Where The Wild Things Are

[numbersix]

I hope you're in the minority, Shrykester, I loved Being John Malkovich. It's one of the best of the 90's as far as I'm concerned. It's a brilliantly twisted love story that takes on our obsession not just with celebrity, but our obsession to be another person, to not accept ourselves.

I haven't seen Where the Wild Things Are (out here next month) but I wasn't a big fan of Adaptation, it was openly contemptuous of its audience and far too obvious about it.

[mateostarr]

Adaptation and Children of Men are two of the top 50 movies of the last decade. Easily.

[NSpan]

The Wild Bunch = gritty western about a team of outlaws in Mexico.
Back To The Future Part III = fun sci-fi western about two people from the future in California.

Different movies.

Stripes = two men go to Army training in Kentucky to keep the nation safe...and meet girls.
Paths Of Glory = Kirk Douglas goes to war in World War I-era Europe

Different movies.

splendid! now, are you really mentally incapable of establishing such differences between 28 Days Later and Children of Men? or are you just being stubborn?

Adaptation, it was openly contemptuous of its audience and far too obvious about it.

Well said.

I think, perhaps, my real problem is more with Kaufman than with Jonze--but until Jonze strikes out on his own and proves his own mettle (and, judging by the reviews, WTWTA ain't gonna do it), I gotta stick with my original assessment.

[numbersix]

You know, I had such high hopes for Kaufmann after BJM. And then I saw Adaptation, and felt as if he was already out of ideas. Confessions of a Dangerous Mind was quite good, and I've mixed feelings about Eternal Sunshine.... But if you realy want to prove Kaufman has not lived up to expectations, watch Synecdoche New York, a film so pretentious that it makes Being John Malkovich look like an instructional video.

[Buscemi]

The similarities between infertility and zombies: both are epidemics that people will freak out about.

The differences between infertility and zombies: zombies make for a much more interesting movie. Honestly, why did Cuaron need $80 million to make a film about infertility? It's like McBain: Let's Get Silly but with a sci-fi slant.

[W]

I couldn't stand Being John Malkovich either...

[BanksIsDaFuture]

but until Jonze strikes out on his own and proves his own mettle (and, judging by the reviews, WTWTA ain't gonna do it).

Have you read the reviews on RT? 71% there, an 8.0 on IMDb, and a 71% on metacritic seems to say Jonze has proven himself.

[undeadmonkey]

Children of Men was genius and very entertaining,

[NSpan]

but until Jonze strikes out on his own and proves his own mettle (and, judging by the reviews, WTWTA ain't gonna do it).

Have you read the reviews on RT? 71% there, an 8.0 on IMDb, and a 71% on metacritic seems to say Jonze has proven himself.

68% on RT, if you read the Top Critics...... despite that, read the ACTUAL reviews--across the board, they don't stand up to the numbers

[BanksIsDaFuture]

but until Jonze strikes out on his own and proves his own mettle (and, judging by the reviews, WTWTA ain't gonna do it).

Have you read the reviews on RT? 71% there, an 8.0 on IMDb, and a 71% on metacritic seems to say Jonze has proven himself.

68% on RT, if you read the Top Critics...... despite that, read the ACTUAL reviews--across the board, they don't stand up to the numbers

Well, 74% on RT if you by the Community - average moviegoers who don't get paid to judge a film.

To emphasize our points, there was an article in EW a couple of weeks ago about how WTWTA is the most "Love It/Hate It" movie in recent memory. Probably since Crash. I guess it's true.

[Buscemi]

To emphasize our points, there was an article in EW a couple of weeks ago about how WTWTA is the most "Love It/Hate It" movie in recent memory. Probably since Crash. I guess it's true.

Agreed. I really liked the film but a lot of people around here seem to hate because it wasn't a dumbed-down adaptation. I even saw people walking out on it when I saw it.

[numbersix]

I thought Inglourious Basterds is the most polarising film around. Never have I had friends who love a movie so much and other friends who hate it.

And Boosch, from what I've read, the main criticism about WTWTA is that the story is too insubstantial to warrant its 100 minutes, but I haven't seen it, so I can't say.

[Donte77]

it was openly contemptuous of its audience

I think that is one of the things I liked about Adaptation. LOL Big fan of contempt.

the main criticism about WTWTA is that the story is too insubstantial to warrant its 100 minutes,

I don't see this as a huge criticism. The book had about 100 words. The story IS too insubstantial. The rest is filler. Although haven't seen WTWTA so I may be talking out of my ass. I have been known to do that occasionally.

[Buscemi]

If you want to complain about unnecessary padding, look no further than The Grinch. A good Dr. Seuss book was expanded into a great 30 minute special. Then, the great 30 minute special was stretched to a dull 100 minutes for Ron Howard's version of the story.

Meanwhile, Where The Wild Things Are works in feature-length. It gives us insight into the characters and the director actually has a good approach at how to handle the story. Under another director, the film would have been a waste. Under Spike Jonze, it is one of the best adaptations of a children's book ever.

[NSpan]

I guess I also need to wait until I actually SEE this movie before I can continue commenting on it...