Into the Wild (2007)

Okay everyone, so I’m going to do something very special and show you a piece I wrote which was included in my summative portfolio for my Creative Writing module at the end of my first year of university. I haven’t done this before and I’m going to let you in on a little secret, it’s because of this piece which you’re about to read that I started my film blog in the first place. Technically I guess you could say that this is my first post. 

The purpose of my portfolio was to showcase my abilities to adapt my writing to different styles and I chose two styles to write in, the first being (needless to say) blogging while my second piece of writing was the written script of a graphic novel (aka a comic book). Both were such fun styles and really opened my eyes to my own self-expression. That sounded really corny but whatever.

Just so you know, I’m not going to show you the whole thing (some editing and tweaking has taken place) because it’s pretty long and, well… “ain’t nobody got time for that!”.

On with the show then… (Quick FYI: structurally this post is very different from previous ones, it’s set out into three different parts, but I’m sure you’ll soon figure it out) 

I first heard of this film from my older; cockier; and much more culturally ‘in-the-know’ brother. I remember the many times he told me how much he loved this film, how inspiring it was and how stupid I was for loving films such as Clueless (as any thirteen year old girl my age would, thank you very much!). Of course in my adolescent-induced-stubbornness I refused to watch the film, countering that it was boring and that ‘you’ve probably exaggerated how good it is anyway!’, though this didn’t stop me from researching the film plot and, subsequently, the person from which the whole film was developed – Chris McCandless.

I have a very clear memory of sitting in the car, while my brother sat in the front seat talking to my mother about McCandless, and telling her, while I eavesdropped in the back seat, about how he wanted to be like this guy. Immediately I shouted from my safe position in the back seat that it was stupid to want to be like him, after all he died, and ‘in such a reckless way!’. My brother didn’t appreciate the interruption of course, but he didn’t argue, which struck me as odd, and from my position I could see a fleeting look cross his face that very much resembled sadness. The thought that I had caused this sadness with my silly interruption was disturbing, so I let the subject drop, but that small and seemingly insignificant memory will remain with me; an anecdote to tell to my sentimental parents. Now, of course, with age and the honed-down inclination to irritate my brother, I understand why the look passed his face.

It was because I had misunderstood the whole point. About Chris McCandless, about who he was, about why he was the way he was, and, most importantly, about my brother. My brother wasn’t saying that he wanted to die lonely and alone, he was telling us that he wanted to live happy; that he wanted to be an adventurer and that; above all, he wanted to live for himself. This, to me, is what the film (and the book) is about – it is about every person who wants to be free.

THE BOOK 

‘Into the Wild’ is a non-fiction book written by Jon Krakauer in 1996 which chronicles the last few years of inspired-by-the-world adventurer Chris McCandless or, as he called himself, Alexander Supertramp. This book, which Krakauer spent the best part of three years researching, offers a unique perspective onto the life and beliefs of McCandless.

I read this book recently as an undergraduate student in English Literature and, rather fittingly, it was part of a module called Contemporary Writing. I say fittingly because this book explores the themes inherent in the modern and post-modern literature movement, and for those of you with no interest in exploring this somewhat infuriating movement, have no fear, I do not intend to include a thousand word diatribe on the importance of such readings. I merely bring attention to these movements to highlight how important this book is in examining identity and the culture of ‘what-is-‘society’?’ on a very basic and human level, through the experiences of McCandless.

Of course if you’re not interested in exploring the depths of the human soul, as this very real man McCandless was, then I wouldn’t recommend this book. Though it is a fantastic piece of literature, I would offer caution to more impatient readers as it sometimes feels slow, with parts of the book feeling forced such as the mention of figures throughout history with a similar story to McCandless’ – including the author himself.

The inclusion of an authorial anecdote, though forced in my opinion, gives the story a life and a presence. The reader can’t seek out the true hero of this novel, because he didn’t survive his journey, but they can seek out and learn to understand the author. This novel is more than just a story created with the intention of fame, glory and money, it is a manifestation of the American Dream. Though it does not represent any great success inherent in this dream, it does represent the truth, which seems a rather fitting message given the life McCandless sought and lived till the very end.

Despite its minor flaws, I couldn’t help but feel that this book is somehow essential, (especially for readers in their twenties) largely due to the huge cathartic release it offers. The book acts as an emblem for the tragic figure of McCandless in that it celebrates his beliefs and his fearlessness yet also castigates the reckless actions which led to his death.

THE FILM 

The film, much like the book, is beautiful and emotionally evocative. Praise must be given to Sean Penn’s direction of the film and his what seems like effortless splicing together of separate yet pivotal moments in McCandless’ last few years of life. I will admit though, that the film sometimes comes across as trying too hard to extol the virtues of McCandless’ life, and in doing so perhaps exaggerates the themes represented by the book, i.e. themes of freedom and happiness come across as too ‘artsy’ and ‘try-hard’ in the film (scenes of flowers blowing in the wind against a burning summer sky come to mind).

I will say one thing of the book and the film – they feel very different. When I finished the book, I came away feeling sad but also relieved to have made it to the final page without giving up. When the end credits came to the film I felt sad, again, but I also felt happy and, most importantly, desperate. Desperate for some happier conclusion to play out; for the ghostly smile of McCandless’ last, horrifying death scene to not be the death scene, but some trick ending. I think the difference is though, that McCandless’ story is a visual one. In the book you can imagine the vast and extraordinary landscapes but it feels vague and fleeting, you can’t quite get a grasp on what this character was thinking or feeling. In the film, however, we can see McCandless, we can see the beauty and the desolation and, because of the utter brilliance of Emile Hirsch, we can truly feel the pain and the loneliness. Tears of happiness, tears of desperation, and tears of rage – the audience feel it all. We are taken on a visual journey, yes, but we are also taken on an emotional one.

McCandless’ relationship with certain characters is represented much differently within the film. One such relationship is with the romantic interest of the film, played by a pre-Twilight Kristen Stewart. In the book a romance is never confirmed or given much prominence, and seems an inessential detail. In the film, however, the story of unrequited love seems important to McCandless’ tale, especially when he tells her in their all too brief encounter that she does matter and she is important. This scene seems a bittersweet moment of foreshadowing, because she is important, she is the last woman McCandless had any sort of romantic interest in. The last person he had a romantic connection with. Which is a horribly tragic fact to face within the film, but an essential one, which is where the strength of this film outweighs the weakness of the book – it seems to capture the important reality of relationships, whatever nature they take.

To end an overly long post I will again emphasize the mesmerizing quality of this film, which captures a time and a place perfectly, and most importantly, captures the essence of a character so completely independent from society. Yes, I now understand what my brother was talking about all those years ago on that hot and otherwise inconsequential day and I can’t help but share that hope. A hope that I feel is transcendent of almost anyone with the capacity to wish for a life that isn’t filled with a monotonous perseverance of day-to-day life. But maybe, like McCandless, I am a hopeless and naïve romantic…

So did you like it? I don't know if you noticed but its got a very different tone and style to my usual posts. Do you prefer this style? Also, back in the old days my star rating didn't exist, so technically I should deprive you all, but...I'm not that cruel.

A film ramblers star rating? 

That's it for now folks...