Read Mixed User Reviews for Into the Wild

4

kev_i_nMar 1, 2014

Brief Review (I haven’t read the book, so this I based solely on the film)
+Brilliant Photography
+Decent acting at points that make the film interesting at points +Great ending (wouldn’t spoiler for you) -I found the story to be boring,Brief Review (I haven’t read the book, so this I based solely on the film)
+Brilliant Photography
+Decent acting at points that make the film interesting at points
+Great ending (wouldn’t spoiler for you)
-I found the story to be boring, predictable and pointless.
-Way to long I wanted to end
-The dialogue was simplistic at best and dull at worst
-The film fails to pull at your heart strings even at points when you are clearly meant to care

The film can be summed up with one word, boring. It is not an awful film, but it never goes beyond 2nd gear. Ultimately I would I have preferred it if it was filmed like a documentary, which would have made greater impact. As a result I wanted it to end, so I wouldn’t recommend it.

Full Review
The first thing you notice about the film is that is positive, is that the photography and setting as very interesting, and well filmed. Having said that once you begin to appreciate the plot, you realise this isn’t surprise, given the fact that the story is basically a journey across America, so great landmarks, like the Hoover Dam, are not too surprising after the first 30 minutes of the films.

Surprisingly at points there are decent pieces of acting, in particularly the ending, and sign of suffering of Christopher (main character). Likewise Chris’ parents do predict a decent level of emotion, without being seen as over-acting. However, for me, the best piece of acting was performed by Kristen Stewart. This is not because Kristen is by any means a decent actress, or depicts any sense of believable emotions, but it is simply because she is so bad playing the emotional under-age teenage girl, who wants sex. Such appealing acting by Kristen Stewart for me was one of the only bits of the film I can remember, simply because of how bad her performance is. (I watched the film literally an hour ago from writing this review). As a result for me the acting was substantial, but you know it is bad when the highlight of a film is Kristen Stewart.

For me the best bit of the film is the ending. I won’t spoil it, but basically it is unexpected, and one that is very well depicted, displaying the innocence of Christopher as a character, just wanting to live life free from the restraints of conventionality.

However for me this is by no means a good film. The main problem for me was the story. It depicts the story of Christopher, who wants to live life free of society, and ends up in his dream land of Alaska, with flash backs depicting the journey Christopher takes. For me it was such a boring story simply because the fact that you see him make it too Alaska which therefore makes the flashbacks for me pointless, because you know any situation Christopher ends up in, he will be fine. As a result for me the flashbacks, feel more like padding than anything else. In particularly his journey to Mexico, when he wants to go to Alaska seems like a waste of time. While they try and make it more interesting and possibly spiritual by having Christopher justify his life through quotations from books, it ultimately becomes pointless. As a result I wanted this 2 and a half hour film to end. The point here is that you could reduce the film time till about 1 hour and it wouldn’t make any difference.
The second thing you will notice about the characters within the film is that the dialogue is too simplistic. This can be seen by how the characters that Christopher encounters, seem to have really restrictive dialogue meaning no matter how good their performances are, their depictions feel limited at best. Such limited dialogue is made worse by how Christopher seems like someone you admire, but not too likeable, yet nearly every character he meets seem to view him as some kind of god like figure, with one character wanting to adopt him, even though he only knew him for a very limited period of time. The combination of forgettable and unconvincing dialogue, in combination with a dull story that was badly portrayed, for me killed any attempt the film tried to make to make you care about the characters etc.

Henceforth while I can see the appeal of the film, I certainly don’t think it is worth all the praise it gets. It is not that the film is awful, but the high levels of potential with the film’s story, in combination with the film’s constant mediocrity, make this film ultimately forgettable and a film with almost no charm. Whereas bad films can be interestingly bad, this film, for me, is just boring. As a result I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

ChrisS.Apr 6, 2008

I rated this a 5. 5 out of 5 for the scenery and all I can say is youth is wasted on the young so 0 out of 5 for a story about someone pissed off and running away from home. Doing his research while running to the wild, ie. how to gut a I rated this a 5. 5 out of 5 for the scenery and all I can say is youth is wasted on the young so 0 out of 5 for a story about someone pissed off and running away from home. Doing his research while running to the wild, ie. how to gut a Moose, good plan. Also shooting the animal with what seemed to be a rimfire 22, another good plan. I wonder how short his stay in the bush would have been if he had not come across the bus. Woodstock and Haight Ashbury come to mind. " Yeah man gonna disconnect from society and live free", until the money runs out or the bullets run out. No man is an island.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful

4

Tss5078Feb 22, 2013

It was critically acclaimed, full of stars, and Academy nominated, but Into The Wild wasn't for me. The film is based on the true story of Christopher McCandless, a young man in search of true freedom. A recent college graduate, inspired byIt was critically acclaimed, full of stars, and Academy nominated, but Into The Wild wasn't for me. The film is based on the true story of Christopher McCandless, a young man in search of true freedom. A recent college graduate, inspired by naturalist literature, McCandless decided to travel to Alaska and live off the land. The film follows his journey, from college graduation and is an amazing story. Emile Hirsch gives an unbelievable performance as McCandless but was snubbed by the Academy. I suspect it was for the same reason I didn't like the film, it is unbelievably slow. The story and cast are amazing, but everything is so sedentary and precise, that you can barely sit through the thing! Some three hour plus films, don't feel anywhere near that long, that's how you know they're great. On the other hand, Into The Wild easily feels much longer than three hours and unfortunately doesn't do the story justice.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

