Into The Wild
While the book and movie explore the ideas of freedom and individualism, they each reveal a different perspective. In the movie, the world is seen through Chris’s eyes, while the book portrays a view of the story through the eyes of Jon Krakauer and people who met Chris. The book tends to add in random bits of information, such as the author’s experiences. One of the more notable differences between the movie and the book is Chris’s actual death. The movie simply shows the audience that Chris was poisoned, and glorifies the event, while the book goes into detail about the differences between the plants, explaining that Chris was not poisoned, but rather starved to death. Such differences are no doubt the result of one fact. The book was written to explain Chris’s journey with facts, and to examine it closely. The movie was produced to illustrate his story in an entertaining manner.
One question that I now ask myself is this: what is freedom? It is, of course, seen differently by all of the people of the world, but I believe it is the ability to do what you please, and to live happily. When one has things that he must do, he feels restrained and trapped. Almost all people have obligations that they are held to by others. I believe that the more people give themselves up to others, the more freedom they lose. Freedom is being able to be happy, and do what you please.
The movie, Into The Wild,was definitely a very entertaining movie, full of emotional twists and turns that left we wondering about Chris. According to the book, Chris “understood” that not all pleasure was to be derived from human relationships. He tries to push people away, and tries to avoid any series emotional connections. This can be seen when he meets Tracy, a young girl who really takes a liking to Chris. It seems that he likes her somewhat, but he pushes her away. I was surprised that Chris didn’t want to have any sort of relationship, but then again Tracy was much younger than Chris. Alexander Supertramp, as he called himself, really had things set up for himself. He had a college education, a good amount in savings, a durable car, and everybody he met loved him. It was amazing how he was completely willing to give up everything to gain a little piece of freedom, to break away from society. His death was tragic. I think the world may have lost somebody special. Maybe he had the right idea about letting go of everything material, and just being free. As for the movie itself, it was definitely well directed, well acted, and well put together. I liked the way it jumped around between Chris’s Alaska journey, and his journey beforehand. It was really able to capture the emotion of his journey, and show what Chris probably went through and felt like. I felt Chris’s despair when he realized he was going to die, when he realized that he had failed his challenge. I felt his peace when he accepted the fact that it was the end. It must have hurt so many people when Chris died. He meant so much to so many people. His journey reminds me some of Romeo and Juliet. It’s so very tragic. While Jon Krakauer did a fine job of portraying Chris’s journey through evidence, Sean Penn did an excellent job of turning Chris’s story into something memorable. I just can’t get over the wrongness of it. He seemed like such a great guy, but he died out there, doing what he loved. At least he went out with some honor. Chris McCandless was just another guy looking for something new, some adventure; only heacted on his desire for freedom, his desire for individualism. He sought independence and self-reliance. He sought immunity from the world’s obligations and restraints. He sought freedom. Rest In Peace, Chris McCandless.