<em>Where The Wild Things Are</em> – V.2 <em>Where The Wild Things Are</em> – V.2

Where The Wild Things Are – V.2

For those who are wondering why I am posting this here: the creatures faces are CG.

  • Jerry,

    You don’t need a reason to post this piece of brilliance!

    The tagline should be:

    “You will believe a trailer can make you cry!”

  • I love it, I actually loved it. this is one of those good few. I thought was gonna end up like Howard the Duck and Flintstones but now I think I’m wrong!

  • Connie Pinko

    Awesome. Just awesome.

  • Chris Webb

    Too much Spike Jones, not enough Maurice Sendak.

  • Doofus

    Can’t wait. Even the trailer is a total tearjerker.

  • Lookin good, but I’ll say it again. CUE 100 PHONE COMMERCIALS!

  • JG


    If even the trailer is this powerful… can’t wait to see the movie.

  • Joe

    I watched this the other day and I have to say, I think I much rather have seen Disney or Bluth studios make this an animated 2d feature. Some of the monsters in the trailer really just end up looking like old people and it really creeps me out. I dunno I just think this movie could of been the come back of 2d animation.

  • Tim Hodge

    iTunes has a short featurette about “Wild Things” with Maurice Sendak, and he loves the film.
    Watching this, I can see why.

  • Looks pretty good, but I’m still wondering why they choose to take 10-20 page books and make them into 3 hour long movies. :(

  • Mike Russo

    Yeah, I’ll stick with the book.

    But if Sendak himself loves the movie who am I to argue.

  • Sam Filstrup

    It’s nice to see how well they’ve taken the books illustrations and brought them into 3D. Can’t wait to see the film.

  • Pedro Nakama

    This is a much better trailer than the first one.

  • Too Much Tacos

    Very cool. Has an 80’s Henson vibe. In a good way.

  • mickhyperion

    I am put off by the irritating alternative (read: offkey crap) music used in both trailers.

  • wh00000000000000!!! :)

  • H.R. Pufinstuf meets Burning Man. Yow! Ugly!

  • Phillip James

    Has anyone seen the book lately?


    Why are people crying over this when it looks nothing like the book?

  • Karen

    I’m glad you said it was “cg” instead of “animated,” which it seems not to be. Yikes.

  • Sylvain

    Ok, I guess I’m the only weirdo who prefers the first trailer. This new one has only happy scenes with all the characters smiling and hugging. I hope the studio didn’t remove the “fear” element in the film like they did between these 2 trailers, or I will hate them forever.

  • Billy Batz

    music does all the work. play that song over clips of Sid and Marty Kroft’s H.R.Puffnstuff and you’ll cry too!

  • Tom Heres

    I think that if the faces were more animated this might not work at all. The whole thing is very restrained, but the indie-ness of it is a little cloying so far.

    Gandolfini is a great choice here. He’d do well in a Pixar cast or Miyazaki dub.

  • FP

    Doesn’t feel like “Wild Things” at all. Feels like some random typical new movie that borrows imagery from Wild Things. And the trailer music sucks. It’s all too Hollywood. It suffers from the Grinch effect: Superfluous backstory and contemporary cliched movie conventions pad the life out of the original, short, punchy book and iron it all smooth and dead. Of course, this is just the trailer…

  • One of the furry things had some serious man-tits…

  • Beady little human eyes and bulbous human noses covered with fur… Yuck! And look how dirty everything looks! The whole world is brown and dusty. As I watch that trailer I just think of how hard it is going to be for the kid’s mom to get all those skid marks out of his PJs! I think I saw Mayor McCheese in one of those quick cuts. Wanna bet we’ll see happy meals of these atrocities? Maybe they’ll redo the book and replace all the illustrations with stills from the movie. Dr Seuss is dead. He can’t help what’s done to his stuff. What is Sendak’s excuse?

  • matt

    Joe, have you ever seen the Max test John Lasseter did a couple of decades ago in 2d/3d? The funny thing is the house has a vaguely Toy Story-esque layout!

    Does anyone have the McFarlane Wild Things figures they put out? They’re fantastic, even retaining Sendak’s crosshatching! The big hunks of plastic don’t stand up too well though.

  • Hey Stephen Worth –

    Here’s a link to an “exclusive featurette” on WTWTA, on the apple trailer website.


