you should check out the books as you will be pleased with the outcome instead of disappointed because you didn't think to check into it first.
10/10
13.11.2009 -
mrjonny486@ - age: 18-25
It's an awesome movie. Go see it.
9/10
13.11.2009 -
madihart13@
I cannot think of a decent way at least to say about this movie, none at all, my husband and I were discussing wether to go see that meatball movie or where the wild things are... I thought it would be interesting to see this one coz we do not know anything about this movie... but yah it should have stayed that way... coz this movie sucks!!!
1/10
13.11.2009 -
zelah75@ - age: 26-35
I honestly loved this movie! I brought my little sister who is 10 with me and she found it to be more funny than scary. The middle and end were a little depressing but that's part of the story. I smiled, I cried, I was angry, I was scared, I was crying from laughter... I love it when movies do that to me! Awesome movie!
9/10
12.11.2009 -
jeremy,mandi,friesen@ - age: 18-25
I don't normally leave a comment but I just had to save anyone out there who is thinking to see it, this movie was disgusting, dark, angry, disturbing, the writer had to have been on something.
1/10
12.11.2009 -
rachstuf@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
This movie is NOT a children's movie, especially for children 4 yrs or younger. The 3 yr old behind me kept crying and saying "I don't like this movie, I'm scared". Within the 1st 15 minutes of the movie. What she found scary was the badly behaved central character screaming and running through his house, tearing up things, who seemed more like a child with pathological problems than your every day run of the mill kid. I explained to the mother she could get her money back if they went before a 1/2 hr was up, so off they wisely went. I skeptically at this point waited, stubbornly wanting to see the monsters, and wondering if there could be a redemption in the film yet to come. The movie never got better, but once they got into the fantasy monster part, visually everything became all tones of brown, no colour whatsoever. It was a depressing, boring array scenically, and the story line was worse. Among the morals of the story: lie lots, screaming and running around are perfectly acceptable, and if you rip off your friends arm, it's no big deal. This movie is frought with ethical/moral problems so much that it's scary. If it wasn't so boring.
2/10
12.11.2009 -
marla10b@ - age: 36-49
Ugh. I expected this movie to be fun and provide a good two hours of escapism. Instead it was the most sucky, angsty movie I've ever seen. The animals were well constructed, but the entire poo brown set colour was depressing, as was the music, and the "adult" "parents are only human--we're all fallible" theme became tired so quickly. I don't know if this movie was intended for adults or children, but it would bore the pants off any kid and make most adults want to puke with its revoltingly sentimental, unimaginative exploration of human nature. Blah! Avoid at all costs!
1/10
10.11.2009 -
juliammichener@ - age: 26-35
Me and my BFF saw it and we talked through the whole movie it was sooo boring it had NO POINT!!!
1/10
10.11.2009 -
ccts4@ - age: 1-12
This is a bit of a cult film. If you read the book and loved it, you must see the movie. It is like the extended version of the book with character's appearance preserved precisely to the illustrations in the book. I've been on this movie with my 4 y. o. son and 10 y. o. daughter - they both liked it. My son have been reading this book in kindergarten this year and my daughter have seen this book in our house. I liked the movie for how comically the relationships between monsters was resembling some real people behaviours. Although, the 5 y. o. son of my friend was bored at this movie.
10/10
9.11.2009 -
kotelni@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
My aunt enjoys kid movies she got to pick what movie to see. My father agreed. My mother loved the book but did not want to see the crazed movie. My brother is 7 years old he was not excited to see the movie. "I want to see Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs." he complained. I agreed with him. We went to see the movie. I did not enjoy the beginning, he got mad and bit his mother. I believe that that is teaching children bad habbits. Then he runs away because he got in trouble and goes to where the wild things are. The monsters want to eat him so he starts lying, which teaches kids that lying will get you out of trouble. All through the middle of the movie is nonsense, fighting, dissagreements, arguements, and yelling. During this my father and aunt left to walk around because they were bored. My brother yelled out loud "I never want to see this movie again." When Max goes home he leaves with no solution to the fighting and sorrow. That was about the time my brother fell asleep. When Max got home his mother rewarded him with choclate cake for running away which teaches another bad habbit. Therefore it is not a movie for kids or adults. It is a 2 hour waste of time and money. Usally on the way home we talk about our favorite parts of the movie. When we got to the car all we did was complain about our headaches and how bad the movie was. It has been three days and we're still complaining. So don't go out and waste your money on this horrible movie!!!
1/10
9.11.2009 -
littles@ - age: 1-12
This movie is a classic; the best I've seen this year. If you prefer your movies loud and stupid and loaded with computer generated effects, however, skip this one. It's intelligent and it's got a lot of heart, and it's made with real creature effects and puppets. Just to let you know, kids under 8 or 9 in the theater just didn't get it; they talked a lot and were obviously very bored. So if you've got kids in that demographic, take them to something else.
