Epic Escapism: A Review of “Into the Wild”
By Jessica LeeFrom the October 7, 2007 issue | Posted in Reviews | Email this article
Penn demonstrates his commitment to McCandless’s story by carefully following 22-year-old Emile Hirsch, who plays McCandless, from Georgia to Arizona, South Dakota, the Gulf of California and ultimately to Alaska, and by including clips of McCandless speaking aloud his thoughts and scribbling letters and entries in his journal — some of which are actually written across the screen in large yellow letters.
Although Penn tells this tale with a degree of authenticity and beauty, he fails to deliver a story rooted in historical context and contemporary cultural dialogue. This film falls short on transcending America’s shallow fascination with the wandering romantic intellectual.
To understand why a top student at Emory University would donate his $24,500 savings, burn his social security card, sever ties to his wealthy family and head west alone to seek truth by hitch-hiking, walking and train-hopping, one must look deep into American history. Moviegoers cannot forget that the realities of America today are the direct result of a three century-long push for progress from East to West coast, by the conquest of native indigenous cultures and conversion of the natural landscape through the barrel of a gun and the uncompromising righteousness of the European pilgrims and settlers. Today’s American is raised in the richest nation on earth, in a culture of materialism and consumerism, classism and rugged individualism, which encourages us “to be all we can be” within the hollow existence of the solo American dream.
While McCandless is clearly dissatisfied with his privileged life and with his parents’ wish for him to pursue a law degree at Harvard University, Penn fails to take a deeper look on how America’s tainted and controversial past could possibly have influenced this desire to “get away from it all.” Eco-psychologists contend that a person’s mental health can be directly correlated to her or his relationship to the natural world (or lack thereof). The massive destruction of the American environment in the last 150 years by urbanization, the conversion of raw materials into profit and widespread pollution is certainly an overlooked factor in why McCandless might have wanted to flee to wilderness.
Cultural critic and environmentalist Derrick Jensen explored the relationship of his violent father to the historical legacy of the destruction of Western civilization in his 2004 book, A Language Older than Words. While Penn does not shy away from exposing McCandless’ childhood pain from his patriarchal, abusive father and submissive mother, neither does he explore it further, leaving the viewer blaming McCandless’ family rather than society. Fortunately, Penn allows us some degree of reality to trickle into the film by letting McCandless’ sister provide narration of her brother’s disappearance and ultimate death.
It is no surprise that McCandless was obsessed with Alaska. The “last frontier” has captured the imaginations and thirst for a life outside of industrial civilization for the last 100 years in American literature from Jack London, Aldo Leopold, John Muir, James Michener and Edward Abbey authors of several of the books he packed with him across the country. While viewers might be inspired to pick up these authors and a copy of Krakauer’s book, the film ought to make a deeper impression on how we can challenge the destructive American paradigm by building sustainable lifestyles more integrated with nature.
It should not be surprising that hordes of New Yorkers packed the theater opening weekend in late September. Cinematographer Eric Gautier, known from his work in The Motorcycle Diaries, provides sweeping views of snow-capped mountains, the Arizona desert and the Midwest prairies, images that are in themselves an escape from a world of right angles and noise, concrete below and a cushion of pollution above.
It is too easy to experience the movie as if it was about fictitious people and places that are dissimilar and are separate from all of us. This film is not to be digested solely as latest great work of cinema, but rather should be a launching pad for finding greater insight into the perverse and critical socio- and environmental moment. —Jessica Lee
For more of Jessica Lee’s environmental coverage:
Hudson Is Not My Hero: Anniversary Highlights 400 Years of Exploitation
Thousands of Youth Demand New Climate Change Policy
Disaster Uranium: Democratic Presidential Candidates Backed by Nuclear Powerhouses
Jessica Lee on First Voice Indigenous Radio (Sept. 17, 2009)
40 Responses to “Epic Escapism: A Review of “Into the Wild””
October 19th, 2007 at 5:57 am
Wow, much reviewer baggage and pseudointellectualism in this review. Classic film student tripe.
“…America’s shallow fascination with the wandering romantic intellectual.” Ahh, it’s shallow huh? So screw Kerouac.