    The whole thing is mostly an interview with Maurice Sendak. He apparently is very supportive of Spike Jones’ vision of his story… I agree though that the designs they chose are pretty off-putting compared to the ones in the book.

  • I’m totally looking forward to this movie. I have complete trust in Spike Jonez and his way of filmmaking. That, along with Dave Eggers writing? I’ll be there on opening day.

    I’m surprised by all the naysayers here…oh wait, no I’m not.

  • AaronSch

    Imagine that—a film that may actually live up to the author’s brilliance. In a little book I owned as a child and still own today there is page that identifies your “favorite things.” Listed in the space reserved for my favorite books, I had carefully inscribed, Donald J. Sobol’s “Encyclopedia Brown, Boy Detective” and Maurice Sendak’s “Where the Wild Things Are.” The latter still being one of my favorite books. Both traillers look and “feel” wonderful. I can hardly wait to see the entire film.

  • Sylvain

    Ward, just in case I was peceived as a naysayer, I am not putting down the film:

    I WILL see this film on first day, I’m just worried that what I liked in the first trailer might have been removed. My worry is not unfounded : Apparently, during the latest focus group the kids were screaming and crying, and wanted to go home because it was too scary. I hope I’m wrong, but I assumed that the studio would react strongly to that focus group, and proceed to remove the real juicy stuff from the film. Again, it’s possible I’m overreacting (I always do, people around me get used to it), and maybe they didn’t remove anything.

  • A.R.

    Keeping in mind it’s just a trailer:

    The book’s story is as basic an everychild fantasy of ultimate power/ wish fulfillment as can be.
    Along with that it mainly owes its legendary status and popularity to the artwork of Sendak-even his trees and crosshatching have personality. His Max has believability and charm, although as drawn he’s more of a wizened imp than a “cute” little boy like the attractive live action kid actor. Sendak’s wide-mouthed, straw-haired, slightly evil-looking kids are more like Mary Blair’s abstractions (albeit in a different vein) than they are human.

    The book has an appeal unique to illustration. I think it could have been made wonderfully in 2D, just as Tenniel’s Alice could have(although until recently the difficulty of that style in a feature would have been too high a hurdle). In this “puffed out”, human-cast and CG-monsters look, it’s just kind of ugly.

    The book’s been out long enough that it belongs to generations of readers rather than to its author, and frankly what Sendak thinks of this film is his own business. It won’t affect me more than anyone else’s opinion will. This trailer doesn’t look to reflect much of the reasons I loved the book and think it’s a classic. But it has something that’s solid gold in the movie business: name recognition, so a slight short story-a picture book full of visual wonder is turned into a feature-length film. Come hell or high water.

    And this is so unfortunate:
    Max: “We could totally build a place like that!”. Dated dialogue in 3, 2….

  • Kyle Maloney

    Sylvian, I don’t think their worried about it being too scary. they were years back, and there was fear this would never see release because the studios kept interfering, but now they’ve backed off. any changes they do because of focus groups at this point will be minor.

    They need to accept that some kids will be afraid of this movie. get over it. a few nighmares never hurt anyone. its not like there will be gore in the movie anything…

  • Emo Kroft power hour…it works.

  • Jason

    I think the trailer looks drab, dismal and ugly. Which fortunately, does NOT remind me of my childhood.

  • I saw this trailer yesterday and I thought they resurrected the art of full animatronics. The thought of that made me happy somehow, being a fan of Jim Henson and his Creature Workshop myself.

    So it’s computer CGI…again…oh, well

  • Kyle Maloney

    Dave, it’s a mix of both. And the minimal animation suits the look well, makes it subtle enough to blend in seemlessly.

    I’m surprised to see so many here bad mouthing this movie, everything I’ve heard sound great, from Maurice’s blessing to comic con reactions to footage shown, to the trailers.

  • Karen

    Kids love to be scared in movies. It’s the dumb parents who think they can control everything their kids see and attempt to scare artists into limiting their intent.

  • acetate

    I’m not “feelin” it. Looks like people in bad theme park costumes.

  • david

    oh. this is what happens when a long time hipster gets a hold of a beloved property, throws Lame soul-less indie rock on top of it along with a kid who can’t act and a bunch of fake “moments” between the characters. Yeah it feels like one big giant annoying music video from spike jonze. But that’s just the trailer, I’m sure the actual movie will be awesome! ;)

  • David Cuny

    I had doubts about how this would work out with body-suit puppets – I had flashbacks to “The Dark Crystal”, which looked good in stills, but on film always reminded me that they were puppets.

