Everybody expects to see the best parts of the book when going to see a movie that is based on a book, but most of the time “The book is better than the movie” and that is what happened in Into the Wild. The movie’s theme is somehow same but the way it is presented quite different than the book. The book Into The Wild, is a travel essay written by Jon Krakauer. It is about a young suburban man from a well to do family who hitched hiked to Alaska without informing his family. He was Christopher Johnson McCandless, a fine man but stubborn with his own idealism. He disappeared immediately after graduating from college with honors on the summer of 1990, donated his grad school fund of $24,000 to Oxfam, abandoned his car and belongings, burnt all the cash and identity, changed his name into Alexander Supertramp and started wandering across Northern California. He worked in several places, made new friends, and lived where people welcomed him. Finally he reaches Alaska, his dreamland. He was found by moose hunters dead in the bus 142. He was very much influenced by Leo Tolstoy who gave up his wealth and wandered into woods. He actually avoided his parents and the social surrounding but unfortunately he died lack of topographic map, flooding in the river and eating the moldy seeds. Krakauer portrays Chris as a gloomy, grudge-holding, very unlike the happy wanderer of the film. The movie excluded essential parts from the book and concentrates on Chris’s quest. It focuses more on Chris being adventurous, friendly, warm yet resentful towards his parents while Krakauer shows other side of Chris.
However, the movie directed by Sean Penn was based on the book which was Chris’s life between college graduation and death; it focused on his i...
... middle of paper ...
...ct of poor judgment.
In the end, Penn tried to make the movie more positive than negative by eliminating the dark sides from the book but as a reader I felt movie would have been better if Penn added some important details which would have satisfied readers like me and would say the movie is excellent. He was showing the adventurous journey of Chris which was one of the causes of his resentment towards his parents but was not able to execute Krakuer’s deeper meaning of the book and his perspective of the wild. People should not take idealism too far because then one can only harm oneself and in the wilderness like Alaska there is no return back if one does not have reality check.
Works Cited
Into the Wild. Dir. Sean Penn. Paramount Vintage. 2007.
Krakauer Jon. Into the Wild. New York: Anchor Book, February 1997. Print.
Into the wild is a book about a young man, who leaves society to hitchhike to Alaska and live alone in the wilderness. “Christopher Johnson McCandless graduated from Emory University in May 1990 with a degree in history and anthropology”p.20. “toward the end of June, Chris mailed his parents a copy of his final grade report.”p.21. He was a well educated man. He had many opportunities in life to be successful. “It was the last anyone in chris family would ever hear from him”.p.22. By August, Chris’ parents received his grades in the mail. He asked the post office to delay them mailing his final grades to his family.
A good portion of Into the Wild, by Jon Krakauer, focuses on the characterization of the protagonist, Chris McCandless. Krakauer shares his opinions on Chris frequently throughout the duration of his book. Chris is portrayed through anecdotes told by people who knew him and through Krakauer’s own personal relation to him. Through these two methods the reader is given a very clear image of Chris. Into the Wild, focuses a lot on Chris’s youth and especially how that influenced his decisions. Krakauer compares Chris’ leneincey on his literary heres versus his harsh judgments on his parents. Chris’ tense relationships with his parents are also used to help show how young Chris really is. After Chris’ youth is made apparent to the reader Krakauer
Throughout Into the Wild, Krakauer portrays Christopher McCandless as an infallibly eager young man hoping to distance himself from the society he so obviously loathes, to "live off the land," entirely independent of a world which has "conditioned [itself] to a life of security." Chris, contrarily to this depiction, is disparagingly viewed by some as a "reckless idiot" who lacked the sense he needed to survive in the Alaskan wilderness. This derogatory assessment of Chris's mindset is representative of the society he hopes to escape and contains all the ignorance that causes him to feel this way. Nevertheless, he is misjudged by these critics, allowing Krakauer to hold the more accurate interpretation of Chris's character, his goals, and his accomplishments.
This book Into The Wild is about how a young man wants to get away from the world. He does escape from society, but ends up dying in the process. The author, Jon Krakauer, does a great job of describing Chris McCandless and his faults. Chris is an intelligent college graduate. He went on a two-year road trip and ended up in Alaska. He didn't have any contact with his parents in all of that time. Krakauer does a great job of interviewing everyone who had anything to do with McCandless from his parents, when he grew up, to the people who found his body in Alaska.
The author uses many way of telling the story buy enhancing the reader understanding in regrades to the point of view of the story line. His use of author quotes, setting, and references create and unique book told by Jon Krakauer. Into The Wild creates a very valuable lesson on how you should always follow your dreams, rather then being told what you should do or what you should not. Chris was a perfect example and a inspiration to many including me.
Chris McCandless was someone who wouldn’t take “no” for an answer. Because of this, he died sometime in August 1992. McCandless, who graduated college in 1990, spent the better part of two years traveling the country in preparation for his ultimate goal, surviving in the Alaskan Bush. Now, however, he is the main character in Into the Wild, where he merely represents overconfidence and ignorance. Chris McCandless was ignoble because he continuously ignored the advice given from others, and was too overzealous in achieving his goal, leaving him unprepared for the harsh conditions of the Alaskan Bush.
