Where The Wild Things Are

Spike Jonze’s adaptation of Maurice Sendak’s 60’s children favourite Where The Wild Things Are has had a troubled development. When the first cut was delivered to Warner Brothers back in early 2008, they were pretty unimpressed by what they saw. The film was going to be shelved, but Warner stumped up some more dosh for Jonze and put the film on a years delay while he re-shot. Was it worth the money? Opinion seems to be split, but for me it’s a resounding no. For those that don’t know, the story concerns Max, a nine year old boy who, after an argument with his mother, dreams up a fantasy land full of furry creatures who treat him as their king….and…err…that’s about it really. The film falls down for me on a number of factors. First, and the problem that Warner had with it originally, is that even this final version of the film fails to make it clear who the target audience is. Secondly, Max comes just comes across as a brat in the film so why do we care enough about him to indulge in his fantasy world? Finally, once in the fantasy world, nothing happens apart from a few trite lessons in life. It really drags along. I actually don’t blame Jonze too much for this. He was always on a hiding to nothing with this sort of material and at least (apart from the creature’s faces) he’s tried to utilise as little CGI as possible. One final thought occurred to me towards the end of the film. It was rumoured to cost $75M, even before the re-shot scenes. Looking at the product on the big screen, I could only think “Where on earth did all that money go?”.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Not a bad film per-se, but far too dull to entertain kiddies or their parents. Rating: 3/10.