2007 drama based on Krakauer book Rating: 13/20
Plot: Christopher McCandless, following his graduation from college, decides he's fed up with society's lies and, inspired by Thoreau, changes his name to Alexander Supertramp and embarks on a cross-country adventure. His ultimate destination--Alaska. Along the way, he befriends old people, criminals, Europeans, and hippies as he hitches, tramps, rows, camps, and walks. He learns from them, they learn from him, and tears are shed. He makes it to Alaska and dies. Whoops!
Liked the book a lot but felt this was uneven and overly long. At one point, I forgot that I was watching a movie and thought that Sean Penn had broken into my house and tried to put his fist completely down my throat. During large chunks of this, it seemed like a two-hours-and-forty-minute series of montages broken occasionally by dialogue. The music somewhat and some of the stylistic choices (intentionally jitters, halts, swirls, tilts) took the focus away from the protagonist and put it on the direction. And one scene involving an apple is one of the biggest movie mistakes I've seen in a while. What should have been simple was convoluted and offensively bedecked. Thoreau and more than likely Alexander Supertramp wouldn't have been happy. The kid playing the lead was very good in a physically-demanding role, and the overall message, reflective scenes with minor characters, and key quotes (I'm guessing from Supertramp's journals) made parts of this powerful and moving. And of course the parts of America that don't involve people are also pretty beautiful. I wanted to like this more and wished there was less of it.
Here I am watching Into the Wild. I'm a little cold. I also ran out of cookies.
McCandless's story is tragic, but then so many people have benefited from hearing it... a couple of years of hitchhiking and camping made a story that now challenges thousands (millions?) of people to reexamine their lives
ReplyDeleteI agree, and I find Mr. Supertramp to be a heroic figure. However, I can see how a lot of folks would see (or read) his story and think he's a pretentious, self-righteous clown who got what he had comin' to him.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite part of the movie, now that I think about it a day after seeing it, is the work of the actors in the minor roles--the hippies, the old man he stayed with at the end. Without words, you could just tell that their brief encounters with McCandless had an impact on their lives.
I think the greatest tragedy of all is probably that McCandless, as he was dying, realized how much more he could have meant to people and how much more he had to offer the world. The "Happiness is only real if it's shared" (that's a paraphrase) is important as near-last words. Obviously, you're right though. If he wouldn't have died like he did, less people would have been touched by his story.
Story aside, what did you think of this as a film?
Often the problem with movies based on real events is that I end up reading the facts (or the internet), and when I do, it ruins the movie. If I didn't know anything about McCandless, I would say this is an overlong, meandering, but generally beautifully shot film with a very charismatic lead playing McCandless. Also Mark Twain is so cute I'd just like to pinch his old cheeks.
ReplyDeleteSadly the truth of the matter seems to be that McCandless was a moron and a lot of this movie is glorified or just made up. The dude killed himself very efficiently during an Alaskan summer six miles from a bridge to civilization. I'm not saying I would have done any better, but I sure wouldn't be there if I couldn't. The film makes him out to be a tragic hero, but being stupid isn't heroic (people who love you are hurt for life). Romanticizing his quest in a movie is cheap and irresponsible. The movie itself gets a 14 but McCandless and Hollywood get a 10.
The above is Cory, not that idiot Anonymous
ReplyDeleteBut in a way, living the exact life you want to live, taking chances, freeing yourself from the crap of society, etc. is heroic. I think the guy was an idiot, sure, but at least he didn't go out like a sucker.
ReplyDeleteRomanticized? Ehh, maybe. I think the book does a lot better job with the subject. And I think the movie could have inflated the heroic aspect even more than it did and really pissed everybody off...
I reread my little review and have no idea what this "apple scene" is...apparently, I really hated it though.
This is one of those movies that I thought was better than the book. I read the book in college and was required to write a paper about it. I was the only person in the class to not like the protagonist. I thought he was pretentious, self-righteous (all the things you said), with a hint of entitlement. The way he went out is cheap and wasteful. If it speaks to anyone, I hope the message is "get your shit together and suck it up." People need to prioritize their lives, sure; but to run away from responsibility is no way to have a civilization. It's "immaturity" masquerading as a "free spirit."
ReplyDeleteI like what Penn did with this movie, though. The book doesn't flesh out the family's problems as specifically as the movie did. All we really hear from in the book is the sister. The parents were the real driving force behind McCandless's departure.
I also really liked the supporting characters (minus the made-up character played by Kristen Stewart). She's foxy, but it was Hollywood trying to slip in a love story. Cheap. Hal Holbrook stole the show when he was on screen and I thought his wisdom and advice hit the nail on the head. Great writing for the actors to work with.
Emile Hirsch does an awesome job as Supertramp. I went in wanting to hate him, but he brought a sympathetic eye to McCandless and I briefly bought into it. As a movie, 12/20.
I liked the book better, and I seem to like Supertramp better than most people. I don't have much interest in ever watching this again (or reading the book)...
ReplyDeleteEvery time a comment is left on one of these really old posts, I wonder what the heck I was thinking with the pictures.