I really, genuinely thought this was one of the worst films of the year. Two hours of self indulgent, indie-cred seeking and ponderous monotony with one of the most irritating child performances in years. For not one moment did i feel sympathy for the tantrum throwing annoyance that was the central character Max. Just to make things worse was the hipper-than-thou and overly-intrusive soundtrack by Karen-O, director Spike Jonze's ex-girlfriend. Those songs just added to the film's emo-y self pitying tone. I know people will disagree with me but this film is already down on my list of the year's ten worst films.



Bride Wars? If i see ten films worse than this film next year i will also seriously consider a different career path to film criticism.



Mind you, it wasn't as bad as 2012.

The problem with these films is that the studios give these films to directors who they think will give it style judging by films they did before.

But the flaws these directors had showing a straight story in previous work show up that not only they have a style that only works in their work but a lack of control when trying to produce a mainstream film.

Plus, the studios will restrict their moves to make sure it's all mainstream.

They should stick with directors who do these sort of movies well, or even, not adapt the book at all and try to produce something original instead.

I love this film, but then I knew I would from having burst into tears watching the trailer before seeing 'In the Loop' earlier in the year.



I think this film may be end up being a manifestation of the Shawshank effect. Critically devisive on release, a couple of minor Oscar noms and no wins, forgotten for a year or so. But then there's an audience out there who connect absolutely with Max. They'll rewatch it repeatedly and be in floods every time Max is eating his cake. Give it another five years and it'll start making unexpectedly high appearances in annual 'Best Film' polls.



It's not that it's a great film, it's that the emotional connection to a character in the film is so strong. That's why those who love it get so defensive.



If you don't connect and what's more don't like the style of film-making you'll get bored or worse loathe it. To those who fall into this camp, please realise that there are many Max's out there who'll read any judgements you make on his character as a judgement on them. Even if the film's imperfections are glaring you in the face.



And Mark is right, this film is for kids. Absolutely. They'll recognise the darkness in the film and either be drawn in or scared off, just as kids did when the book was first published in the 1960s and librarians pondered whether those 9 sentences were just too much for kids to take. Either way it'll make a mark and be remembered in a way some of the best films you watched when you were nine are by you.

Nice review Dr. K, I agree with you.



I think 'Where the Wild Things Are' has been given a rough time by most critics. One critic even said the 'Fantastic Mr. Fox' was miles better than this, I think he's a bit confused to be honest.



I found the film a charming and charismatic piece; I thought Jonze made a really good effort at not only adapting of the world's most loved books, but making it appeal to a mass audience. We all know Jonze is an art and skateboard director at heart and this was clearly out of his comfort zone, and I think it was a huge success.



One of my favourite's this year.

Mark why can reviews only be viewed in UK??!!, yet your Blogs can be watched all over the world?

Because his reviews are BBC content, and hence can only be viewed by people who may have paid the licence fee. Makes no sense since so much of the BBC's online content is free anyway

saw this at the weekend and i think it's an excellent film

it's not an easy kids film, very moving, quite disturbing at times

definitely one of the top 5 films of 2009

the kid is absolutely brilliant and

spike jonze does a terrific job at capturing what it's like to be a child. his direction in all aspects of filmaking is first class, from the direction of his actors, the use of special effects, the choice of music, camera work, and a clear adaptation of the story and its themes



and i agree, it's much better than fantastic mr fox, which, as a wes anderson fan, was a massive disappointment

Disagree completely with the "indie-cred" criticisms and thought the film had got the balance between light and dark absolutely spot on. The creatures were done superbly (although one looking exactly like Seth Green was a little off putting) and the cast doing the voices worked well together.



I do have to agree slightly with psychfursfan in that the soundtrack felt a little over the top, especially at the start. I could have done with a lot less Karen O.



Also, I did wonder if any Mark Ruffalo fans will be demanding their money back after going to see this on the back of his appearance? There are bits of wood that feature more prominently! (Not a slight on his talent, fine actor that he is).

Before Dr K addresses himself to Avatar; a question:



What's with the current trend for any and every adaptation of children's books to be described as "based on the beloved..."?



Why are no adult books 'beloved'; and aren't some children's books more 'beloved' than others?

it took me almost two hours to accept Cameran's $bizzilion dollar creatures, it only took me 20 minuets to fall in love with Jonze's Wild Things. Proof that great character design will all ways win over budget.

Great Movie. This movie made me do the cliche. Laugh, cry, all that jazz. It was a very well done movie on many fronts.

The best reason, I think, why this succeeds, seems be it has heart – which the Fox thing didn't have.



And it's hardly a book filled with content, so... 'Spot the Dog: Where's Spot? the Movie', anyone? Come on, think of the potential sequels!

Saw the film yesterday and can't say I liked it but also can't say I disliked it. It was strange and left me feeling very uncomfortable but I think this is because I am not the right target age for this film.



I think the problem is adults cannot remember the frustrations of being a kid which I think this film captures perfectly. The film seems a bit disjointed and all over the place but I remember from my childhood that's what life felt like all the time.



I admired its darkness and think it is a film more for 7-13 year olds than young children or adults.



Speaking of young children there were 4 families in the cinema in the viewing I went to in South London and all children were under the age of 5. They were bored within 10min and wouldn't stop asking questions or playing on the seats. This is not a film for that age group so can parents please stop bringing them!

If this was an adult film, it's be depressing and pointless. As a children's film it's even more depressing and pointless. The director might have achieved what he wanted to with the film, but I genuinely wonder why he bothered.



For anyone who is gushing about the film, I am gobsmacked and can only assume you're either easily pleased or are deperate to agree with Kermode.





3/10.

I went to see this film with my 8 year old (well adjusted) normal daughter, within 20 minutes she said it was boring (never before). I started to struggle not long after and I noticed almost all the children were restless. I visit the cinema every week and this has been the ONLY time I have ever had to get up and leave with my daughter half way through because it was such a pointless film. We felt no loss not staying to watch the last 40 minutes!! I and my daughter just didn't get it, as a book it should have been left.

I'd argue that Where the Wild Things Are rings truer as a meditation on bipolar disorder than it does childhood. Also that it strays far from its source material, which contains lots of emotions, absolutely, but melancholy is not one of them. The film dwells and dwells and dwells on melancholy. Try and recall any mention of "the sadness" in the original children's book. If you want a truer Where The Wild Things Are movie, watch My Neighbor Totoro. Now 'there' is a film that captures the essence of childhood. Note the absence of dreary indie rock. And if you want to experience the full range of human emotions through the eyes of a child, watch Bridge to Terabithia.



And if you want to know why The Fantastic Mr. Fox works better than Where the Wild Things Are as both a children's film and a children's film for adults, it's because it has a sense of humor. A brilliant one, actually: scenes like the one with the wolf resonate emotionally while being very, very funny. The only funny scene in Where The Wild Things Are is simultaneously horrific. You know the one I'm talking about.