“…the hollow existence of the solo American dream.” - Oh yes, every other country’s dream is surely so much more fulfilling.
“…should be a launching pad for finding greater insight into the perverse and critical socio- and environmental moment.” –yeah, right, abusive fathers are somehow responsible for the destruction of the enironment and western civilization.
“…how we can challenge the destructive American paradigm by building sustainable lifestyles more integrated with nature.”–right, Manhattan-area urbanites should know all about that.
“..leaving the viewer blaming McCandless’ family rather than society.” –Sorry, as someone who’s soloed for months above the article, McCandless was an idiot, A dreamer, yes, but an much, much bigger fool.
Kinda like the reviewer here.
November 15th, 2007 at 12:05 am
Despite not having seen the actual film yet, I feel that some of these reviews can be overly critical. They heap negative criticism on something that could actually mean something to people.
The thing that annoys me, is the fact that Christopher McCandless is almost always made out to be a lunatic. The guy had a dream, and he chased it. Albeit to his eventual demise, but I’ll bet he had fun doing it, and that is after all, what life is all about. It’s not about going to school, getting a job and becoming a slave to commerce.
Happiness is where we find true meaning, and Christopher McCandless felt that becoming closer to Nature was his key to happiness. Why do people become discouraged about doing something they think they might enjoy just because somebody told them that it was ‘weird’?
‘Civilisation’ has killed the human spirit.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:17 am
As a local, (25 Years, just over the hill, Primrose Dome, I gotta tell you folks McCandless was an idiot. Like so many Outsiders (no pun goes unintended) He underestimated the wilderness. This isent upstate NY or the Smokies Or the Rockies! You all would be amazed at how often this little tragedy plays itself out up here. Cheechako full of heroic self awareness goes out and forgets to arrange a pickup date, or thinks they can live off this hungry country. Dudes a little bag of rice and a 22? Like, Hello, try 50 lbs. of rice, ww flour, white flour, oats, 7grain cereal, 2 cases of eggs( turn each egg over weekly to keep the yolks suspended so they don’t go rotten and you WILL be out by late february so bring along some dry eggs) 100lbs of potatoes (plus some dry potatoes) 50 lbs of carrots lots of cabbage (it keeps till Januaryish) Plus moose bear beaver hare ptarmigan bacon some store bought cow pig chicken and we havent even hit the things that keep one from going dimwitted from food boredom. now coffee and canned milk are worth walking to Fairbanks for course he would have only had to go to Healy! Also I never hear about his inept attempts at THIEVERY! Yeah good old idealistic McCandless had that Outsider’s attitude, Wow Cool Cabin It Must Be Abandoned! Wow Check out all of this good stuff, The niegbors yeah cabins around, to Outsiders a cabin 6 miles a way is not a niegbor but up here things are DUH different. Most Outsiders do not realize that Alaska actually has a different culture than the rest of America!!!!!!!! How would you feel if some drifter just walked into your house when you werent home and started hauling your stuff off to his camp, wood stove gear he ate all of their emergency Grub!
And finally,,,, Our local debate now is how much of our local search and rescue resources do we need to keep putting out to Save the Pilgrims! The current favorite plans are either to haul the bus across the river , thereby cutting down on the expensive rescues and the potential drownings or just haul it out to the dump. People are ripping off anything of interest and selling it on e-bay, (dumb move, it belongs to the State Of Alaska, your busted!!) Any way WE think you’all are sort of silly to be inspired by an idiot! How many of us have moved here, into the wild and were smart enough to prepare to lived Out and prospered? lots.
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:11 am
I believe the movie is just a awakening to not be a slave to a unjust and unfair world that thives on commerce, To coporations and even goverment all we are is sheep, being hearded to a economy of rich get richer and poor poorer. I make reasonably good money and live on my own, and I cant take very much time off to enjoy the world outside of society. When is there time to do such things when your earning a paycheck that everybody wants to help you rid of. I believed McCandless did what he thought to be his way of achieving freedom and mabee even to better understand himself. we all die, but we can mostly choose where and when and what we can experience before it happpens….
