[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Into the Wild (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 3/10/2008 10:58:01 PM EDT
|
Expecting a good survival movie, instead I see a movie about an ungrateful, idealist Kid who leeches off society to survive, shirks any real responsibility and then kills himself when he thinks he can pull woodcraft out of his ass in the wilderness, and is too self absorbed to realize when its time to bug out. (yes, he could have followed the flooded river downstream, even if he couldn't cross it rather than starve to death and ineptly poison himself.) Only in the end does he realize he's been a selfish individual his entire adult life. His corpse found in the magic bus by moose hunters with a glib self-written epitaph. They were likely thinking "WTF". Yes, I know that it was based on true events, that doesn't make it any better to me, in fact it may make it worse. Seriously, did anyone else not enjoy this flick, or is it just me. |
I suppose, in his own way. But he gives away $25,000 that was really not even his (given by his father for his education) then later ends up flipping burgers and driving harvesters for money to go to Alaska when he had all he needed right there. I'm not sure if that's freedom or just youthful impulsiveness. I guess I am just old and cynical. |
|
My wife just got this from netflix, we watched it yesterday. The guy, Christopher McCandless, seemed like an interesting young man. I read a lot of the same books and they do make you think about the issues he was struggling with. It was worth watching but I probably won't watch it again. ________________WARNINGSPOILERBELOW______________________________ On the other hand, his time in Alaska is pretty much a documentary of what not to do. He didn't have much if any bush knowledge, he didn't know how to cure meat, he didn't have a map of the area (which wkikpedia claims shows a river-crossing 6 miles from his camp and numerous survival cabins in his AO). There is a valuable wilderness lesson to be taught from this movie if you can separate it out from the philosophical messages. For the record it is also documented that there were no toxins in his system from poisonous plants as the book and movie suggest. It appears he just starved to death. |
|
I love the guys who get all butt hurt because he didn't follow the "rules". His biggest problem and what more than likely molded him into who he was were his parents. Just another example of how bad parents can really fuck a kid up. I felt it was a good movie overall. I respect him for trying something different regardless of the consequences. |
See, to me the obvious notion blaming of his parents for his issues was what irked me the most. In my view his own self absorption was the cause of his escape from society, and his plight. For example, had he chosen to help others in his quest for himself, and joined a global Aid NGO, like Oxfam, the organization to which he so quickly donated $24,000 of his father's money to, he might be alive today. I'm sure many who had nothing growing up would have considered themselves fortunate to have had the advantages he had, such as a college education, even if his family life was not ideal. It can always be worse. In this light I viewed him as ungrateful for what he did receive. A man is never a failure until he blames his mistakes on others. Just my opinion. |
I was not blaming his parents for his "mistakes" if you can even call them mistakes. I was merely pointing out the fact that kids who come from abusive relationships will almost always have some sort of social issues themselves. You could say that Alexander Supertramp had some social issues, couldn't you? |
Sure, there is cause and effect, but I was saying he was blaming his parents rather than tackling his own hang ups, not that you were saying so. I think some people can rise above these issues, and others seem to be lost. He was one of those who could not, apparently. |
I read the book.... If the movie is as you describe it, id say your spot on in the description of him. Stupid ass story, probably a worse movie |
|
From what I have heard, the movie is pretty much unmitigated bullshit. Penn tried to make him a "hero". He did not live as long as the movie portrays, he actually starved to death in the summer, when food abounds. There is a documentary running in Alaska that tells the real story. 