10/10
8.11.2009 -
shaunmcleod@ - age: 36-49
I have not read the book, so this was totally new to me. I enjoyed it. It reminded me of those magical thoughts and feelings which I had as a child playing games and getting lost in my own universe.
7/10
7.11.2009 -
omnimodis78@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
A couple of reviews have noted the difference between the movie and the book, saying that the book tells kids that it's okay to be for no reason "your bad self" every once in a while, while in the movie everything that is different about Max is the result of his troubled home life. The problem with the movie, so the argument goes, is that the trip to where the wild things are does not help Max recover a meaningful life in any way. In my review I want to suggest that this is a movie for adults, not children and that the movie is about hopelessness. Max's mother is overwhelmed by the challenges of being a single mom, she can't give Max the attention he wants, and she is compelled to act in ways that throw him totally off center. Clearly this boy, if things go in this way, is going to have a troubled childhood and adolescence, probably adulthood as well. He bites his mom and goes to where the wild things are and they do nothing for him at all, nothing restorative. Where the wild things are Max dwells in a realm of fantasy that is as dangerous as his home life if not more -- the violence is greater and it is external to him, the threats are larger, the misunderstanding easier to come by. Blame and forgiveness are also imposed irrationally. So there is nothing to learn except this: others want you when they want you. When they don't want you they eat you or abandon you. Maybe they change their minds, but ultimately there is nothing you can do to control your relation with others. That's all I see as learned where the wild things are. Max leaves there and returns home to a mother who has nothing to offer that is anything different than what she was offering when he left. They throw themselves into each others arms in a desperate embarce that signals two things:(1) their inability to live without each other and (2) their inability to provide each other what they need in order to grow meaningfully as people. This is certainly a different message from the book, but it is a profound message -- a suggestion that people are tied together by chaotic irrational forces that cripple as much as heal them -- that the relation between a parent and a child is both desperate and necessary. If this were intended, then it is a profound movie, but it is hardly a message for children.
6/10
6.11.2009 -
gprl6102@ - age: 18-25
So I took my son who's 4 to see it... instead of watching the movie we had a popcorn fight which was much better, this movie sucked and the kid who starred in it acted like he had serious issues he came off as a dirty, no manners, liar, problem child... right through when we were watching I had to tell my son, Now that's bad what he did, or he's a bad boy, b/c I didn't want my son to think this is the way kids should act... also what the heck was up with the unsteady camera footage?
4/10
6.11.2009 -
nanooflinda@ - age: 26-35
Loved this!!! Finally the first kids movie in a long time that's worth seeing!!! (My four year old was scared at different times, not for the little ones:()
10/10
6.11.2009 -
abcddolliver@
This is an enjoyable and extremely original movie. It's something different, yet it's very well done. All of the characters are completely believable. It feels like, though it's rated G, nothing is dumbed down. There's a fair bit of use of metaphors and other such poetics in the movie - indirectly applied - which is quite nice also; you get more than just the simple face value of the picture. I should mention that there seems to be two different groups of people that come out of the movie: One group loves it, and one group hates it. There are the few who fall in the middle, but for the most part there are just polar opinions. I am one of the people who enjoyed the movie very much; the opinion of others always does matter, however it's odd that some people claim they could hardly muster up the patience to sit through the movie.
8/10
5.11.2009 -
pc_rosberg@ - age: 18-25
Highly recommend it. Unless of course you're a total buffoon with some sort of entertainment related myopia.
7/10
4.11.2009 -
chewy123@ - age: 18-25
Wow. All of those who considered this film to be "1/10" or "terrible" or "a waste of money" obviously didn't understand the movie. This film was an incredible journey from beginning to end and elaborated on the fundamentals of family, forgiveness and companionship. The incredible soundtrack was a triumph from arcadefire. A definite must see.
9/10
4.11.2009 -
thumbalena_0513@ - age: 18-25
In a tale such as this reality is no substitute for a powerfully concieved imaginative space. The book had a charm that opened one up to its story. The characters are wonderfull but out of context running about in a real woods. The surreal desert scenes were the most convincing. Max was too despertly unhappy to enjoy and needed more than the Wild Things. The film Pans Labyrinth conquered all of the problems that Wild Things attempted.
6/10
4.11.2009 -
jeromemcnicholl@
The worst movie never seen in my life...
1/10
4.11.2009 -
zhihuix@ - age: 26-35
Amazing movie, well written. I think you definitely need to see it yourself, to have your own opinion on the movie rather than going by everyone's opinion. It does depend on the type of movies you like and kids might find it a little scary during some parts. It was happy, funny and sad at the same time. (A good sad though):D A must see in on my list!! Check it out!
