Long Live Max: RIP Maurice Sendak

Where the Wild Things Are German Chidren’s author Maurice Sendak passed away this morning at the age of 83. Sendak wrote more than a dozen books and illustrated more than one hundred, but he is most remembered for his book, Where the Wild Things Are (1963), which is published in many languages around the world.

Like many others, I discovered the book as a kid and fell in love with it instantly. I remember it as one of the first books I picked out myself when I was attracted to the fascinating illustration on the cover. I liked that the “monsters” were both scary and cuddly at the same time. I eventually figured out that there was something unusual in the 10-sentence story too. In its simplicity and sparse use of words, it raised questions for me that I could not articulate and left me with some questions I still do not know the answer to today. At the time, I remember asking my mom, “Why was his food still hot?” and receiving an unsatisfying answer. The book somehow captures a complex aspect of childhood that adults cannot quite interpret. So I won’t do that here (although Sendak once described how he had to fight with his publisher to keep the word “hot” because his publisher wanted to change it to “warm”).

Spike Jonze understood the complexity of the book when he made his 2009 film version of Where the Wild Things Are, which on Rotten Tomatoes has a 73% rating from critics and a disappointing 59% rating from audience members. Some noted that the movie was more for adults than children, and the movie did a good job of taking a book that takes a few minutes to read and turning it into a feature length film. It is not the same as the book, but for those who grew up with the book, it made a good effort at recapturing that initial bewilderment from encountering the book as a child. As Nick Deigman explains on Fan the Fire, the movie is “a beautiful and languid testament to the importance of remembering how powerful our childhoods really were.”

That complexity in the film came directly from Sendak’s work. Today, the Washington Post explains that Sendak “transformed children’s literature from a gentle playscape into a medium to address the psychological intensity of growing up.” The dark tones of reality appeared in Sendak’s children’s books because he saw that side of life as a sickly and home-bound child who had relatives die in the Holocaust. He grew up in Brooklyn where his family kept him indoors much of the time because he suffered from bouts of measles, pneumonia and scarlet fever. He became fascinated with things like the Lindbergh baby kidnapping, which he later used as an inspiration for his book Outside Over There. Sendak based the Where the Wild Things monsters on his immigrant relatives who would visit when he was a child. They spoke a different language while engaging the children affectionately in ways that were terrifying to the children.

In an interview with Bill Moyers, Maurice Sendak explained that he originally conceived of Where the Wild Things as “Where the Wild Horses Are” until he discovered he could not draw horses. When asked why he wrote children’s books, he responds, “I don’t know.” I don’t either, but I’m glad he did. I am also glad he could not draw horses. In this interview from Tell Them Anything You Want: A Portrait of Maurice Sendak, a documentary by Spike Jonze and Lance Bangs, Sendak talks about death and looks back on his work. RIP.

  • Just Dropped In (To See What Condition My Condition Was In)
  • Ned Miller: The Shy Man Behind “From a Jack to a King”
  • Merle Haggard: “Kern River”
  • Jeremiah Was a Bullfrog
  • B.B. King: “Why I Sing the Blues”
  • RIP Percy Sledge: “When a Man Loves a Woman”
  • (Some Related Chimesfreedom Posts)

    J. Edgar (Short Review)

    j. edgar
    J. Edgar Hoover’s long career in the FBI spanned a number of significant historical events, and the new film about the man, J. Edgar (2011), captures some of the scope of that history while trying to understand a very complicated person. In the film, we see terrorist activity from the early twentieth century through the gangster era into the Depression through the Lindbergh baby kidnapping and the Civil Rights movement through Kennedy’s assassination, until finally Hoover’s paranoia is passed onto the incoming president Richard M. Nixon. It is a big span for a movie, but Director Clint Eastwood never loses sight of its goal of telling the story of the main character.

    When I first heard Leonardo DiCaprio was going to play Hoover, my initial reaction was to think he was miscast. While some critics may still believe that (and also criticize the makeup on the aging characters), DiCaprio does a surprisingly excellent job filling the shoes of the larger-than-life Hoover. DiCaprio is one of the few actors who could convincingly play Hoover at a young age and at old age.

    Judi Dench plays Hoover’s domineering mother, and Naomi Watts plays Hoover’s long-time secretary. But much of the movie focuses on the relationship between Hoover and his longtime assistant, Clyde Tolson, played well by Armie Hammer. Many speculate that Hoover and Tolson had a romantic relationship, and the film focuses on Hoover as a repressed man. Whether or not they had a physical relationship, their close bond, among Hoover’s other repressions, is one of the devices used to try to understand Hoover’s secretive nature and interest in the sexual lives of others.

