So You Want to be a Wild Thing?

**Spoiler Alert: If you haven’t seen ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ this post may has some minor spoilers, but no major plot points are revealed so read with caution.**

On October 16, Spike Jonze’s eagerly anticipated film adaptation of Maurice Sendak’s "Where the Wild Things" Are was released in theaters worldwide. It dominated the weekend box office, and drew rave reviews from most critics, including The New York Times’ Manhola Dargis. (http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/movies/16where.html) However, controversy regarding the film’s content arises when parents brought their children to it, expecting it to be the typical homogenized kiddie faire.

On Sunday evening, I read an article linked on IMDB.com about a father who brought his two daughters to the film, one four and the other one around six, and then lamented about how the four year was frightened by the depictions of the Wild Things (which are extremely faithful to Sendak’s representations of them), and after returning the six year old climbed on the table and pulled a tantrum a la Max. The writer claimed that this was out of character behavior for his daughter, and blamed the film for planting this concept in her head. Though his point does have some validity, I would hope that the author would recognize that his daughter is only re-enacting the movie and is not turning into Max. He went on to state how disappointed he was in the film’s depiction of Max’s family with his harried mother losing her temper, the teenage sister leaving Max behind to go off with her friends, and Max’s reactions. He claimed that these actions are truly irresponsible behavior, and sullied the spirit of the book.

My reaction to this article was one of disbelief. Firstly, I began to question the author’s judgment when he brought a four year old to a two hour movie, and was surprised when she started squirming. Secondly, I was surprised that the author did not bother to look into who Spike Jonze was and the other types of films he had directed since it is rare that a director’s name is so strongly attached to the promotion of a film as Jonze’s was without it being a tip off that this person has a reputation.

Also, I sincerely wondered if the author had actually read "Where the Wild Things Are" and absorbed the material instead of just speaking the words aloud. For example, as in the book, the spark that really ignites the action in Where the Wild Things Are is when the protagonist, Max, throws a tantrum and his mother sends him to his room without supper. As I recall, in the book, Max’s tantrum is set off because he’s been terrorizing the dog and his mother has told him to stop. In the movie, it is set off by watching his widowed mother and her boyfriend interact. It is established earlier that Max deeply misses his father while having to cope with the strains the new living situation has put on the family. Admittedly, most this exposition is done either visually and indirectly, but I am sure most audience members picked up on the underlying messages. Therefore the film’s tantrum comes from a deeper, emotionally justifiable place. Max is anxious about his mother’s new relationship, and doesn’t know how to deal with his feelings so he acts out violently. He dons his wolf suit, climbs on the table, insults and embarrasses his mother, and when she loses her temper, he bites her. I am not saying that this is acceptable behavior by any means, but it honest behavior. I am sure that only who either has a younger brother or remembers their older brother’s behavior when he was nine would be inclined to agree that boys at that age can be destructive, especially when under emotional stress.

The author’s critique of the sister’s behavior to leave Max behind while she goes off with her friends is another example of not necessarily the correct behavior, but it is what happens in real life. This is a deviation from the book, but I believe it delved deeper into Max’s mind set. His consequential ransacking of her room is also true to life. It is a perpetually reaction when a younger child realizes that his or her sibling is growing up, and wishes to spend more time with people his or her own age. Max demonstrates remorse for his actions, shows what he has done to his mother upon her arriving home, and then helps to clean it up. It demonstrates how he is at the point in life where he knows right from wrong, but is filled with such deep emotions that he cannot always control them.

Additionally, the Wild Things embody certain emotions and their introduction is a violent one. One of the Wild Things is throwing a tantrum, and is ransacking houses. The article’s author wondered what sort of message his actions were sending to children. Clearly, the thematic elements were lost on him. The characterization of each Wild Thing was done deliberately so that Max would recognize his own emotional troubles in them, and try to come to terms with things.

I am sure that this article’s author has some definite points and validity to his argument, but all I could think while reading it was that the entire film must have flown over his head or that he had absolutely no idea what he was sitting down to watch. Unfortunately, I am having a difficult time locating this article again, but I will keep looking and in the meantime these are links to similar articles: http://www.flickfilosopher.com/blog/2009/10/102209question_of_the_day_is_where_t.html ; http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2009-10-19-wild-things-controversy_N.htm)

On another note, in an interview with "The Mommy Files" (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfmoms/detail?entry_id=49362) , the book’s author Maurice Sendak as well as Jonze and the film’s co-screenwriter David Eggers spoke their minds about parents who would critique the film for being too scary. Sendak stated that he would not tolerate answering or apologizing for that occurrence. Jonze and Eggers gave similar if not as pointed responses. I would have to agree with this statement because in today’s society there is a prevailing belief that children should not be scared. They should be protected from everything from monsters under the bed to dirty fingernails to their own emotions. Perhaps the latter is why animated films tend to avoid showing the evolution of a relationship when it is so much easier just to present the cut and dry “they kissed, instantly fell in love, and lived happily ever after” version.

In an article for the Niagara Gazette, (http://www.niagara-gazette.com/nightandday/local_story_295120210.html) , author Phil Dzikiy points out something I realized literally moments before finding his column. That unlike "Wild Things," most films that are believed to be “kid’s movies” are not about children or childhood, but young adults or teenagers who have matured enough that their actions are more deliberate and thought out. Dzikiy notes how Pixar’s WALL-E deals with obesity and UP! portrays the length of a marriage including infertility in less than three minutes. These are serious adult issues that children are not oblivious too, and yet Pixar which is owned by Disney escaped the controversy that Wild Things is coming under. Let’s not forget that in Finding Nemo, Nemo disobeys his father, shouts at him, and is kidnapped due to his actions. Then Nemo goes to a new place where he makes new friends, and comes to terms with the emotions that led him to act out. Doesn’t sound so different than a certain other movie, right? However, the qualms raised were far less. Behold the double standard of the public when it comes to films believed to be for children.

I could definitely keep going, but I’d like to hear your thoughts on this topic. Thanks!