I thought "Into the Wild" sucked

vedderelf

I was really, really excited for this movie but I was extremely disappointed. I'm curious as to what others thought about the actual movie, soundtrack excluded.

I don't think this is Sean Penn's directorial debut but it looks like something someone out of film school would do. The opening letter to Wayne at the beginning was cheesey, and by the time Wayne comes along, you've already forgotten about that opening part.

The movie was waaaaay too long (started at 7:45 and got out at 10:20) and the sister's narration not withstanding, it didn't give any insight at all into Chris' state of mind. What exactly was it that he was getting out of the experience? And at the end, when it flashes to the people he met along the way, what sort of connection did Chris feel to them? Because the way it came off to me, it was more like Chris was like self-centered narcisist who didn't really care about the people he was leaving behind.

I should have read the book first because the movie soured me on the whole story. It could have been this epic adventure and instead, it got muddled in what I thought was a horrible job by Penn. I mean, there's 3 different parts where Chris looks right into the camera! It was distracting and unnecessary.

I just really, really, really wanted to like this movie and I was pretty disappointed. The only things it had going for it was the basic plot itself, the beautiful vistas, the fact that the lead actor looked a little like River Phoenix and of course the soundtrack.

Just wondering what others thought, especially those who spend a lot of time in the outdoors and lead a version of this lifestyle portrayed. Also, those parents were pretty brave to cooperate with a movie that made them look like some pretty horrible people.

whygo

read the book spoiler

PureandEasy

the letter wasn't cheesey, it was real, Chris actually wrote that to Wayne

you should have read the book first

I don't think it was Sean's best work, but I enjoyed it, although there were some things from the book I may have included, while leaving out some of the things he included

im an ear

"You know somethin'...YOU suck!" - Billy Madison

vedderelf

what does "read the book spoiler" mean?

I just didn't think the movie did a good job at all of explaining Chris' motivation (the part about his dad's indescretions hit on it). All Penn did was rely on quoting people like Thoreoux. And that conversation he has with Ron at the end on the top of the cliff? That could have been sooooo much better done.

I guess to me it just came off as amateurish and Penn kind of hero-worshiping someone that was not a hero at all, but could serve as a good example to others.

The Billy Madison quote was helpful. Quit looking at me, swan!

nfanel

vedderelf wrote:

I was really, really excited for this movie but I was extremely disappointed. I'm curious as to what others thought about the actual movie, soundtrack excluded.

I don't think this is Sean Penn's directorial debut but it looks like something someone out of film school would do. The opening letter to Wayne at the beginning was cheesey, and by the time Wayne comes along, you've already forgotten about that opening part.

The movie was waaaaay too long (started at 7:45 and got out at 10:20) and the sister's narration not withstanding, it didn't give any insight at all into Chris' state of mind. What exactly was it that he was getting out of the experience? And at the end, when it flashes to the people he met along the way, what sort of connection did Chris feel to them? Because the way it came off to me, it was more like Chris was like self-centered narcisist who didn't really care about the people he was leaving behind.

I should have read the book first because the movie soured me on the whole story. It could have been this epic adventure and instead, it got muddled in what I thought was a horrible job by Penn. I mean, there's 3 different parts where Chris looks right into the camera! It was distracting and unnecessary.

I just really, really, really wanted to like this movie and I was pretty disappointed. The only things it had going for it was the basic plot itself, the beautiful vistas, the fact that the lead actor looked a little like River Phoenix and of course the soundtrack.

Just wondering what others thought, especially those who spend a lot of time in the outdoors and lead a version of this lifestyle portrayed. Also, those parents were pretty brave to cooperate with a movie that made them look like some pretty horrible people.

i agree you should have read the book first. basically all of your complaints were complaints i had about the book.

i actually found chris to be less of a self-centered narcissist in the movie than the book. i think emile hirsch did a great job of showing us what chris got out of the experience...his facial expressions spoke volumes. also i think the parents were portrayed more favorably onscreen.

also, i thought the book was all over the place...movie had more of a connected feel.

vedderelf

PureandEasy wrote:

the letter wasn't cheesey, it was real, Chris actually wrote that to Wayne

you should have read the book first

I don't think it was Sean's best work, but I enjoyed it, although there were some things from the book I may have included, while leaving out some of the things he included

I'm not saying the letter was cheesey, just the way it was used like that.

Jwmcc

vedderelf wrote:

What exactly was it that he was getting out of the experience? And at the end, when it flashes to the people he met along the way, what sort of connection did Chris feel to them? Because the way it came off to me, it was more like Chris was like self-centered narcisist who didn't really care about the people he was leaving behind.

That's how I felt after seeing it last weekend. The movie itself was about 15 minutes too long, and I came off feeling that he formed these bonds with people that he had no intention of doing nothing more than using them along the way to his goal.

Travelar

vedderelf wrote:

I'm not saying the letter was cheesey, just the way it was used like that.

The opening page of the book is Postcard to Wayne.... it just seemed logical that the movie would start that way to me.

As for the book, it's all over. The author sidetracks into things like his experiences climbing a mountain in Alaska and how he thought that formed a sort of bond between him and Chris.

While I thought the movie was pretty well done, there are several facts that for whatever reason were portrayed wrongly in the movie. While none of them huge, they may have taken away the ability for the viewer to get deeper into Chris' mind.