    While not perfect, the movie was fascinating, thoughtful, entertaining, and informative. Although the movie jumps back and forth through time, Eastwood was masterful in doing it in a way that never seemed confusing. But while I was never bored, watching the film is not necessarily a pleasurable experience. If there is a weakness in J. Edgar, it is that you have to spend two plus hours with someone who is not very likeable. Even when Hoover was doing some things that benefited the country and busting criminals, he seems less like a hero and more like a troubled person who happened to do some heroic things as a side effect.

    Conclusion? J. Edgar is a very entertaining film that is epic in scope but personal in focus. If you do not mind spending time in the company of an unlikeable character as long as the character is interesting, and if you are curious about American history, you will like this movie.

    Check out some other reviews because why should you listen to me? The Rotten Tomatoes website currently indicates a low critic rating of 40% with a higher audience approval of 66%. Mike Giuliano of ExploreHoward.com calls the movie “a worthwhile character study that’s able to transcend its various flaws.” On Flick Filosopher, Maryann Johanson, by contrast, concludes that the film “is too staid and static, and too unfocused, to make us feel much of anything at all.”

  • The Missing Marine From the Iwo Jima Flag Photo
  • Bryan Cranston As LBJ in “All the Way” (Short Review)
  • Why Did God Make Oklahoma?
  • Don’t Miss “Philomena” (Short Review)
  • Bob Dylan Believes in Detroit in Super Bowl Commercial
  • Ira Hayes Won’t Answer Anymore
  • (Some Related Chimesfreedom Posts)

    Charles Lindbergh: The Spirit of St. Louis

    Spirit of St. Louis On August 26, 1974, Charles Lindbergh died of cancer in Hawaii at the age of 72. Lindbergh was the first person to fly solo nonstop across the Atlantic Ocean, and he is also the subject of one of my favorite bio-pics, The Spirit of St. Louis.

    Looking at the year he died, it is difficult for me to believe that Lindbergh’s life overlapped with my childhood, as he seems from another age.  And 1974 is not that long ago. Similarly, his talented wife, Anne Morrow Lindbergh lived until 2001.

    The Spirit of St. Louis, directed by Billy Wilder, is the movie I saw in my childhood that established Jimmy Stewart as one of my favorite actors. It is a compelling movie about a unique type of heroism, and Jimmy Stewart must carry the movie. If he is not interesting, the movie fails, because a key segment of the movie is Stewart alone in the plane. But the film works and captures the drama, fear, and loneliness of that first solo transatlantic flight.

    Lindbergh’s solo 33-1/2-hour trip, where he had not slept for 55 hours, was a kind of isolation that is rare in this modern world with crowded airplanes, cell phones, and Internet access to the world. Like Michael Collins’s trip around the dark side of the moon after separating from Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin in 1969, Lindbergh’s uncertain groundbreaking trip required a special resolve to face one’s fears alone.

    And the movie The Spirit of St. Louis does an excellent job of showing that isolation, as well as the logistics and preparation involved.

    After the Historic Flight

    Although Lindbergh’s life continued past his flight and even past where he saw Apollo 11 land on the moon, the film rightfully ends with Lindbergh’s heroic triumphant flight in 1927. Unfortunately, the rest of Lindbergh’s life would not always be so happy.

    In 1932, Lindbergh lost his son in an infamous kidnapping and murder.  And as World War II approached, his statements about the war made him a fallen hero. He argued against U.S. involvement in the war, making controversial statements supportive of the Nazis. But after the war broke out, he served in the Pacific as a military observer and flew combat missions.

    Each one of those stages are worthy of more discussion — or additional movies, because Lindbergh was a complex man. There is Forward From Here: Leaving Middle Age–and Other Unexpected Adventures, a book by Lindbergh’s daughter Reeve Lindbergh, where she recounts her discovery after her parents’ deaths that her father had three secret families in Europe. Using fiction to consider Lindbergh’s complexities, author Philip Roth wrote a novel, The Plot Against America, that imagines an alternate history with an anti-Semitic Lindbergh being elected president over Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

    It is difficult not to ask questions about the choices that Lindbergh made in his life, where he resided on the edge between being a hero and a villain, between joy and tragedy, between order and chaos. We may revisit some of these topics in the future, but for today, on this anniversary of Lindbergh’s death, if you are interested in the heroic flight, the James Stewart movie is a great place to start.