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Beyond the movie, if you feel the urge to criticize, at least be smart enough to read the book first. This movie is not for your pure entertainment but for understanding of Chris McCandless. Yes, a lot of people have had the balls to search for their souls in the wild and didn’t get a movie made about them, but it’s the fact that Chris wasn’t completely educated on the wilderness and continued to fallow his dream that makes him unique. If you have any sort of an open mind, you have had your times of wanting to escape the evils of society, you just were incapable of cutting loose from the tit of society that we all suck on. He, actually had the heart to do so. Yes, he died, and if you read the book you’ll better understand why he did die. When he died, he knew he was going to, it wasn’t as if he was dumbfounded by reality and died miserable of his decisions, he made peace with death, something many people are terrified of. Its the fact that a carbon copy of societies regurgitated youth opened his eyes and strayed away from being just that. I believe that if the story of Chris bothers you and pisses you off because of his publicity and such, then you are probably subconsciously jealous and angry at the lack of will that you have, and just upset that unlike you, someone was willing to do as he dreamed. Grow some balls and suck it up and get tough, dream big and live your dreams, life is to short. If death becomes of it, at least it came in your most desirable of ways……..
March 7th, 2008 at 7:46 am
My initial reaction to the movie is one of regret for the adventures that I have not grabbed in my life, and second, one of fear for my daughter, who still possesses the need for an escape from the corporate world, and who is currently attempting to make her way through college with many questions about her future.
Third, and maybe most importantly, is my understanding of a young person who has been handed all of the tools for success in a world that his parents deem important, and his personal rebellion of those gifts that have long arms. My parents were far less financially capable than Chris’, but no less commandeering when it came to their measure of my success. I have had the same conversation with my mother about the capabilities of my car, even at my ripe age of 47!!
I raised my daughter by myself, but not without a consistent input from my mom, who successfully instilled in my child from an early age all of the material ideals that I rejected as a young adult. Now that my child is in college, she is developing the spirit that I had hoped to instill within her all of her life, but the spirit that she rejected because she was handed the material things that I detested when she was young and impressionable.
Now that she is in college, and developing the idealism that we all develop as we learn and grow, she finds herself ready to reject and explore her options in life, but without the practical experience that one needs to live “off the land,” and without the social skills that are needed to understand that living a life of solitude, especially among our esteemed literary heroes, we need to have survival skills that are not in place.
I think that Chris had many of the same ideals that I had as a young adult. Alaska has long been termed “the last frontier,” and I think that his ignorance of subsistence, even though he did try to give it a “quick study,” gave him a false sense of security. Although he had studied enough to know what he didn’t want in life, he did not possess the maturity to understand the brevity of his choice to go into the wild.
I think that the movie portrayed many people who cared about Chris, and who attempted to dissuade him from taking such a drastic trip by himself, but I also think that the film gave him credit for being an insightful, although naive, young adult. It is obvious that he was able to touch those with whom he came in contact, but his naivety and immaturity were his downfall in the end.
I think that there are many young people who go through the motions of society’s expectations, and they come out of an adequate education with the unanswered, and often unasked, question of why they must jump on the hamster wheel of life in America.
In the end, I was touched by this film because I applauded Chris’ sense of adventure and his rejection of societal expectations, while I mourned his naive idealism, and the fact that he was ill-equipped to survive in the wild. The film was aptly named.
I also extend my regrets to his family, who I know must ever mourn his absence in their lives. I, too, lost a brother too soon, and although I wish that I had been able to control his actions, I could not. I respect my brother and his decisions in his life, although if I had been able to make those irreversible decisions for him, I would have chosen for him a different path. We must all remember to respect the lives of others, even if their choices do not make sense to us. We can offer our input, but each soul has to follow its own calling.
March 11th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
I think the reviewer here is not giving enough credit to the movie goers that this is geared toward. Penn doesn’t need to go into depth with family affairs, or American history, or idealism. All of this is alluded to in several occasions and really doesn’t need to be spelled out for the typical viewer of this film. Actually, if he did go into deeper thought on this, it would drastically take away from the film and the thoughts that it triggers in the viewer. If you require trite insights and disclosure and explanatory plot lines, I suggest you watch Law and Order or CSI:Alaska. They do a pretty good job of throwing any independent thoughts into the dumpster with a nice little wrap up at the end of every show. So satisfying though isn’t it?
