movie "into the wild" - spoiler -

ok i just found this thread in the search, and i gotta say, I dont think Into the wild was about survival at all. It was a story about a kid that wanted to get away from it all and experience nature at its fullest, something that you cant look down upon (IMO). It was a story that most people wont see the things that he did wrong. It was intended for a general audience not experts, just like david blaines magic specials. I watch them and see all the things that he did, but that doesnt stop it from entertaining a general audience.

(Btw into the wild is my second favourite movie.)

I've read the book and seen the movie. Both disappointed me deeply. IMO this kid was nothing more than a spoiled brat that was trying to run away form his problems and got himself killed in the process. His only saving grace was that he didn't get anyone else killed in the process. Again, only my opinion.

IMO Supertramp was rejecting not only his parents but also the culture that he felt helped to mold his parents into what they were. abusive and neglectful. i went through a phrase similar to this but not so extreme, as i think most teenagers do. At a young age it seems that the only way to not become your parents is to be 180 degrees opposite of what they are. Living in an abusive environment during the formidable years can cause long term emotional problems. and i think Supertramp had some emotional problems. Lucky are those that grow up wanting to be just like their parents for all the right reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tacmedic

I've read the book and seen the movie. Both disappointed me deeply. IMO this kid was nothing more than a spoiled brat that was trying to run away form his problems and got himself killed in the process. His only saving grace was that he didn't get anyone else killed in the process. Again, only my opinion.

---

if he was a spoiled brat then why did he refuse to get a free car and why does he hate materialism?

This poor fella is just like the poor 41 year old that watched Survivorman excepted he read books and did the same thing.
Thinking that living in the wild or that survival is some romantic ideal is the same as these poor kids that play video games then join the arm services thinking war is some romantic adventure.When in fact all are very ugly!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarge47

1st, you should read the book that the movie; "Into The Wild" was based on as it goes into much more detail. Next, Check out "Alone In The Wilderness", the story of Dick Poerenke.(Hope I spelled that right.) It's great! More later.:cool:

---

Sarge.... Is allone in the wilderness the one written inlike 1914 the one your talking about? I looked for it on amazon and that's the only one listed. It was written by a guy named knoles or knowles or something like that?

OS:
Alone in the wilderness is a documentary film about Dick Proenneke: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0437806/
It is great. If that man haw lived later and come here asking about doing that, I'd have tried to dissuade him too, but I'd have been mistaken. On the other hand, he knew what he was doing and probably wouldn't have had much to ask in the first place.

I've often wondered how many "supertramps" make it and the world don't hear about it. I don't know if Dick Proennoke is really in the same category. Didn't he move to the wilderness after he retired? I don't mean that as a negative, just curious.

yeah; for me it's not about whether it's possible, since we all know it is, but more a question of motivation, realism of goals and - to oversimplify and possibly exaggerate only a little - the feeling that somebody asking what model knife they should take is not likely nearly prepared for such an undertaking. e.g. if a person does not yet know what to do a mile from town, how can they hope to do so 30 miles or more from town.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randyt

I've often wondered how many "supertramps" make it and the world don't hear about it.

---

There are tons of guys just like Chris McCandless that "made it"....I am basically the same age as him, and throughout the early and mid-90's I lived a very similar lifestyle as him, and had lots of friends that did the same type of things. I worked around several Nat'l Parks in the west, and there were lots and lots of guys spending their time going to Grateful Dead shows, living out of tents, tipi's and cars, working as raft guides and dishwashers, and going on extended wilderness adventures. What he did was not unusual. There are still many people thoughout the west and Alaska still doing this type of thing and thriving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DOGMAN

There are tons of guys just like Chris McCandless that "made it"....I am basically the same age as him, and throughout the early and mid-90's I lived a very similar lifestyle as him, and had lots of friends that did the same type of things. I worked around several Nat'l Parks in the west, and there were lots and lots of guys spending their time going to Grateful Dead shows, living out of tents, tipi's and cars, working as raft guides and dishwashers, and going on extended wilderness adventures. What he did was not unusual. There are still many people thoughout the west and Alaska still doing this type of thing and thriving.

---

that's what I figured. I have a question though, it's not meant to be negative. Did Mccandless cause his demise because he was stupid or did fate have a affect? Sometimes it don't take much to go from hero to zero and in his case it cost him his life. There are times that we all make it through by a freckle but we just don't realize how close it really came.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randyt

that's what I figured. I have a question though, it's not meant to be negative. Did Mccandless cause his demise because he was stupid or did fate have a affect? Sometimes it don't take much to go from hero to zero and in his case it cost him his life. There are times that we all make it through by a freckle but we just don't realize how close it really came.

---

I think he was a victim of his own attitude....he wasnt as stupid as much as we was too cavilier...he bought into his own BS basically and thought the basic rules of survival didnt apply tp him

or he was simply willing to take that risk.

I don't think he was willing to risk it all....if you watch the documentary "Call of the Wild" it goes into more facts about McCandless and his ill-fated journey, and his desire to be rescued. The movie "Into the Wild" ignored some important facts about him to create a mytholgical hero....

no base jumper ever wants to die when the 'chute fails either, but that is no the same as to say they did not consider the risk worthwhile when they took it.

i'm certainly not basing my impressions on a film, but they are of course just my suppositions. i am an irregular sprocket after all.

I don't think comparing McCandless to a base jumper is vaild. Base jumpers are extreme adrenalin junkies and they all know going into their activity that with the rush comes grave consequences. From what I've read and seen McCandless was not an adrenalin junky. He didn't particpate in extreme sports of any kind (that kayaking part in the movie was ficticious- in real life he did a flatwater canoe trip)....what he planned to do was not a real risky endevour in the world of risk management.

it killed him, didn't it?

adrenalin seeking behavior needn't be a factor in the decision to engage in risky behavior. the consequences of a disaster are identical when the consequence turns out to be death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canid

it killed him, didn't it?

adrenalin seeking behavior needn't be a factor in the decision to engage in risky behavior. the consequences of a disaster are identical when the consequence turns out to be death.

---

No, the activity did not kill him...and in all reality what he did was not "risky"...people have been living and thriving in that area for thousands of years- with even less then he had with him.

i'm still going on the evidence that he's dead.

Quote:

---

people have been living and thriving in that area for thousands of years- with even less then he had with him.

---

this is a logical fallacy. x number of people have been getting lost, stranded, starving, injured and freezing in Alaska for thousands of years as well. that y number of people manage to do so without accident would allow us to determine the level of risk. it does not demonstrate absence of risk.

But, as far as in the terms of risk management- it was not any more dangerous than being born. Being born has inherant risks (no body gets out of here alive)....its not like he was jumping off a bridge, or out of a plane. The activity he was engaged in did not kill him. If you think of it in simple terms- all he was doing was trying to exist.