    I have been to the spot on Long Island from where Lindbergh began his historic flight.  But unfortunately, it is a shopping mall.

    Fortunately, Lindbergh’s body received a better burial. After he died, he was buried on the coast of Hawaii next to the ocean. The inscription on his tombstone includes a phrase from Psalm 139: “If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea.” Although the Psalm continues, the inscription on Lindbergh’s tombstone ends there, leaving the reader mid-sentence, wondering if you do that, then what? Just like Lindbergh’s life, the inscription leaves one with many questions.

    Have you seen The Spirit of St. Louis? What did you think of it? Leave a comment.

  • The Circus Town’s Been Born
  • Gary Cooper’s Three Oscars
  • A View from the Rear Window
  • How Alfred Hitchcock made “Rope” With Only 10 Cuts
  • Long Live Max: RIP Maurice Sendak
  • Audie Murphy: To Hell and Back to Film to TV to Song
  • (Some Related Chimesfreedom Posts)

    Missed Movies: Amelia

    If you avoided the movie Amelia (2009) in the theater because of the bad reviews, you might want to check it out on DVD/Blu Ray/HBO.  The movie about Amelia Earhart may not be a great movie, but it is an entertaining story about one of the most interesting people from the early twentieth century.

    I may have a lower standard for biography movies than fictional movies because biopics have the added bonus of teaching me about events that actually happened while I also realize that the director and writer are restrained by true-life events.  For example, because we don’t have the information, the movie rightfully avoids showing the actual crash that ended Earhart’s life in her 1937 attempt to circle the world, although it follows her up until the moment radio contact was lost.  A fictional story would have been able to dramatize the crash.  Further, biopics often are restrained to a certain formula to try to cover a large number of years in a person’s life and to make it a cohesive story.  That’s one of the reasons that Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story was able to do such a funny send-up of otherwise excellent biopics like Ray and Walk the Line.

    Amelia Earhart’s life was so ground-breaking it’s difficult to convey how important she was for aviation and women’s rights in less than two hours.  But the movie does a good job in telling the story, with excellent acting from Hillary Swank as Earhart and Richard Gere as her husband, George Putnam.

    One small piece of history I learned was that when Gore Vidal was a child, he knew Amelia Earhart because his father had a relationship with her.  Gore has seen a lot of American history.

    Earhart was an amazing person and aviation pioneer:  first woman across the Atlantic as part of a crew in 1928, first woman and second person to fly solo across the Atlantic in 1932, first person to fly solo across the Pacific between Hawaii and California, as well as a leadership role in several organizations promoting aviation.  The movie does a decent job of telling the story, and it’s worth a rental.

    Bonus History Tidbit:  Who was the second person to fly an airplane non-stop across the Atlantic after Lindbergh?  Clarence Chamberlin, although he carried a passenger.  He was in the competition for the Orteig Prize money with Charles Lindbergh and others to be the first to fly an airplane across the Atlantic.  He would have beaten Lindbergh, but a former navigator sued him and kept him grounded for awhile, which allowed Lindbergh to beat Chamberlin.

    Chamberlin flew across the Atlantic on June 4-6, 1927.  Lindbergh made his flight on May 20-21, 1927, winning by just two weeks.  Had Chamberlin beaten Lindbergh, would Lindbergh still have been the national hero?  It’s possible, as his was the first solo flight, but the media focus was on on being the first non-stop flight and winning the $25,000 Orteig prize, and Chamberlin would have won the prize if he were first.  If Chamberlin had been the national hero, would that have spared Lindbergh the tragedy of his son being kidnapped and killed?  Would it have spared America of seeing its national hero accused of being pro-Nazi?  Few have heard of Chamberlin because Lindbergh beat him, and Chamberlin may have been the lucky one after all.

    Missed Movies is our series on very good movies that many people did not see when first released.

  • Why Wasn’t Conviction a Best Picture Nominee? (Missed Movies)
  • Nicolas Cage Shines In Modest But Surprising “Pig” (Short Review)
  • Is “Captain Fantastic” Fantastic?
  • Runaway Train (Missed Movies)
  • Tommy Lee Jones and “The Homesman” (Missed Movies)
  • A Balance Between Culture and Fun: “In Bruges” (Missed Movies)
  • (Related Posts)

    Amelia