The guy was prepared to live in the wild. He did for quite some time. Bringing hundreds of pounds of supplies along, like someone here suggested would be necessary to make it up their, isn’t practical when you’re going on two feet with a backpack! I think you’re missing the point of into the wild. That would be “A Well Planned Expedition” instead.
This seemed to me to be more of a story about finding one’s self and realizing what is important to you. McCandless did just that. He realized that although living in the wild made him happy, this happiness is only validated and realized with in the company of other people and via human interaction…society if you will. With all of his hatred for society and the actions of people, he realized that he needed at least a part of society and certain people to be truly happy. However, he was inexperienced with Alaska and overlooked the spring thaw and it’s effect, even weeks later, on the bodies of water in the area. His fatal miss-step. He wouldn’t have gone to the plants if he had been able to get out when he decided to do so.
One thing I don’t get…or a couple things actually. And maybe someone can help. Did he build his bridge before or after the thaw began? I thought it was before and if so, that thing would have been wiped out by higher water levels. Also, say he built it after the thaw began, wouldn’t it have been obvious to him that the river directly down from the bus was flowing at a much higher level than it was when he came in? Being the smart guy that he was, you wouldn’t think he would over look the greater picture that something like that exposes.
Also, I don’t think Penn should have included the looks toward the camera. During the the apple scene and a couple other times, Hirsch looked straight into and reacted to the presence of the camera. If he wanted to go that way, the whole thing should have been filmed differently.
All of the jesus like depictions were kind of of over the top for me as well upon a second viewing. I would imagine that these were spawned from Penn’s mind and not included in the book, but I don’t know that for sure because I have not read the book. Thinking about getting “Into Thin Air” though.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:43 am
I am always perplexed by peoples need to pass judgement….If you take anything from the movie at all remeber it is an interpretation of someones story , someones life, and that in the end it was how he chose to live it….we should be greatful that we were given a brief glimpse into such beauty and a wicked soundtrack!!!
March 23rd, 2008 at 10:56 am
It’s amazing how differently people can see things. I loved the movie and reccommended it to my sister. She was put off by Chris’s abrupt exit after graduation and I could tell she had a bitter taste in her mouth from there on. Yes he was extreme but lets face it his life was not a waste and I think kids and adults will continue to see the movie or read the book and say to themselves “Hey maybe I could be doing something more with my life”. That’s not to say we are going to see a increase in Alaskan Expeditions but rather maybe a kid picking up a book written by one of those great authors mentioned in the movie. Or perhaps a kid gaining more respect for a certain personal relationship or even learning more about themselves through personal reflection. Oh and heaven forbid they might gain new respect for “Mother Nature”. The fact that Chris abandoned his family was tragic but I really think he would have gone back home. I don’t think it’s fair to call Chris an idiot either. He graduated from Emory. Hello? I just knew I was going to like this movie and I think anyone who has ever thought about getting away from the hustle and flow of life will like it to.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:21 am
I watched this movie last night.
I make my living by writing, but in replying here I think it best to avoid such verbose commentary as characterizes this review and many of these replies–not to mention further psychoanalysis of Christopher McCandless, Sean Penn or society at large!
It was A MOVIE; meant to chronicle, not to explain.
C.M. did what he did, for whatever reasons. Was his death worse than another, visited upon someone who “played by the rules” all their life, as they sit drooling in a nursing home? Only Alexander Supertramp could say–but we can’t ask him–so why not suspend all the judgments and psycho-babble and applaud Sean Penn for putting this record on film?
Must everything be worn out by pretentious debate?
March 24th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
I agree with you Adam, as we do when we critique a book by a well-known author; who we are and what we know is how we judge the book. But there’s that old cliche’, don’t judge a book by it’s cover. Oh, how I would have loved to be standing on the outside watching this adventurous young man live his journey. How many kids have taken off for Hollywood with less than a few clothes for the dream! I wish Chris had lived, what a story he could have told, but sometimes that’s what happens, we never back it back from our wrecklessness abandonment, if that is truly the word I want to use here. How many times have we told our stories and said I don’t know how I kept from getting killed, but what a thrill. Isn’t that what life is about? The ups and downs, the thrills, the moments of joy. Enough said. Kudos to Sean Penn!
