Daniel makes stuff, and, in his spare time, writes about things like movies, kid culture, and geek stuff.
Unleashing Life's Wild Things

A.O. Scott, of the New York Times, talks about “Where the Wild Things Are”, the upcoming (fantastic) “Fantastic Mr. Fox”, and other children’s films and books:

Will “Fantastic Mr. Fox” be too scary for youngsters? Too confusing? Maybe, for some. But so was “Coraline,” Henry Selick’s pitch-perfect adaptation of Neil Gaiman’s kiddie-gothic novel. So was “Edward Scissorhands,” Tim Burton’s indelibly dark portrait of the artist as a young goth. So is “The Wizard of Oz” and half the books in the children’s section of the library. And so, of course, is “Wild Things.”

The impulse to protect children from these kinds of stories is understandable. Like adults, they experience plenty of hard feelings in their daily lives — at home, on the playground, in the classroom, in their dreams — and they may want, as we do, to use movies and books as a form of escape. Bright colors, easy lessons and thrilling rides that end safely and predictably on terra firma have their place. But so, surely, do representations of the grimmer, thornier thickets of experience. That’s what art is, and surely our children deserve some of that too.

It seems that A.O. Scott, as a critic, is always at his best when tackling deeper, more impacting issues through the lenses of film and cinema. He certainly does a swell job here – while many critics have gotten bogged down in “how scary” for a children’s film “Where the Wild Things Are” is, Scott has gone straight to the real issue and declared that movies for children are supposed to be scary. I couldn’t agree more.

Nov 05, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

Spike's Free-Range Movie Set

I really do promise, no more “Where the Wild Things Are”-related posts after this. In a recent interview, though, Spike Jonze shared about an aspect of the movie’s filming I hadn’t heard before – and quite frankly, love to pieces:

Q: Even though it was a long and hard shoot, did the process bring out the inner kid in you?

Spike Jonze: I don’t know… did it? The inner kid was what the script came out of, but I don’t know. We all moved to Australia together and everyone brought their families.

Basically, the philosophy was: if there are lots of kids around, they can go anywhere. They can go in any of the trucks – go make something in the art department truck, or go put the wolf suits on, or get fake blood from the makeup trailer, or go into one of the sets and make a movie. The idea was like summer camp – this is your set.

But also, [it was for] Max and all the kids on the set to have this group to play with and hang out with. The idea was [that] the set was open for the kids to come whenever they want. Max was there every day with some other photo doubles that played Max in the movie. So there [were] always at least four or five kids, and then on a good day there were probably 15 kids, when everyone’s kids would come.

How cool is that? And to think that you can actually be true and honest to the feelings driving a story throughout the whole filmmaking process… in this case, letting everybody behind the camera go just a little wild too.

Nov 01, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

"They're Just Guys."

Because I really can’t help it (and also really, really love the movie), here’s an almost 5-year-old’s brilliant take on “Where the Wild Things Are” and whether the movie scared him:

Mom: Was it scary?

Oscar: What was scary?

Mom: Was the movie scary?

Oscar: None of it was scary. Not any of it.

Mom: Not even the monsters?

Oscar: There weren’t any monsters. Those were just guys. Sometimes you think things are monsters when they’re just guys.

That’s right. Sometimes the things you think are monsters really are just guys.

Oct 30, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

In Support of Scary Movies

Fittingly in time for Halloween, Reece Shearsmith, writing for the BBC Magazine, asks: “Is it good for us to feel scared?”

Why do we expose ourselves to this fear? In certain situations, people enjoy being frightened. Perhaps it has something to do with the primal nature of fear. As the American author HP Lovecraft wrote, “The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown.”

Horror in all its various genres can achieve many things. It reveals people facing fears and desires; it asks us to observe our social and individual assumptions; it can produce imaginative worlds in which, for a time, we escape from the problems and triviality of our day to day lives; it can make us chuckle at ourselves; and, most significantly, it can entertain and be fun.

We also shouldn’t shirk from exposing our kids to fear:

Horror stories offer a playground in which children, and adults, can play at fear. There is nothing wrong with being scared. It’s a survival response. And having young children as I now do, I am mindful of what goes into their heads.

One of my earliest terrors was the witch in Disney’s Snow White, and the image of her evil face and devil-horned head dress has always stayed with me.

Today children’s films often have the warning “mild peril”.

This indeterminate definition, I think, is fundamental when realising we don’t really know what will stay with and give children nightmares for years. It might be a face we see in the swirl of patterned wallpaper, or a smiling doll, or a painting of Jesus in a children’s bible.

It begs to be answered: How do we ever really know what is “too scary” for kids?