I'd also like to add that the book discussed some of the people in Chris' life a little more in depth which really adds to how Chris interacted with the world. The book also brought some closure by talking about the influence that Chris had on these peoples lives after they discovered he had died.

Read the book..... I think you'll took away quite a bit more of the story.

Chris1401

http://www.mensjournal.com/feature/M162/M162_TheCultofChrisMcCandless.html

Here is a decent and somewhat critical analysis of the movie and book along with insight from people closely related to the events surrounding it.

I found this to be the best representation of both sides out of any article I have seen.

vedder360

Saw the movie last weekend, loved it... Guess not everythings for everyone though...

PureandEasy

“There’s a reason, a reason I’ll be back”

and that reason is that it’s just a compelling story, no matter which viewpoint you take

this story will continue to live on for many years to come

dontloseyourheat

No one really knows what Chris was experiencing or feeling along the way. He went months at a time without journal entries and a large number of them were just a few words long.

He made notes and underlined certain passages in the books he was reading. It was through those that Krakuer began to deduce what was going on in his mind.

Not to pile on but in a large part of the book isn't even about Chris or his journey.

I liked the movie more than the book because, like someone said, the movie was more "connected." I'll probably be the only one who didn't like how the used the soundtrack. I love all the songs but didn't like how the fit into the movie. I felt like they overused the music and the lyrics to "Hard Sun" had nothing to do with the story.

josevolution

vedderelf wrote:

I was really, really excited for this movie but I was extremely disappointed. I'm curious as to what others thought about the actual movie, soundtrack excluded.

I don't think this is Sean Penn's directorial debut but it looks like something someone out of film school would do. The opening letter to Wayne at the beginning was cheesey, and by the time Wayne comes along, you've already forgotten about that opening part.

The movie was waaaaay too long (started at 7:45 and got out at 10:20) and the sister's narration not withstanding, it didn't give any insight at all into Chris' state of mind. What exactly was it that he was getting out of the experience? And at the end, when it flashes to the people he met along the way, what sort of connection did Chris feel to them? Because the way it came off to me, it was more like Chris was like self-centered narcisist who didn't really care about the people he was leaving behind.

I should have read the book first because the movie soured me on the whole story. It could have been this epic adventure and instead, it got muddled in what I thought was a horrible job by Penn. I mean, there's 3 different parts where Chris looks right into the camera! It was distracting and unnecessary.

I just really, really, really wanted to like this movie and I was pretty disappointed. The only things it had going for it was the basic plot itself, the beautiful vistas, the fact that the lead actor looked a little like River Phoenix and of course the soundtrack.

Just wondering what others thought, especially those who spend a lot of time in the outdoors and lead a version of this lifestyle portrayed. Also, those parents were pretty brave to cooperate with a movie that made them look like some pretty horrible people.

why don't you just tell everybody the whole movie scene by scene so the people who haven't seen it yet don't have to, does that explain 'SPOILER "....

bovy_j

I freakin' loved this movie. You're opinion is wrong.

mattmidgett

josevolution wrote:

why don't you just tell everybody the whole movie scene by scene so the people who haven't seen it yet don't have to, does that explain 'SPOILER "....

First off, the original poster's post didn't contain any spoilers. He said it was too long and that he thought Chris was self-centered. I don't think that gives away much, so chill out.

Anyway, I didn't think the movie sucked but at the same time I wouldn't say it was far above average either. I thought Emile Hirsch did a good job and I was blown away at his physical transformation throughout the film. I think he is going to become known as one of the better young actors around.

Back to topic, I wanted to be floored by this movie. I really did. The fact of the matter was that while the scenery was pretty, it seemed to drag to me and towards the end I was kind of wanting it to hurry and wrap up. It has received tons of wonderful reviews so I think us dissenters might be in the minority here though.

I did feel that Ed's music was a great compliment to the movie though and it made me love all the songs more than I already did.

acoustic guy

emile did look into the camera when he was eating the apple but I thought it was really funny.
He made a joke about it.

TrixieCat

Jwmcc wrote:

That's how I felt after seeing it last weekend. The movie itself was about 15 minutes too long, and I came off feeling that he formed these bonds with people that he had no intention of doing nothing more than using them along the way to his goal.

Now see, what I took away from this is that Chris himself touched their lives, more than they touched his...even though I believe that is the way it is described.
I thought it was awesome, but I wasn't expecting too much seeing as The Perfect Storm was one of the cheesiest movies around.

urbanhippie

I loved this film. It was beautifully done and Emile Hirsch did a great job. I read the book beforehand and I much preferred the film. Whoever said it was more connected is right.
I felt the authors views intruded in the book, not so in the film.
It made me cry...but more than that, it made me think.

Kel Varnsen

nfanel wrote:

i agree you should have read the book first. basically all of your complaints were complaints i had about the book.

i actually found chris to be less of a self-centered narcissist in the movie than the book. i think emile hirsch did a great job of showing us what chris got out of the experience...his facial expressions spoke volumes. also i think the parents were portrayed more favorably onscreen.

also, i thought the book was all over the place...movie had more of a connected feel.

I have not seen the movie or read the book but the idea that you should have to read a book to understand a movie based on it is something I disagree with. If any movie based on a book can't tell a quality story on its own then it is a problem with the movie.

Lifted

i thought the movie was okay, but i agree with some of your points, like the fact that it was way too long. anyway i read the book first, and the book was great. it was way better than the movie and i'm not the kind of person who thinks that the book is always better than the movie.