Kelsey Spencer
English 101, Ms. Vetne
P2-Film Analysis Essay
March 15th, 2009
My Journey Into the Wild
Into the Wild is a film that was directed by Sean Penn and released in 2007. It's based on
a true story, and I thought that, after learning that it was based on true facts, the filmmakers did
well in portraying it. The acting and cinematography in the movie is very good, and the music is
pretty well done as well. I think the intended audience is definitely older, namely because the
movie itself is rated R. I would recommend this film to others.
The cinematography of the film is very unique, in my opinion. There's a lot of variety to
it. Sometimes shots are flashed really quickly, and other times quick, important scenes in the
movie are depicted in slow motion. This gives the movie a dramatic flair. The shots of Alex
when he's in Alaska, though, are much calmer than the ones of him in the city. It makes the
audience realize how Alex's feelings contrast when he's in the two different settings--busy city
life makes him nervous while life in the wild makes him relaxed. This helps the audience to
understand his reason for leaving society--he feels a lot less stressed when he's out on his own,
enjoying himself and surviving alone in the outdoors.
The lighting in the movie is very natural when Alex is outside. When he's in the city,
though, it gets strange--there are a lot of dark blue and green hues which made me, as a viewer of
the movie, feel anxious. I think the lighting was very effective. There were a lot of gorgeous
shots in the movie as well. The nature scenes were beautiful. I loved the Alaskan mountains the
most. One of my favorite things about this movie, though, was how many animals were shown
on the screen. It was neat to see what types of animals live in Alaska and it made the film
appealing to me as an animal lover.
I think the characters were good overall. My respect really grew for Alex when he was
about to shoot the elk, but then saw its young come up behind it and changed his mind. It showed
a lot about his moral character. At first I thought that all the hippies were too alike and that the
movie crew could have expanded on different types of characters for Alex to meet, but as soon as
I learned that this movie was based off of a real story, I realized that those were the type of
people Alex seemed to run into a lot in reality, and that's something that shouldn't be represented
incorrectly. The casting was done really well, and if I'm going to be honest, I might as well say
that this movie did make me cry--particularly at the part where Alex leaves Ron and the camera
focuses on Ron with a tear falling down his face. I just felt so bad for him...he'd lost his family
and was offering to adopt Alex, and Alex said, "We'll talk about this when I return from Alaska";
Ron knows that it's very unlikely that he and Alex will ever meet again.
Overall, I think this was a good film. It was a bit long and a bit confusing at times when
scenes switched back and forth from Alex being in Alaska to him being on the road to Alaska,
but it was a memorable movie that even managed to tug at my heartstrings at one point, which
was actually unexpected. It had its flaws, but, hey, what movie doesn't? If I had to rate Into the
Wild myself, I'd give it an eight out of ten.
Speaking of rating, this film got a large variety of reviews. Some of those reviews I
agreed with, and others I honestly couldn't take seriously and wonder why they'd been published
in the first place. To be specific, the review that I couldn't stand was one titled "'Into the Wild':
Bad End" by Richard Schickel, published in Time Magazine. First of all, the title of the review
lead me to believe that Schickel didn't even take note of the memoriam at the end of the movie,
which reveals that the film was based on a true story. The ending of the movie was not up to the
movie makers. The film itself was an adaptation of an event that had happened in real life--an
event that ended tragically. Second of all, Schickel makes a mistake with the date, saying that
Christopher McCandless graduated from Emory University in 1992 when in reality Chris had
graduated in 1990 and was found in Alaska in 1992. Schickel's terminology is very casual and
made me think that he's not very professional when it comes to reviewing movies. One of
Schickel's lines in reference to Chris is: "It's a little difficult to see what's bugging him" (1). I
think "bothering him" would have been more appropriate, but let's move on. Schickel seems to
babble in his review at times, especially about Chris's parents. The last line of his paragraph
concerning them reads, "Plenty of young people have slithered through the cracks in their
facade" (Schickel 1). What the heck is this supposed to mean? I have no idea. Of Chris's survival
skills, Schickel says, "[They] are about what you'd expect of a nice middle-class boy, who may
have read his Thoreau, but who neglected to cultivate a Ralph Waldo Emerson he could count on
for a warm bath and square meal when he really needed them" (2). I honestly don't understand
what he's saying here, either. Who's Ralph Waldo Emerson? I think Schickel needs to stop
pretending to be smart and witty and just write about the movie--preferably after watching it
thoroughly for the second time. He goes on in his review to mention some person by the name of
Dilbert and then even Britney Spears and American Idol. He even calls Sean Penn, the director of
the film, a "knothead" and includes the word "screwiness" in his review. I cannot take what he
says seriously, so I'm deciding to disregard his review altogether. I'm sorry I had to read it.
I mostly agree with the review in Christianity Today by Frederica Mathewes-Green.
Mathewes-Green contradicts herself by calling the movie "infuriating" in the beginning of the
review and then praising it later, but she admits to doing so. I don't know what to say about her
comparison between Chris and Shirley Temple because I've never seen the Shirley Temple
movies. I liked how Mathewes-Green stuck to the movie, though. She summarizes it throughout
her review and praises the acting at the end.
My favorite review is the one in U.S.A. Today, titled "'Into the Wild' Explores the
Wander of It All" by Claudia Puig. She summarizes the movie well throughout her review and
uses adjectives to describe what she thought of it--"haunting" and "moving". She also describes
the music as "evocative". I agree with Puig's point that Sean Penn, the director of the film,
doesn't judge Chris by his actions and thus, portrays him as a character that should only be
understood by his audience. This is a very good point. Puig makes you think about the movie and
Chris as a person by asking questions such as "Was McCandless an innocent dreamer, a sensitive
soul yearning to be closer to nature?" and "Was he a childish and self-absorbed tenderfoot who
took unncecessary risks?" (2). She goes on in her review to talk about the actors in the movie.
This was a very understandable review that I definitely agree with and enjoyed reading.
So, despite varied opinions that I may or may not have agreed with, I think the movie was
pulled off pretty well. The storyline was interesting, and it had believable, heart wrenching
moments. The settings it captured were gorgeous, and the editing effects, though random, made
the movie unique and memorable. I would definitely recommend this movie to my friends.
Bibliography
Into the Wild. Dir. Sean Penn. Perf. Emile Hirsch, Marcia Gay Harden, William Hurt, Jena
Malone, Catherine Keener, and Hal Holbrook. Paramount Vantage, 2007.
Mathewes-Green, Frederica. Rev. of Into the Wild, dir. Sean Penn. Christianity Today 28 Sept.
2007: 1-2
Puig, Claudia. "'Into the Wild' Explores the Wander of It All." Rev. of Into the Wild, dir. Sean
Penn. U.S.A. Today 20 Sept. 2007: 1-2
Schickel, Richard. 'Into the Wild': Bad End." Rev. of Into the Wild, dir. Sean Penn. Time
Magazine 21 Sept. 2007: 1-2