March 26th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
All I have to say is that he was really brave. Many of us will never listen to our inner voices the way he did. But I do disagree with his view on human relationships. I think it is the instinctual and primal need for every person to have a bond with another human being. Does anyone think that Eddie Vedder would have played a good Chris if he was a little younger? I feel like they have similar spirits, both smart and aware of the evil nature of our society.
March 27th, 2008 at 2:15 am
i have wanted to do some soul searching at the ripe old age of 50 and this film inspires me to grab my husband and do it climb mountains swim in th sea life is too short and what is important materialistic wealth or getting back to nature christopher McCandless you have inspired me
March 28th, 2008 at 7:30 am
I watched this film last night. It is always inspiring to hear the life stories of people who had the courage to follow their dreams, to be themselves and to live their truth, with integrity and without compromise. There are several references to Chris’ “immoderate” approach to life. Clearly that is a strong trait which defined him. In reference to some criticism of Chris and the film, I feel It’s all too easy to sit back in our comfortable lives and criticise those for making choices we would never make, and for doing things we cannot even fathom doing - however I believe life is really about following your own path, each of us has our own unique one to follow, and none is less valid than another.
The fact that Chris’ life path took him on such an extreme journey in the context of modern America gives the film it’s sharp contrasts, gives us lots to think about. Hallelujah! It’s real, and challenging to mainstream values of material and personal security.The questions it throws up are therefore bound to grate on some people and spark discomfort and criticism.
So what if we don’t understand another’s choices in their life? Why not just have an attitude of live and let live? Why not be inspired by another’s journey, why not be more determined to be true to ourselves, and to follow our own heart with such unflinching courage, even if the path is completely different from Chris’?
The film also points to the fact that before going into the wild, Chris proceeded through the steps of college education that was expected of him, and that doing what was expected and “normal” his whole life until the point he left - did not satisfy his hunger for knowledge and wisdom - his was a desire to learn and transcend through direct experience.
To me his story reveals his honesty - he could not live a lie, live in denial of who he was - He could never have been at peace or happy by NOT being true to himself, so he faced his fears (of water, for one) and went out there into the wild because he had a burning passion to do so. Good for him! As his journal indicates, he died happy. Isin’t that so important in life? Isin’t human happiness and the striving for truth some of the driving forces that have always compelled humanity?
I see the bigger picture in this film, and i feel it’s powerful because it touches on universal themes through the lens of one man’s life and his personal quest for fulfillment.
We can never know what Chris would have done had he’d survived. The film indicates that through his solitary experience in the wilderness he had an epiphany - he realised that “happiness is real only when shared” The point about his choices is that, for this particular human being, and his personality, history and all the things that made him who he was, he HAD to go out there, INTO THE WILD to discover the importance of sharing and connection in human relationships. He did not anticipate dying there, and he was not an ‘idiot’ for going in the first place..
He lived an incredibly full life in 24 years and died happy because he was true to himself.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:18 pm
THE MOVIE certainly was one that allows the viewers (if opened minded enough) to all learn
something; or atleast remember things that should be of great importance. LIFE, FAMILY, FRIENDS
and ALL OUR MANY FREEDOMS>>> what a precious web we weave.
As for the character; it’s sad that a person in this world, in this country we live, would feel so
disconnected from his family/friends to do what he did. Shame on his parents for not seeing
that there was some mental instability there… HELLO?!?!?!
April 5th, 2008 at 6:19 am
I know my review isn’t as creative as others, but…
I loved the film because it gave me this longing for an adventure.
April 6th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Re: Maerene’s question, I believe three buses were brought out there for housing for coal miners in the late 40’s, but the project was shut down, and they hauled 2 of them off and left the 3rd one there. All you kids thinkin’ of going out there n checkin’ out the bus, well, that all happened more than a decade and a half ago, I wouldn’t recommend it unless you have the proper vehicles, ain’t much out there unless you’re lookin’ to hunt outside of the NP line.