    In contrast, I think the CG elements here look very good, and don’t call attention to themselves. My kids were sort of “meh” watching the trailer, but it made me want to see the film.

    Then again, my kids are discovering “Fraggle Rock” on DVD, and I’ve not heard a single comment about the puppets not being realistic. They’re busy being caught up in the story.

  • Animatio

    some of you are utterly disgusting. I hope you hate the movie and drown in your own bile you silly people. Like Maurice himself said, “Anyone who doesn’t like this movie can go to hell”

  • Jason

    **some of you are utterly disgusting. I hope you hate the movie and drown in your own bile you silly people. Like Maurice himself said, “Anyone who doesn’t like this movie can go to hell”**

    I think somebody’s inner child needs a time-out.

  • A.R.

    Animatio(and anyone else who is offended by a negative response): This is a trailer for a movie, and just like all other movies the people watching may like it, love it or hate it.

    But whatever their reaction it doesn’t mean that they are bad or good people. It also doesn’t mean that the movie is itself objectively “bad” or “great”.

    If you’ve seen it and love it, terrific! If you didn’t, that’s okay too.

    This was posted specifically to get reactions from readers and, one imagines, a discussion of what’s either good bad or indifferent based on the trailer. The reactions seem pretty even either way, and there’s no more reason for me to ridicule anyone who enjoys or is touched by it any more than you should spew bile at people who find it unappealing. Don’t you think?

  • some guy

    I’m really happy it DOESN’T look like the very obvious “bright colored happy monster lolapalooza” that it seems some people want this to be. Really, this hearkens back to Henson’s heyday in terms of look and feel. The brown really gives it a homemade, natural, comforting feel which I’m fine with. This is more akin to “what if these monsters really existed?” rather than having brightly colored fantastical creatures. Truth be told, the book wasn’t all bright colors and candy canes either, so what’s the beef? Really, I love that it’s not pink, purple and green that we so readily associate with fantasy or anything animated for that matter.

    And yeah, the hipster/indie-ness is pretty heavy in these trailers, but uh, outside of the very very niche group of cave dwelling animation fans here, the largest group of people really looking forward to this movie and that even care to appreciate it are HIPSTERS.

    And really, I’m fine with that. At least they didn’t try to go the across-the-board-through-mediocrity route like it seemed like it was going early in production (if you’ve read about the troubles the executives wanting to start over from scratch mid-production because they “didn’t get it” and Spike Jonz having the nerve not to compromise and convince them to stick with his vision).

    no song and dance numbers, no obvious antagonist, no pop culture references, no obnoxious in your face side kicks and all the other formulaic nonsense that plagues movie theaters every summer season, just fantasy and imagination and a little depth and HOPEFULLY a great, feel-good story? personally, THAT’S WHAT I’VE BEEN WAITING FOR.

    …and some people really want a Don bluth version? cripes.

  • rblitz7

    to all the haters…even if you don’t think this movie won’t be good (I personally think it will be amazing) it could of been a lot worse….hmm lets see the creatures could of been all CG, could of went goofy comedy route fart jokes and all. I realize I’m not holding the current movie industry up to high standards but you have to really cherish any good/great movie that comes out in todays sequel crazed money driven industry.

  • david

    Yeah, you can be comparative and say that this movie appears to better than the other schlock hollywood puts out, but to me it’s all crap. It’s like saying one turd is better than the other because it doesn’t have corn in it. C’mon. Just like pixar films are overrated your opinion’s have been formed through settling for the lesser of 10 evils. And there are obviously a lot of defensive people here, that’s fine, but if you’re entitled to self-righteously defend your sacred tastes then I’m allowed to knock whatever i feel like.

    Like another poster mentioned above, this already seems dated, yet the book itself is pretty timeless. Throwing in annoying indie rock (and i hope there is no indie rock in the movie, but i bet there is) immediately makes me hate the movie. Spike Jonze comes off as very pretentious and self indulgent.

  • Gijs Grob

    To me, this film seems to have ca. nothing in common with the children’s book, even though I think the monsters looks good. The book is poetic, but not sugarly sweet, as the film seems to be, according to this trailer. Instead, it has violent overtones. Both these and its children’s fantasy feel are captured way better in Oliver Knussen’s opera ‘Where The Wild Things Are”, which is highly recommended.