The book Into The Wild, written by Jon Krakauer, tells the story of Chris McCandless a young man who abandoned his life in search of something more meaningful than a materialistic society. In 1992 Chris gave his $ 25,000 savings to charity, abandoned his car and most of his possessions, and burned all of his money to chase his dream. Chris’s legacy was to live in simplicity, to find his purpose, and to chase his dreams.
One of the main differences between the book and movies are how Penn and Krakauer interpret Chris McCandless and his story. In the book the story seems to focus more around examining and understanding Chris and his life, whereas the movie shows his life as more of an
Into the Wild, a novel written by Jon Krakauer, as well as a film directed by Sean Penn, talks about Chris McCandless, a young individual who set out on a journey throughout the Western United States, isolating himself from society, and more importantly, his family. During his travels, he meets a lot of different people, that in a way, change his ways about how he sees the world. There are many characteristics to describe McCandless, such as “naïve”, “adventurous”, and “independent”. In the book, Krakauer described McCandless as “intelligent”, using parts in his book that show McCandless being “intelligent”. While Krakauer thinks of McCandless as being “intelligent”, Penn thinks of McCandless as a more “saintly” type of person.
In Krakauer version he too often strayed from the story of Chris which personally I found frustrating. The purpose for reading Into the Wild is to here Chris McCandless’ story, not Jon Krakauer’s. With his chapters titled, “The Stikine Ice Cap,” Krakauer seemingly turns McCandless’ story into his own, babbling on about his endeavours and nothing but himself, without mention of Chris for 24 pages. On the other hand, the movie doesn’t include any of the unnecessary Krakauer information allowing for the main focus to be on Chris. Not only does this make the audience feel more emotionally connected, but the movie also offers extra emotional appeal. Heart strings are pulled in the parting scene between Chris and Ron Frantz and the old man’s eyes swell with tears and and they slowly roll down his cheeks. As Chris takes his last breaths, images of his family and his life flash before his eyes, making for a teary but heartfelt
What would it be like to live in a world where love is a meaningless word, and people have no emotions? That’s exactly what life was like for Jonas, a boy who lived in a supposedly utopian society where everyone is the same. He is selected for a special job, and during his training he learns the importance of individuality and emotion. In the book and movie adaptations of The Giver, there are many similarities and differences.
Life is a form of progress- from one stage to another, from one responsibility to another. Studying, getting good grades, and starting the family are common expectations of human life. In the novel Into the Wild, author Jon Krakauer introduced the tragic story of Christopher Johnson McCandless. After graduating from Emory University, McCandless sold of his possessions and ultimately became a wanderer. He hitchhiked to Alaska and walked into the wilderness for nearly 4 months. This journey to the 49th state proved fatal for him, and he lost his life while fulfilling his dream. After reading this novel, some readers admired the boy for his courage and noble ideas, while others fulminated that he was an idiot who perished out of arrogance and
Into the Wild, written by John Krakauer tells of a young man named Chris McCandless who 1deserted his college degree and all his worldly possessions in favor of a primitive transient life in the wilderness. Krakauer first told the story of Chris in an article in Outside Magazine, but went on to write a thorough book, which encompasses his life in the hopes to explain what caused him to venture off alone into the wild. McCandless’ story soon became a national phenomenon, and had many people questioning why a “young man from a well-to-do East Coast family [would] hitchhike to Alaska” (Krakauer i). Chris comes from an affluent household and has parents that strived to create a desirable life for him and his sister. As Chris grows up, he becomes more and more disturbed by society’s ideals and the control they have on everyday life. He made a point of spiting his parents and the lifestyle they lived. This sense of unhappiness continues to build until after Chris has graduated college and decided to leave everything behind for the Alaskan wilderness. Knowing very little about how to survive in the wild, Chris ventures off on his adventure in a state of naïveté. It is obvious that he possessed monumental potential that was wasted on romanticized ideals and a lack of wisdom. Christopher McCandless is a unique and talented young man, but his selfish and ultimately complacent attitude towards life and his successes led to his demise.
In Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer explores the human fascination with the purpose of life and nature. Krakauer documents the life and death of Chris McCandless, a young man that embarked on an Odyssey in the Alaskan wilderness. Like many people, McCandless believed that he could give his life meaning by pursuing a relationship with nature. He also believed that rejecting human relationships, abandoning his materialistic ways, and purchasing a book about wildlife would strengthen his relationship with nature. However, after spending several months enduring the extreme conditions of the Alaskan wilderness, McCandless’ beliefs begin to work against him. He then accepts that he needs humans, cannot escape materialism, and can never fully understand how nature functions. Most importantly, he realizes that human relationships are more valuable than infinite solitude. McCandless’ gradual change of heart demonstrates that exploring the wilderness is a transformative experience. Krakauer uses the life and death of Chris McCandless to convey that humans need to explore nature in order to discover the meaning of life.
The book, "Being There," is about a man named Chance, who is forced to move out of the house he lived in his whole life and his experience in the outside world. Based on the success of the book, the movie, "Being There," was made. The author of the book, Jerzy Kosinski, also wrote the screenplay for the movie. I think the major difference between the book and the movie is that in the book, we get to read what Chance is feeling and thinking, but in the movie, we only get to see his actions.