Re: The feel of this thread, see the movie to experience the chronicle of MCM’s life in an easily accessable and aesthetic form, read the book if you want to really understand the boys life.
April 7th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
I read the book about 6 months ago and saw the movie last night. In a commentary about human nature, the only thing that sets McCandless apart from thousands of other more worthy adventurers is that they died. This morbid fascination is undeniable. If McCandless walks out of there, there is no story. He’s so far from being the first American with wanderlust (and a distaste for materialism), that it must be pretty insulting to the ghosts of Lewis & Clark that the guy warrants a book and a movie. That may sound very harsh, but it’s true whether you think Chris is a folk hero or a fool. He is quite clearly neither if he walks out of there alive if worse for the wear.
I admire Chris’ spirit of adventure and his desire to find out what makes men happy. This alone sets him apart from 99% of the population. At the same time, it’s impossible not to judge him harshly for being so ill-prepared for the Alaskan Wilderness. I bring more survival tools on a day-hike in Colorado. It takes skill, experience and preparation to live in the wild. Chris relied on instinct and simple wide-eyed wonderment.
Some think Chris was either mentally ill or had a death wish. I don’t think so. I really believe that Chris thought living in Alaska wouldn’t be that much more difficult than living in a tent in the Arizona desert. The fact that he didn’t even understand that a river passable in April would be raging with the run-off of melting winter snow in summer is one particularly glaring example of his naivety. His preparation was as follows - he bought a book about edible plants and asked a South Dakota recreational hunter how to preserve meat. He didn’t even know enough to be dangerous. Ultimately, I think he was brimming with the confidence that comes with youth and having your whole life ahead of you. Although he apparently died of starvation, I would argue that the indirect cause of death was more like a combination of naivety and hubris.
April 8th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Critique the movie. Criticize the critic. Critique the criticizer. Critique the critique. Fall-down-go-boom.
April 11th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Sounds to me the reviewer was more interested in trying to appear intelligent by forming a contrived critical analysis’ of Penn’s work. I often wish critics could really speak the truth instead of trying to communicate how important their message really is. Another self absorbed critic. Booya.
April 14th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
For the confines of time restraints (about 2 hrs) to create an entertaining “movie” that will hold your attention and still deliiver a powerful, respectful, and accurate message , this movie is it. Critique is unfair.
April 16th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Everyone is entitled to rant their opinions. So here goes.
I think a lot of good points are made here. For whatever reason, this story speaks to the human spirit. Somehow we get ourselves wrapped up in this story and maybe it is morbid facination.
One thing I know is when a person is in solitude, away from the influences of others. They are free to discover who they are. They don’t have to morph into whatever subtle expectations are pushed in their direction. When they are kind to strangers nothing is expected in return. No let down, no betrayel. Away and tucked in to nature there is no bullshit. I believe Chris was very young and was searching for an identity he could be proud of.
People lie, everyday. His father lied, his mother lied. The promises are made and never really seem to be put in motion. Call it a weakness or amazing strength but I feel like Chris figured out what he needed and hoped to find it. I also feel like this drive is in each of us. But we lose sight of it and fall into stereotypes. We get the job, get the wife, have the kids, buy the hummer. We just run and exhausting race that we never win. I’d rather die at 22 knowing that than living to 100 and not knowing.
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
I enjoyed the idealism and message of the movie, but found myself saddened by the ignorance and naivety of such an apparently bright and resourceful young man. I applaud his willingness to follow his heart, but at times it seems that he left his mind at home when he took off for the road. Is anyone else bothered that the man is scrounging for squirrels and foliage but never once attempts to catch a fish, with rivers everywhere, a pole, and a net? This really bothered me… a lot.
Also, though I think it’s easy feel empathetic for what drove him, I cannot dismiss the selfishness of putting all of his loved one’s lives on hold while he set out on a mission of self-discovery. Lastly, if you want to go “Into the Wild,” you must fist discover the primitive wildness of self, which I’m sorry, doesn’t include not killing game available to you because they have offspring to provide for. He read Jack London, yet somehow missed all of his most crucial messages. It’s somewhat depressing that in the end he had no choice but to face this reality of Natural Selection, since he seemed such a decent man, and die empty from what he hoped would finally satiate him… his hunger for a truth only found in the wild.
