Category Archives: Holden Caufield

What J.D. Salinger Meant to Me

Leave a reply

I meant to write this post on Thursday or Friday. Hopefully, this topic hasn’t lost its relevance yet.

As a blog that devotes exclusively to the moving image, it is only a rare, yet deserving occasion that I would devote an entire post to a book. This is one of those occasions.
On Thursday, J.D. Salinger, author of “Catcher in the Rye,” died of natural causes. He was 91. Salinger has become quite legendary for his extreme secrecy. However, his true claim to fame is his writing of the American classic “Catcher in the Rye.”
“Catcher in the Rye” seems to have become a mandatory read in this country. Every high school student is given a copy to read at some point in their lives. I am proud to say its one of the only required readings I’ve ever been given in my life that didn’t feel like a chore. For those who haven’t read it yet, “Catcher” tells the story of Holden Caufield, a teen who has just been kicked out of boarding school and now spends a few days aimlessly wandering through New York City before having to face the reality of telling his parents.
Holden Caufield hasn’t necessarily been an idol to me but rather just someone I look to to understand my own life. Over 60 years on, he truly resonates as one of pop culture’s greatest anti-heroes. He is someone who acts so mature yet ironically is extremely immature. He also is something of a representation of anti-establishment. For all these things, Salinger’s creation has never left our thoughts.
Surprisingly enough, there has still never been a film version of “Catcher in the Rye.” This is mainly because Salinger strictly guarded his story’s rights. It wasn’t out of pure stubbornness, but rather because Salinger never wanted us to see Holden. It was up to our imaginations. After Salinger died, there were random whispers on the web of a future film adaptation.
Not only would it be wrong to ever adapt “Catcher in the Rye,” it would also be extremely unnecessary. It would be unnecessary because in a way, Holden’s story has already been put on the screen hundreds of times, with amazing results.
One of the finest examples is “The Graduate.” Ben Braddock mirrors Caufield in his aimless wandering. Both of their unsure journeys from kid to adults seem like sort of dangerous purgatories. And both characters, despite lacking ambitions, are so hard not to root for.
Perhaps a film much more directly influenced by Salinger is “Rushmore,” which is the story of a teenager kicked out of private school for his failing grades. Like Holden Caufield, Max Fisher acts much more mature than he actually is. Perhaps the best way that Anderson imitates Salinger is the way in which we view his character. We don’t necessarily root for his immaturity but rather for his journey to maturity and the harsh way he is pushed around by society.
While most of my influences remain in the film world, there are only a few others from different mediums that I can say have truly influenced my life. Of those, all I can think of are Bob Dylan, Lorne Michaels and J.D. Salinger. Not only has he touched my own life, but he’s also shaped the way that films tell stories. We never need to see Holden Caufield on film because in truth, there is a Holden Caufield in all of us.

Movie Review: Where The Wild Things Are

1 Reply

Like many children in America, I remember being read only two books growing up: “The Cat in the Hat,” and “Where the Wild Things Are.” The former got a movie adaptation that few would ever like to mention again, while the latter, after so many years, finally made it to the big screen.

“Where the Wild Things Are” is a movie adaptation I’ve been waiting for for quite some time. The idea of how someone could take 10 sentences and turn it into a feature length film fascinated me. The end result is something of a mixed bag; an intense labor of love that just isn’t given all the love it truly needs.
In order to make the story fit a feature length, director/writer Spike Jonze and co-writer Dave Eggers added a backstory. Young Max (Max Records) feels isolated from the rest of the world. He doesn’t have friends, he has an indifferent older sister, and divorced parents.
Just like in the book, Max’s frustrations mount to him donning the trademark wolf suit, biting his mother, and then sailing off to the land of the Wild Things. There, he meets the tough but lonely Carol (James Gandolfini), the bullied Alexander (Paul Dano), and the free-spirited KW (Lauren Ambrose).
Like in the book, Max becomes their king. Here though, he learns that it ain’t easy being in charge.
“Where the Wild Things Are” was brought to the big screen by one of Hollywood’s most wildly imaginative directors, Spike Jonze. This is his third film, following “Being John Malkovich” and “Adaptation.” His version of “Where the Wild Things Are” proves to be not only Maurice Sendack’s vision, but also his own. He turns the island of the Wild Things into a land of not only dense forests but also desolate, empty deserts. And there’s a giant dog.
Like “Being John Malkovich,” “Where the Wild Things Are” takes place entirely inside one person’s imagination. In this case, it’s in Max’s head. Unlike the book, Jonze doesn’t seem to distinguish between Max’s fantasy and reality. Perhaps this is his way of saying Max hasn’t entered the realm of early maturity yet, and the only thing that will accompany him is his dreams.
Before I dish out some complaints of the film, there are a few things here that must be praised. Mainly, it’s Lance Accord’s camerawork. His cinematography ranks alongside “The Assassination of Jesse James” and “Children of Men” as the best of the decade. Some of the best shots come during the “magic hour” of the day when the sun isn’t quite set, but still beams down in golden rays. The desert is used perfectly as a metaphor for Max’s isolation from humanity.
But maybe most profound is the way the Wild Things themselves are depicted. Instead of choosing CGI, Jonze went with old fashioned puppetry. While on set, Records was never talking to a green screen, but rather living, breathing creatures. Then, there’s the way they are introduced. While most directors might make a big deal out of it and create a slow, painful introduction (i.e. Peter Jackson’s “King Kong”), Jonze shows us the Wild Things just seconds after Max arrives.
When I left the film, I felt conflicted. I knew there was something missing from the film, but I just didn’t know what. While it’s understandably hard to turn 10 sentences into an entire film, the approach seemed a little backwards. In a way, almost nothing seems to happen in the film. While the Wild Things certainly are given a human face, some of the conflict felt a little forced. At one point, Carol asks Max if he knows the feeling when your teeth spread apart as you get older. Lines like this sound more like Andy Rooney observations than actual thematic discussion.
Maybe “Where the Wild Things Are” could also be a victim of bad timing. The film about the child who creates a fantasy world to escape their horrible reality has become quite commonplace. It was done best most recently with “Pan’s Labyrinth.” In a way, I wish Jonze laid the plot out a little more like that film. “Pan’s” felt more like a story with actual challenges facing Ofelia in her own fantasy.
In the end, I still do appreciate everything Jonze did to make this movie. I call it a labor of love because I know Jonze truly did all he could to get his vision on the screen. It’s a labor of love like Copolla’s “Apocalypse Now,” Ridley Scott’s “Blade Runner,” or Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds” in which the style is so flawlessly executed that most might lose the meaning of exactly what was going through the director’s head. Could this version of “Where the Wild Things Are” be so personal to Jones that it might just be lost on us?
Max was a hero to me in my youth and his character continues to interest me. Jonze makes him out to be not just an outsider, but also something of a misguided rebel. Could he be a boy with no love in his life who deserves it like Jim Stark? Or just someone as emotionally immature as Holden Caufield?
But let’s not over-analyze. The simple message of this film is the power of a little bit of love. It’s a message so simple yet so brilliant that only 10 sentences are needed to fully illustrate its power.