Forget about relying on blanket statements or ratings that label movies too “grown up” or “honest” for kids. (That was one of my huge irks about the critical coverage of Spike Jonze’s “Where the Wild Things Are”. Fear is completely unique to each individual – even Max Records, the actor who played Max, said the movie’s scariness “depends on the kid. There are parts of it that are pretty intense. When I was 7 years old, I could not have seen this movie. It would’ve scared me. But my younger brother, who’s now 7, could’ve seen this a year ago. It depends on the kid.”)

But beyond that, why are we treating fear as a negative thing? We have to come to grips with fear itself, I think – and acknowledge that fear is a normal, even sometimes desirable human emotion. Kids are entitled to a full range of emotions, and we have to give it to them. We can’t stop them from seeking it. Children need to feel an edge of un-control sometimes – they need to feel that wildness.

The great thing about stories and books and movies, though, is that it gives children – and adults – a place to play out these fears and emotions.

Appropriately, the guys at We Love You So have just put up a post about the scary and frightful movies from their own childhoods and beyond – from “Poltergeist” and “The Watcher in the Woods” to “Paperhouse” and “Pan’s Labyrinth.” And they want to know: what are some of the favorites from your own childhood?

Oct 30, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , , , :: #

David Brooks: "Where the Wild Things Are"

A great column from David Brooks about “Where the Wild Things Are”, from which I shall now excerpt from copiously:

In the movie, Max wants to control the Wild Things. The Wild Things in turn want to be controlled. They want him to build a utopia for them where they won’t feel pain. But in the movie, Max fails as king. He lacks the power to control his Wild Things. The Wild Things come to recognize that he isn’t really a king, and maybe there are no such things as kings.

In the philosopher’s picture, the good life is won through direct assault. Heroes use reason to separate virtue from vice. Then they use willpower to conquer weakness, fear, selfishness and the dark passions lurking inside. Once they achieve virtue they do virtuous things.

In the psychologist’s version, the good life is won indirectly. People have only vague intuitions about the instincts and impulses that have been implanted in them by evolution, culture and upbringing. There is no easy way to command all the wild things jostling inside.

But it is possible to achieve momentary harmony through creative work. Max has all his Wild Things at peace when he is immersed in building a fort or when he is giving another his complete attention. This isn’t the good life through heroic self-analysis but through mundane, self-forgetting effort, and through everyday routines.

This rings so true for me – there’s an incredible peace in the mundane, in the busyness of creation. It allows you to temporarily forget about the chasms and strains of being, of not knowing who you really are, and just get caught up in a singular act placed in front of you. I suspect their beautiful acknowledgement of this is a big reason why I loved Dave Eggers’ and Spike Jonze’s vision for the film so much.

Oct 20, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

Experiencing the Book "Where the Wild Things Are"

In a wonderfully illustrated way, Michael J. McAghon deconstructs Maurice Sendak’s picture book “Where the Wild Things Are” – and shows how subtle things, like page layout and illustration placement, unconsciously impact the reader.

It’s a great testimony to how picture books – at least good ones – are often an artform unto their own, requiring great skill and masterwork to pull off well. If you like this, I suspect you’ll also appreciate the wonderful Molly Bang’s book, “Picture This: How Pictures Work.”

Oct 19, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

What Makes a Kids' Movie Scary?

In an amusing diatribe last week, “Wild Things” creator Maurice Sendak told Newsweek Magazine that parents could “go to hell” if they thought the newly released “Where the Wild Things Are” film might be too scary for their kids.

Reporter: “What do you say to parents who think the Wild Things film may be too scary?”

Sendak: “I would tell them to go to hell. That’s a question I will not tolerate.”

Reporter: “Because kids can handle it?”

Sendak: “If they can’t handle it, go home. Or wet your pants. Do whatever you like. But it’s not a question that can be answered.”

Naturally this caused something of a stir in parenting circles, and it begs the question: just what does make a kids’ movie too scary? And perhaps more pressingly, is that really a bad thing?

The New York Times put together a panel of top experts – ranging in expertise from from child development (David Elkind and Dorothy Singer) to media and mass culture (Joanne Cantour and Robert Thompson) – to elicit their responses to that question. It’s definitely worth a read, if only for the wide expanse of opinions.

Oct 19, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

The Pains of Being Pure at Heart

One of my favourite reviews of “Where the Wild Things Are” so far:

Ultimately, “Where The Wild Things Are” is like a wondrous treasure or a magical found object. The type of little trinket that a little boy would constantly carry around in his pocket, stopping to endlessly examine and awe over though he’s already seen it a million times. Warner Bros. have taken a major gamble with this film, but it will pay off eventually, as this beautiful and scrappy lived-in portrait of the difficulties and suffering of childhood is akin to the filthy, ragged and very beloved plaything doll or security blanket that children cling to until they’re frayed to their very limits. It’s something that deserves to be adored and wept over that much.

