Into the Wild....

shawn474

I read the book awhile back and just got finished watching the movie. Very well done, but very depressing. What a sad story........makes you think.

Shawn

avelanchefan

SPOILER!!!!












Shawn I agree. I read the book about a year ago, and I remember putting it down after I read the last page and I felt the same way as Jon Krakauer did. Why....why did he do what he did? I mean we all know he felt betrayed by his father, but he was still loved by his family, and he touched so many peoples lives in his travels. And these same people tried to get him to reconnect with his past, which he still shunned. Then to only realize that he really did want to be around the ones he loved and who loved him after it was to late. Just a tragic story, one that has really affected me in a positive way. Krakauer I think was also stumped by these same questions.

On the movie side I felt Sean Penn did an excellent job. He hit the points correctly that the book made, and it turned out to be a great viewing experience. The Ronald Franz story to me was just so heart wrenching to read and to view on the screen. That man really did love Chris.

muncybob

Have not read the book but did recently view the movie. Early in the movie I mentioned to my wife that he felt about the same why I did when I graduated college(not about my family though) but I didn't have the balls to give up the material life and go out to explore humanity & nature in it's purest sense. What a shame how it ended!

shack

***Another Spoiler***














I watched it last week. Sad, but I felt like "what an idiot". If you know anything about the real Chris McCandless he was totally unprepared. As you recall he couldn't leave because of the swollen river. If he had done nothing more that take a map of the area, he would have known that 6 miles away from the bus there was a hand operated tram that would have allowed him to cross the river. Plus even though he had yearned to do this for years, he did no real research into what to expect other than read novels. He is thought by some to be some sort of cult icon/maytr for the "into the wild" bunch. IMO his ego got him killed. Very tragic, very sad...but very stupid.

pmckeealaska

The prevailing attitude here in Alaska is that the guy was an idiot. I certainly agree with this assessment. To be as unprepared as he was and yet still go out there is just assinine. I have been to that area north of Denali Park on 3 occassions and while it is not one of the more remote places in the state it is not a place to get into trouble or an area where you want to go unprepared. I get very irritated with the folks that have made McCandless into some kind of folk hero as he was just one more in a long line of **** to come here to "get back to nature" only to have nature get back at them. I work in the Alaska bush for my job and i always go with what i need to survive in a crisis situation. As far as I'm concerned it was natural selection in action.

mrbigbluelight

It is, IMO, a movie to see.

Depressing, yes.

But I'm amazed that McCandless' parents revealed as much personal stuff about themselves to the film-makers as they did.

The fact that he went into the wild "armed" with a ....... 22 rifle !!
What was he expecting to live on, woodchucks and snakes ?

The notation he wrote in one of his books was very poignant:

Happiness is only real when shared

How true.

Ron-P

I saw this in the theater, a boring hippie movie about sums it up for me.

shawn474

No doubt the guy had delusions about what to expect in the wilderness of Alaska. It's just sad to see someone go in such an ironic way. He alienated himself so much from his loved ones and then found himself yearning for their company in hislast days. The picture that he took of himself that is shown in the end seems like he is genuinely happy and content and then to die the way he did just sucks.

trubluluc

Well done film.
Not a happy story, ironic and tragic, but such is the life of romantics.
They don't live in the real world, they live in a world of dreams.
Like falling stars, they are beautiful, but don't last long.

I too was thinking...."dude the bus got there somehow...it didn't fly...there must be a trail somewhere."

-Luc

danger boy

I"m never riding a bus again. that's it.

trubluluc

....that doesn't move much.

danger boy wrote: »

I"m never riding a bus again. that's it.

danger boy

it was sad how it all ended.. but, you get yourself into those situations.. ain't nobody going to rescue your ****. I wonder if he was ADD or something else?

Ron Temple

I enjoyed the movie. At first I was tremendously irritated with the protagonist, but through his interactions with others during his journey, I grew to like or at least care about him. In fact, I enjoyed the supporting characters more. I knew folks like him, hell I was like him, but, I survived. The way this was portrayed, he never had enough knocks on the head to teach him that life is dangerous. The Alaska adventure wins a Darwin award.

Yeah, the movie and book glorifies and idiot, but it still was a good picture.

danger boy

Best moment in the whole movie.. when the old guy gives him a ride and they go their separate ways.. both knew that the end was near for one of them.. and that even though they got along great.. they each knew this would be the last time they would see each other. ever. great moment on film.

Hal Holbrook was great in this movie. I hope he wins an award for this role.

shack

Ron Temple wrote:

Yeah, the movie and book glorifies and idiot, but it still was a good picture.

There are lots of good movies about idiots...It just doesn't make them any less of an idiot because of the quality of the movie.

AsSiMiLaTeD

I finally got around to watching this a couple days back, and then did some research on the 'real' story.

Seriously, what an idiot, but I'll get to that in a second.