9/10
3.11.2009 -
lucky_charm_19@ - age: 13-17
Characters were exactly like the book. I found it a bit disturbing but my son liked it and related to the characters 'feelings'. That was worth the price of admission.
7/10
3.11.2009 -
itsallgood2003@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
This is a troubling movie. It has the same name as a small book -- indeed it is supposed to be a movie based upon the book. One could say that it is grounded in the assumption that narrative can be "repeated" in different media forms. In this case, however, it doesn't work for a variety of reasons -- here's one: 90 minutes of film requires a lot more information than ten pages of pictures (with a sentence for each) can provide; consequently, there is a lot of detail added, and this detail ultimately eliminates some of the functional ambiguity in the original book. Max, for example, is a little devil in the book and that sort of devil works great in cartoon. But in cinema, with more sentences and more history, he comes off as something quite different -- i.e., in the book he's a little "demon" but in the movie, he's "mentally ill". Sendak structures this mental illness around three characteristics in the mother: her lack of a partner, her attempts to get a partner, and her sense of exhaustion with respect to both Max and her tenuous job. In the film, these factors make Max the way he is -- simply to fill out a movie, in other words, the film makers turned Max into a child in crisis, troubled by some of the dominant moral issues of our time. It's very clear, in the first ten minutes that Max is relating to his mother in terms of functional allegory. He isn't just being a crazy little demon like "book Max" -- he's acting out the trauma of his life from the perspective of a child who does not know how to make sense of his world. Indeed the entire atmosphere of the first ten minutes is of such overwhelming crisis that viewers might become exhausted and walk out were it not for their hope of repair. These first ten minutes are not, then, the random wickedness of "book Max" and they place high expectations within the reader for the journey to follow. Meaningful narrative has clearly defined structures -- thus, as Chekhov says "A gun that goes off in the third act must somehow be made present in the first." In the same way, if you are going to make a child "sick" in a movie, then the journey stage must either cure (romance) or kill (tragedy) him. Neither happens in this book. Instead the journey is to a land of spectacle in which nothing structurally meaningful happens. Instead, the film makers blow up the cartoon landscape of the book and have characters speak with the same randomness as they speak in the book. It is a dream, as someone said, but there is nothing Jungian about it (and yes I have read most of Jung) Consequently when the child comes home, nothing has been learned. In the short book, that doesn't matter because the child didn't need to learn anything -- he was just bad because he liked being bad, and ultimately his parents didn't mind that he was bad (hence his dinner was "hot") The message kids get when they read that book is that it's okay to be a little demon, it's even okay to run away in your mind and have wicked fantasies, your parents will still love you. The boy in the movie is "mentally ill" however, he is suffering from a troubled life. So what are you supposed to learn from that: that troubled children are a hopeless lot? A lot of social research will confirm that, that is true, but I don't need to go to a movie to watch it happen. Thus, while some people may like this film because they liked the book, it is not a good film. And there's no sense pretending that you liked it because you are "aesthetically superior" as some have. The reason you were able to like this movie so much is not because of what you were able to see -- it was what you were willing to overlook: the tragic crisis of "Movie Max". The movie is a critical failure because it damages Max to make the story last 90 minutes but it cannot find a way to repair him -- that or they didn't even understand that he needed to be repaired. That's why it feels pointless at the end.
2/10
3.11.2009 -
com2013@ - age: 13-17
It was terrible for the whole family not good, my 1 friend took her kids out of it bc it was so bad.
2/10
3.11.2009 -
austinhere10@ - age: 13-17
I love this movie, I cried :( but it was amazing :D
10/10
3.11.2009 -
meaganpetersen1@ - age: 13-17
Really great. Had that 'film festival' feeling... which is not always a good thing... but very unique atmosphere and emotions... if you like that sort of thing. Avoid if you like watching metal robots fighting for hours on end.
9/10
2.11.2009 -
benimator@ - age: 26-35
Worst movie ever! Don't waste your money on it the movie sucked.
1/10
1.11.2009 -
emily@ - age: 1-12
Don't know how I was able to stand sitting through it all. By the time it was over, I had a headache.
3/10
1.11.2009 -
rubymoon@ - age: 50+
This movie was terrible. It is extremely random and has no meaning. It's very childish, and boring, even my 9 year old sister said it was terrible. The movie was obviously low budget and at some points in the movie you find your self blankly staring at the screen wondering what is going on. I definitely do not recommend this movie for anyone. Not even for small children.
3/10
31.10.2009 -
borges,nathan@ - age: 13-17
|