  • Gobo

    Completely brilliant looking; I can’t disagree more with the people claiming it has “nothing to do with the book”. To me, this looks EXACTLY like what I imagined the world of the Wild Things would be like when I was Max’s age. If to you this looks dirty, ugly, and awful, then our imaginary worlds have nothing in common.

    And yes, the music is “indie rock”, old-timers. It’s Arcade Fire, who compose multi-layered rock operas; the music in the film will be composed by Carter Burwell and Karen O. Welcome to the world of music in 2009!

  • Ben

    It looks okay, but the monsters just don’t have the appeal that they did in the book. They’re not cute or funny looking, just ugly.

  • Ethan

    It doesn’t look so bad, it’s only a trailer and it got me interested (haven’t read or even heard of the book, however).

    A friend of mine made a funny observation I’d like to share. It’s a variation on Godwin’s Law : “As a discussion on cartoonbrew grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Pixar approaches 1.”

  • I’m a Spike Jonze fan, and while I can understand some of the forced emotion and reliance of the music to give the trailer impact, I’m guessing the trailer is probably not going to be too representative of the movie as a whole. The movies Spike Jonze makes tend to be somewhat meandering and loose, so it’s hard to force that into the tight trailer format. It didn’t really work too well for Being John Malkovich (which I don’t really like) and Adaptation (which I thought was ace).

    Also I would like to chime in on the music as well. I absolutely hate that they are using Arcade Fire to promote the Wild Things movie. It’s just a cheap grab to attract hipsters, as many have said, no bones about it. Arcade Fire is probably the penultimate empty hipster band… or they used to be almost 4 years ago. Back then you couldn’t say a bad word about Arcade Fire, with the denizens who read Spin and Rolling Stone autonomously telling you that you must see them live before you can even being to criticize them, yet now if you talked to the typical hipster with the stupid hair, they may not even know who Arcade Fire is, being replaced with the next fake-DIY soulless indie band on a small label which in reality is owned by Universal as stated in the terms of service.

    Anyways, I’m hoping the Arcade Fire do not show up in the actual film. To note, Being John Malkovich had Brazil playing over the trailer (a few years before every CG film started doing that) and Adaptation had Under Pressure playing, neither of which appeared in either film. So hopefully this trend will follow and we can just enjoy an actual movie score.

  • Still havin’ a problem with a kid that old wanderin’ around in footy pyjamas. Just sayin’, is all.

  • Hal

    Sean – what’s with the hatered towards ARCADE FIRE’s music outside of your own “anti-hipster” agenda here? What music would you have preferred? I think its a brilliant choice which actually IS representative of the movie as a whole – there seems to be a melancholy to this film greater than simply a kids book adaptation. The trailer feels like its selling this as a slightly tragic story of a lonely kid on the precipice of adulthood trying to escape growing up by immersing himself in a fantasy world. Considering the content of the actual song (if you listen to it and don’t pass judgement by labelling it “indie” and outside your interests) its anything but soulless and probably sets THE EXACT TONE of Eggers and Jonze’s narrative. Just shocked at the all around anger towards an intelligent interpretation and a consistent artistic vision vs. something like CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS. Looks awesome and I can listen to that music to those images all day long.

  • Gobo

    “I absolutely hate that they are using Arcade Fire to promote the Wild Things movie. It’s just a cheap grab to attract hipsters…”

    Except, of course, that if you listen to the lyrics, the song they chose is ideal for this film. But I guess it’s easier to knee-jerk dismiss them as a “hipster” band than to actually listen, or to know that Spike Jonze chose the song and personally contacted the band to ask them to record a special version for the trailer.

  • sankaWorks

    Alright, most of you here are artists; I assume anyway. Can any of you even remember how your imaginations worked as kids? I would have thought you did, but after reading a lot of the responses here I wonder….

    The book that this movie is based on is about 40 pages long and contains about all of ten sentences.

    The average adult sees a book like ‘Where The Wild Things Are’ and sees a picture book. Pictures and a few words. Distinctive art and so on and so forth. But when a kid looks at it through a kids eyes, and a kids mind, the pictures transcend their place on paper, much like Max’s room transcended it’s four walls, and become a world that only a child’s mind can see properly without straining. When we as people get older the world fills in the blanks for us. We know there aren’t monsters under our beds, or a snow covered forest behind the clothes in the wardrobe. Children haven’t had these facts filled in permanent ink yet; they’re only kind of scribbled in pencil.