Everyone talks about this guys like some kind of hero, and having balls for striking it out on his own. I think it takes more to stick around and face whatever's bothering you than it does to abandon your family (or at least your sister) and run away. At first glance the idea of what he did has some feeling of grandure (sp) to it, but when it really comes down to it, it's just running away - that's all assuming the movie and book accurately portrayed his motives for wanting to get away. I understand wan5ting to get away from it all, wanting to be freed of the chains attached to material posessions, but the guy could have at least picked up the phone and called his sister.

What he did was selfish, plain and simple.

Now to the moron part. Going into the wilderness without a map and a compass is just plain dumb, there's no getting around that. Really, going in without a full understanding of the environment, what game to hunt, how to preserve meat (ie slicing the meat in thin strips and letting it dry out vs smoking it like he did), etc is very dumb. But going in without a compass - that's just unacceptable.

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you go into a vast wilderness without a compass and you die, well you pretty much had that coming to you. From what I've read, there was a hand operated train a quarter of a mile from him that could have carried him across the river and would have likely saved his life. There were also apparently several cabins within a few miles that may have held supplies he could have used as well.

I realize the internet wasn't around back then, but taking some time and doing a little research and preparation would have likely saved his life.

I'll admit the movie ending was sad. But when I did some research and found the 'true' story of what happened, I was more angry than anything. Sure you hate to see anyone go like that, but damn what an idiot.

I wouldn't say he got what he deserved, as that's a little harsh, but if you take a logical approach - his experiment yielded the expected result, given the inputs.

EFanning

Krakauer's original magazine story and book garnered many responses similar to the one above. Penn's movie has drummed up a new round of the same reaction: McCandless acted recklessly and died because of it; he was no hero, in fact, he was a boob.

That summary is accurate. McCandless died due to foolish mistakes. However, the foolish mistakes are part of what makes the story compelling, and the story has helped produce a good book, movie, soundtrack, solo tour and two tv interviews. And, you could argue, that by exposing his idiocy, young men like him might make better choices.

The original Outside magazine story was compelling. The book was compelling. The movie was compelling. Eddie Vedder's soundtrack is pretty sweet too. Any way you present it, McCandless's story is entertaining. It sells books, movie tickets, soundtracks and even led to a Vedder solo tour, which may actually produce a live album, which is good news to me. Oh, and there was an Inconoclast episode where Penn and Krakauer went back to the bus. And, beacuse of the movie, Charlie Rose interviewed Penn and Vedder, which was pretty funny.

I too stop short of lionizing McCandless, but I appreciate his journey and we should all probably thank him for triggering the book, movie, tv shows and music.

BIZILL

dude left a trail of broken hearts. and he was and idiot. still, good movie.

billbillw

I finally watched this about 2 weeks ago on HDDVD (Fry's clearance). Great movie. Excellent cinematography, good soundtrack, compelling story. The guy certainly was an idiot for going out there so ill prepared. Seems like he had an ego complex and got by in his previous survival encounters with a great deal of luck. His luck ran out in the tundra.

Sadly, this type of behavior is still glorified by shows like Survivor Man and Man vs Wild.

John30_30

This movie is compelling precisely because this boy was not a survivalist, and did not survive. He went up to the wilds to get away from the outside noise, the noise in his head, and maybe try to find himself; not to be Grizzly Adams.

He was a poster child for his generation that wandered off and died. He ran as far as he could from his a55hole parents to find something worth living for in his own way, rather than to slough along for 60 more years and then kick the bucket.

No doubt he got some insights his last few weeks that most folks don't get their entire lives. Is that worth dying for? He thought so.
He was heroic in that he was a seeker of truth that he had no notion of how to look for; he was a boob and an idiot for the same reason.
That's why this film grabbed me by the gut.

shack

billbillw wrote:

Sadly, this type of behavior is still glorified by shows like Survivor Man and Man vs Wild.

I totally disagree. These two shows may glorify the survival skills, but they also are by men trained in extreme survial skills and they make a point that what they do is not to be taken lightly. If McCandless had watched even one of those shows he would have developed more skills to survive than what he had. They do not glorify risk taking with no preparation IMO.

AsSiMiLaTeD

shack wrote: »

I totally disagree. These two shows may glorify the survival skills, but they also are by men trained in extreme survial skills and they make a point that what they do is not to be taken lightly. If McCandless had watched even one of those shows he would have developed more skills to survive than what he had. They do not glorify risk taking with no preparation IMO.

Shack hit the nail on the head.

Shows like Man vs Wild and Survivorman are all about teaching you how to prepare and survive in the case that you aren't prepared. The statement that they contribute somehow to reckless behavior is like the opposite of truth...

concealer404

I liked Into the Wild for no reason other than some of the amazing film work. I only watched it to see the places.

Mike Kozak

He was an idiot, plain and simple.....pun intended