Who Went Looking For ‘Where The Wild Things Are’?
Posted by meredith on 10-19-2009
After nearly a year of blogging your ears off about the Spike Jonze helmed adaptation, yesterday I finally saw “Where The Wild Things Are.” I left the theater content and teary-eyed, and judging from a quick glance at the crowd, mostly in their 20s and 30s, it seemed I wasn’t alone.
It got me to thinking how a film that revolved around childhood, but wasn’t technically a kids’ movie was actually pretty appropriate for a generation of young adults with a reputation for instant nostalgia. The age group was arguably the film’s target audience from the get-go (see my November post and the We Love You So blog devoted to promoting the film), and it was adults without children who turned up in the largest numbers on opening weekend. From the Los Angeles Times:
… “Wild Things” played to a diverse crowd and didn’t demonstrate particular strength among families. Despite the movie’s PG rating and basis in a popular children’s book, only 40% of ticket buyers were families with children under 12, reflecting the consensus amongst critics that it was too sad for most youngsters. An additional 14% were teenagers, and 43% were adults without children in tow.
I don’t necessarily think it was the sadness (hello “Wall-E”, “Up” and every Disney movie where a parent dies), so much as the strong symbolism and scary moments that may have potentially prevented parents from bringing younger children. In a way the clear symmetry that Jonze and his screenwriting partner Dave Eggers’ drew out between the real world and the dream land of “The Wild Things” was a lot like the main character Max himself — not really attempting to disguise itself as a monster-filled adventure story so much as just dress up as one. The real narrative, a parable about childhood anger and the elasticity of family, was still very much on the surface, ripe for the psychoanalytic picking. And for Gen Y’ers like me who grew up with the book and are familiar with Jonze and Egger’s deft, but heavy touch, I see this potential academic reading making the viewing experience richer and more enjoyable. For kids and tweens? Maybe not across the board.
Then again there were simpler pleasures to find in the movie. For one, the visually breathtaking costumes and scenery. Also, heaps of props should go to newcomer Max Records for his portrayal of rambunctious, young Max. Still, even those elements with potential appeal to a general audience, seemed particularly designed for me and my peers — with the set and the soundtrack being whimsical, but not overly childish and the kid actor looking more like a hipster mascot than an average 9 year old.
Does this mean the film won’t be as successful as the studio had hoped? Maybe. Will it make some parents regret bringing a birthday party of 8 year olds? Apparently (see comments). But at a time when “Twilight” is just as much for Moms as for teens and “Family Guy” is pretty much just for dudes of all ages, should it really matter that the “Where the Wild Things Are” remake is more for me than tweens?
For more coverage of YA books and publishing, check out the Ypulse Books Channel sponsored by Little, Brown Books for Young Readers, publishers of Ash by Malinda Lo
Categorized under: Movies & Music
October 19th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Where the Wild Things Are just doesn’t seem like a children’s film to me. It is a bit dark, and deals with characters who can be physically abusive at times. As a viewer in my mid-twenties, the film was pretty nostalgic for me. It brought back memories of me reading this book when I was quite young and made me think of times when I wanted to escape to the land of the wild things to get away from it all.