Into the Wild (15)

It's interesting to read some of the negative reactions to this film and in general how the word "indulgent" gets attached to anything that challenges materialistic modernity. To me, Penn goes to considerable lengths to balance his character's idealism against the cost of his individualism. The narrator is not McCandless, but his grieving sister, who reminds us again and again of the pain that his family experienced. Furthermore, the final outcome of the journey emphasises the realisation by Chris that he made a mistake in rejecting society outright and he pays the ultimate price for that. This is a film, which like "Grizzly Man", deals with the relationship between man and society and the decision to escape back to nature. Whereas "Grizzly Man" stands back and observes it's subject with a detached distance, "Into the Wild" empathises with it's character and tries to show us the lure of the foolhardy adventure as well as it's tragic consequences. How is that more indulgent than any of the stories that we see about individuals seeking fortune along more wordly paths?

"Worst tragedy of my life" - killing the moose. The guy was definitely full of himself, and Penn "forgot" to deal with that. But then, he was just a troubled kid, and he did something different. McCandless, not Penn.

He did not belong to nature, to the land. He died because he did not belong there. It was all so meaningless. Most importantly, he had some joy leaving things behind, buth he had no joy being there. I do!!!

I think your opinion on this film depends on what you bring to it... there are some reviews here from people who obviously were never going to let any of the deeper ideas get within an inch of them. And others, like me, who simply sat back and opened their mind. You could get arsey and prickly about the character's choices and motives but I think his plan was to escape from arsey and prickly people.... I can't fault him for that. A sad but thoughtful story, an unusual and worthwhile film.

What a load of self-indulgent rubbish. I detested how Penn portrayed Chris in the film- this saint like un materialistic God. When in fact all I saw was a selfish, nasty little boy who put his parents through absolute hell. It was the glorifying of what he did that was so ridiculous. I mean fine, give up material possessions, that's all well and good but acting like it's the rest of the world and not you that has a problem was just idiotic and something that I believe everybody (if they're being honest) cannot relate to. Hirsch was beyond irritating with his self satisfied smile and jesus-like beard. The whole film was a disaster- not funny, not sweet, not insightful or even original. It was an absolute bloody disaster.

I found it very difficult to collect my emotions as this film came to an end. I am in my mid-forties and as a military veteran have considerable experience of tragedy and as an outdoors enthusiast of survival in the wilderness. My guess is that one's reaction to this film will be relative to one's experience, insight and perceptiveness. Life is a comedy for those who think, a tragedy for those who feel. As a stand alone (I haven't read the book, nor do I have any knowledge of the background to this film - but does that matter?) this film is the most profound and thought provoking I have seen - ever. Perhaps that is its purpose - I will now read the book and research the background.

Visually stunning. But the film is banal and self-indulgent. It looks like a mixture of music video+national geography+discovery. To my relief, Christ finally wrote down"happiness real only when shared". I guess that is how Sean Penn tried to make up for his previous over sympathy towards Christ. However, it came too late.

First of all UI and Olek know nothing about who they are. if you're a parent and you love your kid, even though he goes to college and gets that degree and does something else doesn't mean it should be a waste of money. if you think that you're a bad parent! he didn't die because of starvation, he died because he ate the wrong berries and the river was too high to cross. this movie was vantastic. it is about finding out who you really are as a person and looking with in, and on the way making an impact in everyone elses lives that you meet up with. the character in this movie is brilliant and smart, he graduated from college with straight a's and knew so many knowlegable quotes and how to connect with people. so before you leave some really bad comment, watch the whole movie and actually look at the symbolism rather than the nudity and scenery UI and olek

This was the most boring film I've seen in the last twelve months. Long sequence of landscape shots after long sequence of landscape shots, the idolisation of a selfish, foolish guy, the voiceovers, the pretension... geez. I don't know why the people who enjoyed it are so touchy about it being criticised, although it does strike me as a film that it might be considered hip to say you like, even if you don't. It's a pretty pretentious flick.

A very sympathetic portrayal of a defiant, adventurous spirited young man. The film generates a feeling of admiration for the courage of the main protagonist, Christopher McCandles , alias, Alexander Supertramp, while allowing his muddle-headed determination to live alone and cut-off from "society" in a demanding environment, to speak for itself. At times during the screening I wondered about the relevance of the film to a 58 year old like me, but director, Sean Penn skilfully depicts the anguish of McCandless' parents in a way that makes it very relevant to a father of sons in their 20’s (which I am). By including even more of the perspective of McCandless' sister, Penn has produced a film of considerable appeal across gender and generational lines.