April 27th, 2008 at 12:23 am
Re Heather’s comment “Is anyone else bothered that the man is scrounging for squirrels and foliage but never once attempts to catch a fish, with rivers everywhere, a pole, and a net? This really bothered me… a lot.” Are you serious? You seem to be intelligent enough to understand that although this movie was based on a true story, NO ONE actually witnessed his entire journey in the wilderness. Did he carve in the wood “I don’t fish”? If he didn’t than no one will ever truly know. Heather, I FIND MYSELF saddened by your ignorance and naivety.
This movie definitely moved me. It left me feeling helpless and disillusioned. It made me see the bigger picture. its all about living, loving, and dying. The part that moved me the most was when the old man asked Chris if he could adopt him and Chris looked at him and told him they can talk about it when he gets back from Alaska. The old mans eyes filled with tears and he agreed but when he saw him walking off into the distance he must have known he would never see him again.
This movie is about rediscovering oneself and living life to the fullest. This is the life Chris chose and although he died sooner than most, how many people can actually say they actually “lived”? Some people search their whole lives never truly finding themselves and most people never even search. Chris wasn’t afraid to find himself…at all costs.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:26 am
I am 50 years old, female and have a 19 year old son in college with all the “normal” societal dreams. Christopher McCandless reminded me that there’s so much more and if my son were to take a sudden turn to find himself i would support him fully. Life is unique to each of us - may we all finds ourselves. Some day. in some way.
May 19th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
McCandless is neither a sympathetic nor a heroic figure. He was childish, spiteful and petty in making his parents worry so much about his whereabouts. His decision to disappear deep into the Alaska wilderness because of some ideas he picked up from reading Jack London demonstrated an impulsive immaturity that is certainly nothing to romanticize. He was in fact tragically moronic, in that he wasted his potential by needlessly dying in a wilderness that he did not understand nearly as well as he thought. Several people tried to tell him as much along the way; advice that he ignored to his own detriment. Neither Krakaur nor Penn can finesse this story - both the book and the movie are shallow attempts to romanticize a very self-centred, impulsive child whose single minded journey to “find himself” put his own family through hell.
May 21st, 2008 at 2:23 am
Has anybody considered why Christopher McCandless would punish himself in the way that he did because he was turning the anger he felt for hisparents onto himself? Why did he want to escape and leave everything behind?
Although I agree that he did want to shed all material things and live within nature, there are always emotional reasons for our actions, not only political ones.
This movie was indeed sad but not only because of the tragic ending. It was sad because Chris went “into the wild” to escape the pain he felt from his upbringing. Did he feel connected to his parents? Probably not. Maybe that’s why he wasn’t able to connect to anybody else in a committed way. His story gave me insight about my life.
Thank you to all those involved in the making of the movie.
On to reading the book!
July 24th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
best movie by far,
shows real beauty, now this fake shit we have in our society…..
one day i will try what he has done
July 30th, 2008 at 4:39 am
This movie was very well done, even though I am not usually a fan of Sean Penn. The Reviewer is an idiot and is one of those people that has to find every little fault with anything, whether the fault exists or not. I know your job depends on your ablility to critique certain things, but why not be realistic instead of materializing issues that aren’t really there except for in your imagination. The thoughts in the review could not have been the first thing to come to mind when watching the film. These negatives came after long thought and a need to fill an article with “insightful” bulls**t. You DO NOT seem insightful, more retarded than anything. Maybe you impressed some people, but not me. You are out of touch, but want to be regarded as a realist. It aint happenin, sorry.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:54 am
The Book clearly states that McCandless died as a result of ingesting seeds that were indistinguishable, even to most experts, from the non-poisonous ones, that would have nourished him. Let’s see if Mr. Alistair McLaughlin, can see the end of his days clearly enough to avoid it as he so vehemently asserts McCandless should have. None of us know what eats us until we are dead, and by then most of us will never know.
