Differences Between Into The Wild Book And Movie

925 Words2 Pages

Carlos Godinez
Professor Cooper
ENGL 102
April 2, 2014
Into the Wild: Book vs. Film
So many books or pieces of literature have been made into films. At times the films can mirror exactly what the author wrote and hoped to convey, but often films can either create this sense of enhancement of the book or distort it completely due to more or less background information and a change the perspective of the main character. The book Into the Wild, written by John Krakauer was one of those movies that was recreated into film by director Sean Penn. This is a story of a young man who is unsettled with the poisoned ways of society. He goes on to destroy his previous identity and creates a new one, he abandons his home, car, life-savings, and family life to live on the road and in the wilderness of Alaska. It was mentioned he was trying to escape society as a whole and find himself and happiness. Both the book and the film follow a pretty consistent plot that correlate with each other, both making it evident that Chris was a polarizing subject. So, why does the book portray Chis McCandles as a charismatic, outgoing, well-educated nice kid, as where the movie portrays him more as foolish, immature, unprepared boy biting off more than he can chew? It all depends on your interpretation of both sources within the given information. The following comparison will address the book versus film version of Into the Wild and raise the issue of the amount of background information given in the book versus the film and the change in perspective of the main character Christoper Johnson McCandles.
John Krakauer published Into The Wild in 1996. He first wrote of Christopher McCandless‘s story in an article which he published in Outside Magazine in January...

... middle of paper ...

...ated with me after watching the movie was “. . . And I also know how important it is in life not necessarily to be strong but to feel strong. To measure yourself at least once. To find yourself at least once in the most ancient of human conditions. Facing the blind death stone alone, with nothing to help you but your hands and your own head.” This quotation really embodied McCandless’s vision and life interpretation, which I found significant in forming my opinion. From a personal stand-point, I thoroughly enjoyed both Krakauer’s literary depiction and Penn’s film. Although their plans of organization and portrayal of McCandless were slightly different. Their conveyance of McCandless will only affect the readers as much as they allow. The book and film were both unique in telling the life learned lessons and great adventures of Christopher McCandless.

Open Document