    That’s what made the book so special to me as a kid; it kind of spun you around blindfolded and shoved you off in a general direction; where you wound up was up to you and chance.

    It is, to say the least, a bold undertaking to turn something like this into a movie. I readily admit that it lends itself to abuses of all sorts. And from what I’ve seen, read, and heard; it’s being done with an earnest honesty that astounds me.

    I think what makes this movie so anticipated to me is it stirs the memory of when my mind still worked like that and the world was so much bigger; and anything could still happen. It’s that little feeling, little tickle in the back of my mind, that makes me create art to this day. It just strikes me as odd that this aspect has been mostly missed in the posts here.

    PS:The music is irrelevant really, but for the sake of argument, I believe it fits the movie well. As far as hipsters go, I think some of the posters here need only go as far as the nearest mirror to find one.

  • It was already animated in 2d, beautifully and faithfully, what – thirty years ago?

    I just don’t understand why they had to make this. I’m sure my kids will love it. But that cutesy, wussy Max, and those non-threatening, wholesome Wild Things… they just don’t do it for me.

  • Anna

    It’s clear that each and every one of those who read the book in his/her childhood has his/her own way of seeing it, and gives his/her own interpretation, and has specific and unique feelings towards the book. So does Spike Jonze. So instead of accusing him, or producers or whoever else of how they got wrong the book, or how this is not what you imagined, or how it should have been a 2d animation or any other thing, I think it’s actually interesting to see how someone else sees ‘Wild Things’. Someone who can actually share his vision to millions of people. Maybe it could actually enrich your own vision of the book, who knows?

    The book has an will always have a special place in my heart and, I’m sure, in the hearts of everyone else. But just because someone else sees it in a different way than you, it doesn’t mean that he’s ignorant or snob or whatever else. It’s his unique vision.

    I will keep my love for the book the way it is, and in the same time I am really curious to see how Spike Jonze turned it in a cinematic form. And I can only respect and admire and have the warmest feelings for someone who, from the love for this very special book (in my opinion), has had the ambition and perseverance to deliver and share his own intimate and unique vision to other people.

  • Bob

    I can’t believe people are still going on about “hipsters”. It’s just just young people making a culture of their own, which they’ve been doing since youth culture was invented. Get over it. It makes you sound like a crotchety old man waving a shotgun on your porch when you talk about “Them dang Hipsters”.

    Can we all agree to stop automatically calling things “Indie” or “hipster” if they aren’t a part of our homogenous mainstream culture feeding trough?

    On a side note, Arcade Fire is one of the LEAST soulless bands I’ve heard, so I completely disagree with the guy who was bad mouthing them on that account. I’m not a huge superfan of theirs, but their songs definitely capture some intense childhoody vibes (and David Bowie thought their music was good enough to play with them live, soo….).

  • Ethan

    Please don’t take this personal, this is just a gratuitous rant :) I think we have been conditioned to believe that an animated film is only good if every aspect is seemingly timeless. I disagree.

    I once met a musician whining that classical music is the only thing in the world than can be called “music” because it is timeless. Everything else supposedly sucks because it is ephemeral.

    In the 90’s, the only acceptable music for an animated films seemed to be an orchestral Alan Menken style, with the 5 annoying songs during the film, and a cheesy song over a full orchestra from a has-been singer during the credits. That was considered timeless, winning oscars and grammys, but today, only a few years later, it sounds like 90’s-animated-film-music.

    I guess I prefer Arcade Fire to “timeless” music… *duck*

  • Rextherunt

    SankaWorks comments are I think probably the most peceptive I’ve ever read on this on this site. That’s spot on what Wild Things means to a kid and what all the hipster sniping, technique obsessing, web site haunting serial snipers are too far away from childhood to remember.

    For those of you who read books, Dave Eggars is a really interesting writer – and Spike Jonez can make at least make films to argue about afterwards. It’ll be fascinating to see what Wild Things means to them and how that plays out on a screen – hopefull without the dead hand of too much Hollywood formula falling across it.

    And when it’s over the book will still be there, perfect unto itself and ready for new generations to explore and expand it.