|
My wife bought the DVD after some Oprah ranting...we sat & watched it...me being me...I kept pointing out the dumbshit moves while in Alaska & the okay moves-marked the river were he crossed it before-but ditched an important piece of head gear when it was going to get COLD Ya, it was along slow movie but I was happy to see Darwin WIN. 7mm |
McCandless was definitely a Darwin award nominee |
Avid hunter, but competent? Was he not trying to hunt MOOSE with a 10-22? Or did I get that wrong? He starved to death when he should have been surrounded by small and medium sized game. |
|
Hey I'm not defending him. But he did kill the moose, did he not? Anyways, in the book it talks about how he was a Reagan supporter and would come into his dorm room with his rifle slung after hunting trips or something like that. It's been a while since I read the book, but that stuck out to me. Anyways, I think Sean Penn made him a liberal in the movie because he felt audiences would sympathize with a democrat more that a republican. Who knows. |
I agree, the movie showed how he made some real dumb ass decisions. His quest could have gone much better and MAY have had a happier ending had he been better prepared. Those boots the pickup truck driver gave him probably allowed him to survive longer than would have otherwise. But as far as the movie itself, besides being a little too long,I think it was well made the way it went back and forth. Would have been a decent made for tv movie None of the voting options fit my opinion so I didn't vote. |
In other words a classic tale of darwinism  Ya know it must suck to self select yourself out of the gean pool. If only that director would follow that sniveling fuck dribbles' example
|
|
I liked it. How did he leach off of society? He worked and just went where he wanted. i see a leach as a parasite, taking something. How does having a different life make him a leach? The only mistake he made was not knowing how to survive. I have been a pretty active cross country trekker for the last 15 years and liked themovie and what he was looking for. Following the river wouldnt have done anything for him. It wouldnt have guarenteed lead him any where safe and he was too tired to have made any use of a safe place to cross and try to backtrack his original path. What he should have done was to find the route the original drivers of the bus used to get the bus there. The bus was not airlifted there. The bus was not a 4x4, driven over impassable mountain peaks. It drove down a near by road or path. That would have been his closest easiest route to the nearest civilization. Or he could have take a knife and cut the meat he was trying to smoke into small flat pieces. Then used the rack he was using to insulate the smoke to hold the pieces over the fire. I don't see anything wrong with his life but 1. he was selfish to heartlessly walk away from his family without a word and 2. He was naive. Liked the movie. |
| If he was already tired and on the edge how would walking 6 more miles to then try to backtrack a long hard path have helped him? the bus came from some where flat and drivable. he was wallking for a long time to get to his base camp, going back the same way when already in bad shape is not what I would do. I would have found the path a city school bus drove. that needs roads. You have a better chance of finding help on a road than sick in the bush. especially if you dont know a lot about the bush. |
He didn't look too tired and on the edge when he fell in the river to me. Had he known about the crossing he could have easily handled the extra 6-12 miles. Further how long was the bus there? It could have been there for years with the trail long since overgrown that it came in on. That's assuming the trail even lead to anywhere travelled/inhabited in short order. Conventional wisdom is to follow water downstream when all else is unknown. Of course all this could have been avoided if the dumbass had taken a map in with him. |
|
If nature had taken the road, well maintained enough for a city school bus to cross, what did it do to the river? the river, subject to glacier flow, summer floods and constant water? I have trekked through alaska. Like most every water way that I have ever seen, judging what the map tells you is not a even almost a good idea. Water ways from the desert to the arctic diseappear, grow exponentially, get several times deeper and dry up, etc, sometimes on a weekly basis. The river was already swollen when he tried to cross it. The only thing that he knew is that the river was more dangerous. Any thing the road went through the river was even more affected by. What is a thick blue line on a map in 1998 is 100% different in 1999, again in 2000, again in the summer of 2000, again a few months later, again a few weeks later, again next year and on and on. Roads dont change as much as rivers. Rivers may or may not go by a town. They may flow off where ever they want. Human eyes may not have even ever seen 80% of alaskas waterways. Human/society/ departmen of road works built a road for a reason. It goes some where. It came from so where. Rivers dont have the same requirments. |
Either you dont remember a damn word of the book, or I dont.... The book completely portrays him as an idiot from what I remember, I read it like 6 months ago. The kid gave away a bunch of money that wasnt his to give away, rolls out and tells no one anything where hes going, drifts across the country, squanders his money, and become a squatter. Eventually he gets a job and then goes to alaska completely unprepared, and he wants to live off the land. He fails. Not exactly libtard status, but for sure really stupid and I dont recall any mention of him hunting, or reagan in the book. |
Are you trying to tell us a bulldozer can only travel on a road? A bulldozer could have pulled that bus over the same terrain you'd see on a MX track. Give mother nature some time and there wouldn't be any trace of the tracks it made either. |
| so the hippies chose the most strenusous path they could find because the had a bulldozer? I have LIVED in this environment for monthS, PLURAL. They said "hey we have a bulldozer lets climb a mountian with it. Forget paths. Sure the most logical way is to makshift find our way back to society but we have a bull dozer lets have our hippie navy SEAL friends air lift that to a remote nonsensical place that has no relation to any roads"Because we all know that hippies love to use bull dozers to defy logic. RIVERS CHANGE DAILY!. if you dont know that you have dont know alot about navigations and the world. It takes DAYS to travel 12 miles in alaska! DAYS! DAYS! |
Your rambling is nonsense. What mountain did they climb with a bulldozer - and even if they did, so what? How do you thing mountain passes are carved out - by chinese immigrants like in the old western movies? Nope, earth-moving machines like excavators and bulldozers. Who said that van/bus belonged to hippies? How do you know it didn't belong to some guys that wanted a cheap hunting shelter out in the wild? What does the river have to do with towing it in? Listen, this is getting old - stick to your opinion as long as you want. We're going to solidly disagree here and I have no problem with that. |