“Every man dies, but not every man truely lives.” Anon.
Get a life, before you lose yours.
Damo
October 11th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Great film - kept me fully engaged for the entire 2+ hours. Never read the book. Sorry that the kid died - also sorry for the family and friends left behind. Can’t help feel, though, Chris wanted to leave society behind and free himself from the shallowness of possessions - yet he could never have gotten as far as he did if it wasn’t for the possessions of others. Not sure of the message there.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Must say I liked the book as well as the film… deeply touching story. As many of you have written, I also feel I can understand what drove him to do what he did. Leaving society behind (though to a large extent dependent upon its means of transportation, gear, food etc.) The thought is, however, not far fetched. I can wrap my mind around it fully.
I also fully understand what some of the Alaskans in here have stated - the man was ill prepared. (I myself have spent lots of time during +30 years in the rough environment of the Scandinavian mountains… far away from where roads, people, cell-phones and such can be accounted for… where it is You and your ability to co-exist with nature that matters in the long run… especially when things go not as planned…)
As stated in the book, Chris apparently headed out there even without such basic things as a map and a compass… just to mention 2 things one at least ought to think about bringing…
You don’t walk into a Wall Street broker firm and claim a well-payed job without having the proper qualifications. Likewise… you don’t head into the wild without severe consequences unless properly prepared… Simple as that! And no matter which way you turn - there will always be luck-seekers that loose on Wall Street… as well as there will be ill-prepared people dying when messing with the real wild - not fully aware of what it actually takes to survive out there…
Nothing will ever change that - mankind needs yet another million years of evolution to overcome that flaw… So in the meantime… let’s just be… amazed by this breathtaking story! And truly beautiful film!
August 20th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
There’s a lot of moralising going on in some of these comments - not mention the crit. It seems to me that the guy made a mistake and lived to regret it. He came to realise at the end - too late - where he went wrong, which was rejecting the people he met on his way to pursue what was an obsession. It’s the stuff of tragedy. Had he survived, he would no doubt have patched it up with his parents, while turning the two hippies he met into surrugate parents. (After all, there was no way he could go back to square one; there never is.) I mean we could say that Oedipus should have known better than to believe the Oracle, but he didn’t and that was all there was to it. It’s the way the cookie crumbles at times. In life we sometimes make tragic decision and I don’t think we will ever get round that simple fact.
October 8th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
“Although Penn tells this tale with a degree of authenticity and beauty, he fails to deliver a story rooted in historical context and contemporary cultural dialogue. This film falls short on transcending America’s shallow fascination with the wandering romantic intellectual.”
who says Penn should ‘deliver a story rooted in historical context and contemporary cultural dialogue’ - ? this is a bs critique, what does it even mean??
Penn apparently worked for ten years to make this film. He does not seem overly for or against McCandless - he’s portraying his understanding of what happened to McC, based on help from his journals and sister, family…
then the reviewer goes on to use “America’s shallow fascination with the wandering romantic intellectual” for her own purposes:
“It is no surprise that McCandless was obsessed with Alaska. The “last frontier” has captured the imaginations and thirst for a life outside of industrial civilization for the last 100 years in American literature from Jack London, Aldo Leopold, John Muir, James Michener and Edward Abbey authors of several of the books he packed with him across the country. ”
I thought McCandless came across as a selfish boy who abandoned his life and family with a disdain that can only be attained in the decadent wealth of America. McCandless seems to care more for the random stranger than his family. He goes into the wild w/ little knowledge or experience and to me seems like he has no respect for Nature or the people who love him.
Then, when he reaches his destination, he seems bored in this abandoned bus. Prepare? nah— he loses the moose b/c he doesn’t have the forethought to prepare the meat curing fire - he’s like a dilletante - he’s not really engaging in the wild, he’s hiding around the corner from it. Luckily, he picks up the plant book “on the way” in Fairbanks -
while i can identify with the desire to explore and also feel disgusted that permits for the Colorado run years and years in advance, McCandless only learns in the very end when he carves or writes, “for happiness to be real it must be shared.” and there he is alone, dying in a fossil fuel guzzling broken down bus.