Into The Wild Analysis

Words: 983
Pages: 4

Have you ever wanted to run away? Leave this boring life consumed by money and rules? To be one with nature and find the so called ‘peace in the pathless woods?’ That’s exactly what Christopher McCandless chose to do. A poetic soul, an idealistic dreamer, and a controversial nonconformist, he chose to leave a materialistic life, along with everyone and everything he knew, and hitchhike into the Alaskan wilderness. Sean Penn’s 2007 Into the Wild is a wonderfully directed experience, filled with beautiful cinematography and based on a thought-provoking adventure. But as marvelous as the movie is, it’s only a fabricated representation of reality.

Some people, such as myself and Christopher McCandless, crave the truth in life. The character
…show more content…
“Into the Wild” is an absolutely beautiful movie to watch, with some incredibly composed shots by cinematographer Eric Gautier. Beautiful snowy mountains, vast shots of lakes and frozen rivers, richly coloured green forests, all are used to evoke feelings of awe and wonder, both at the scenery and the epic nature of McCandless’ journey. Along with the gorgeous scenery drawing away from otherwise questionable survival decisions, these techniques have been used to add sympathy for the character. Such as a close up of Chris unabashedly crying at the beauty of the herd of moose running through the snowy mountains, or a scene where although the risk of starvation looms near, he refuses to shoot the moose when he realises there is a moose calf trailing behind it. These images have been created by Penn to support the proposed representation of McCandless’ character- that he is a pure soul and a gentle …show more content…
But many commentators thought he was a fool; a dreamy kid woefully unprepared for life in the wilderness. In fact, two main descriptors of McCandless are the words ‘pretentious’ and a ‘stupid fool’. An article titled Into The Wild on comingsoon.net narrates him as ‘self-importantly pretentious,’ saying that it’s not enough for him to nobly donate his life savings to charity and go on a worthy journey as a penniless traveller’; he has to quote Thoreau and Pasternak while he does it. An even more harsh review is presented from MISANTHROPY TODAY, in a feature called “Into The Wild Sucks, Big Time.” The writer criticises the nature of the journey, pointing out that on Chris’ path to enlightenment, he never tries to actually help anybody, and that even his spontaneous acts of charity only add to his self-aggrandizing nature. Even more savagely, their opinion is that his death was the final consequence of his narcissism, naîvete, and stupidity. Although this review may seem cruel, it is an opinion shared by many who viewed this