At least for me, that captures it. Sendak, Eggers, and Jonze have managed to create a film that I certainly hope is – and believe will end up as, once I’ve properly seen it – that type of film that you can carry around in your pocket, a special treasure that’s all your own.

Oct 15, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , , , :: #

Let the Wild Rumpus Start!

Newsweek shares what I consider the “definitive” roundtable interview with Maurice Sendak, Dave Eggers, and Spike Jonze – the three men behind “Where the Wild Things Are.”

I love these guys so much. If for nothing else, then for this:

Jonze: The big disagreement is that they [Warner Brothers, the studio] thought I was making a children’s film and I thought I was making a film about childhood, and so, along the way …

Eggers: Keep dancing, Spike!

Jonze: I mean, I think it’s a film—I want children to see it, and it’s not like I made it not for children, and it’ll be on the video shelf under CHILDREN’S, but I didn’t come at it that way. I came at it from the inside out as opposed to the outside in. In the end, though, the studio let us make the movie we wanted to make.

Sendak: It’s really an American problem.

What do you mean?

Sendak: Europeans have done films about children, like The 400 Blows or My Life as a Dog, which is one of the most wonderful movies ever. It’s tough to watch his suffering when his mother is dying and he scoots under the bed. That’s the kind of way they have of dealing with children and they always have. We are squeamish. We are Disneyfied. We don’t want children to suffer. But what do we do about the fact that they do? The trick is to turn that into art. Not scare children, that’s never our intention.

That’s the way to do it. That’s the way to make movies, and tell kids’ stories through cinema. It begins with a certain willingness to be honest, and with with a high degree of respect – respect for children themselves, and for the experiences they go through. These three guys, I think, have that honesty and respect. And I love them for it.

Of course there’s this also this other reason to love Maurice Sendak:

What do you say to parents who think the Wild Things film may be too scary?

Sendak: I would tell them to go to hell. That’s a question I will not tolerate.

(And iif you’re interested, one of the interviewers has also kindly put up a full, unedited version of the discussion online here.)

Oct 14, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

Making the Music of 'Where the Wild Things Are'

A short five-minute documentary – shot by Lance Bangs, who frequently collaborates with Spike Jonze – about making and recording the music for “Where the Wild Things Are.”

To watch Spike Jonze and Karen O be so cool, free, and empowering with actual kids, nonprofessional kids, as they sing background vocals for the music – that makes me so happy. I wish all adults interacted with kids this way.

Oct 12, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , , , , :: #

How Maurice Sendak Made the World Safe for Monsters

The Boston Globe examines the origins of the Wild Things:

From the moment they appeared in 1964, they seemed bracingly and completely original. But in fact Sendak’s monsters had a long series of ancestors and descendants, and a closer look at their lineage suggests why “Where the Wild Things Are” marked such a revolutionary moment in monster history: not because they were so radically original, but because the book allowed us to see monsters in a new way.

In interviews, Sendak has said the Wild Things were inspired by visiting relatives, whose appearance in his boyhood Brooklyn home were a source of great alarm to the budding storyteller. Just who were these creatures, barging into the living room and upsetting the domestic routine? (They’d come over for dinner, so young Sendak was told, but was he the meal?) Sendak cites one uncle in particular, named Joe, as a template for the Wild Things, and looking at the illustrations we can imagine him as he appeared to the impressionable child: a rotund, hirsute guy, jovial but prone to overexcitement, toothy, and bulgy-eyed.

But it’s possible to find other ancestors, distant cousins, and even offspring on the Wild Things’ family tree.

Fantastic.

Oct 04, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

Max at Sea: An Excerpt from the 'Wild Things' Novelization

While I’ve been enamoured beyond any-reasonably-healthy-amount this past year over the scripts Dave Eggers has written – working with Spike Jonze, for one, on the upcoming film adaptation of “Where the Wild Things Are,” and the independent, Sam Mendes-directed “Away We Go,” for two – sometimes there comes along little excerpts from his books that remind me of this fact: Dave Eggers is and always will be first and foremost of a novelist.

Don’t get me wrong: I think he’s brilliant at both. And yes, I’m gushing. But his novels are purely and simply extraordinary – which is why I couldn’t be any more pleased about “Wild Things,” the novelised adaptation Eggers decided last year to do, based upon Maurice Sendak’s book and the script he and Jonze wrote. Now, courtesy of The New Yorker, we’ve been gifted with a doesn’t-disappoint excerpt of it. Read it and cry. (And don’t forget afterward to read the short conversation the magazine had with Eggers about the novel.)

Aug 24, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

A Really Long Interview With Author Dave Eggers

But in Dave Eggers’ case, no interview is ever long enough.

Jun 10, 2009 :: Tagged under: , , :: #