JoeyD.Mar 7, 2008

The trailer suggests this is an inspirational and uplifting film. It struck me as more melancholy and kind of a depressing. Overall it was a bit too long, in my opinion. But it didn't completely suck. Worth a rent at least. If The trailer suggests this is an inspirational and uplifting film. It struck me as more melancholy and kind of a depressing. Overall it was a bit too long, in my opinion. But it didn't completely suck. Worth a rent at least. If you've got 2 hours to kill and feel like watching a quasi-hippy, skinny kid do some deep and introspective soul searching, then this film is for you. Hal Holbrook's character is worth the wait, by the way.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful

5

JohnP.Jun 8, 2008

Slow and boring.

0 of 2 users found this helpful

4

dlynch18Feb 27, 2011

Movie seemed to drag on forever. I couldn't feel sorry for someone that just seemed to use people to get to his end goal and not care about them. At many points I thought the story was going to wrap up but it just kept going and going, notMovie seemed to drag on forever. I couldn't feel sorry for someone that just seemed to use people to get to his end goal and not care about them. At many points I thought the story was going to wrap up but it just kept going and going, not in a good way.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Trev29Jun 9, 2013

A great story with some very beautiful shots and emotional scenes, but it is ultimately a bore that never seems to end. The movie could have played out much better if it wasn't for the endless screenplay.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

ChristineT.Nov 5, 2007

I understand Sean Penn was not on a fact-finding mission, but the numerous discrepancies with the book (okay, maybe the book was wrong) make me question his motives. To wit: Chris abandoned his car because it would not start after a flash I understand Sean Penn was not on a fact-finding mission, but the numerous discrepancies with the book (okay, maybe the book was wrong) make me question his motives. To wit: Chris abandoned his car because it would not start after a flash flood. When park rangers (not people out searching for wild flowers) found it, it started after being jumped and ran for years. Chris traveled the lower Colorado River, not the rapids, in a canoe, not a kayak. The couple he later met in the Grand Canyon were German, not Dutch (or Danish; I forget what the movie said), and I doubt they were such giggling twits. He got lost in a maze of irrigation ditches and would never have reached the ocean had not Mexican hunting guides carried him and his canoe in their truck. He abandoned the canoe; it did not blow away. He was never beaten up by a railroad guard. When the manager at McDonald's asked him to wear socks, he wore socks. "Ron Franz" (pseudonym) did not hit the bottle after his family was killed; he mentored young Asian people and sent two through medical school. Chris almost certainly knew the difference between wild potato and the poisonous sweet pea; his notes say his decline is the "fault of pot. seed." Moldy potato seeds can be poisonous. Why overly romanticize that which is already dramatic?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

RutterOct 28, 2007

I read this book several years ago...a few comments... The movie leaves you with a distinctly different impression than the book. The book for me was sort of a cautionary tale about romanticizing the whole high minded spiritual view of I read this book several years ago...a few comments... The movie leaves you with a distinctly different impression than the book. The book for me was sort of a cautionary tale about romanticizing the whole high minded spiritual view of Chris. In the movie he was an idealist, living life on his terms, and died tragically when he found the TRUE meaning of life, touching many along the way. The book was a little bit more sort of cynical of these types...Nature is harsh, maybe civilization is not such a bad thing...it exists so we don't starve/freeze to death, so quit your whining about the ills of society and learn to live with those around you...running away is not an answer. Maybe it is this interpretation of his life that was needed to get the cooperation of his family, I don't know. At least for me, I left the book with the "wanna be hippy dumbass over-estimates himself and under-estimates nature" and you took a sort of perverse thrill in reading about him getting his due. The main actor was ok, but to me didn't convey the character I read about in the book. He is pretty light in the charisma department, but his gig seems to be walking around with a wide-eyed smile and then losing a bunch of weight..ehh. The character in the book came off more 3-dimensional than was pulled off here. Ok movie, but if you are like a lot of people and have this notion of throwing it all away and living an idyllic life, read the book...it still gives you a lot to think about but filters in a certain grim reality this movie seemed to miss. The Movie itself is entertaining enough..you can enjoy it on it's own merits or you could also choose to read the book, but be warned, you will walk away with two different experiences.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

TGRBeastOct 30, 2007

The movie took some liberties in comparison to the book. The book was much more focused on how Chris was a loner, wanted to escape from society, and how ill-prepared he was for nature's elements. The movie really tried to make Chris The movie took some liberties in comparison to the book. The book was much more focused on how Chris was a loner, wanted to escape from society, and how ill-prepared he was for nature's elements. The movie really tried to make Chris look like a hero including all the people's lives he touched - a MUCH different story than the book. The movie was also somewhat irresponsible in showing someone like Chris who had no whitewater experience going through some very serious white water which in all likelihood he might not have survived had he tried to go through it. The book showed him as a loner kid who hated his parents for providing him with the best opportunities they could - much more than many of us could ever hope to have been given. The movie was overly harsh on the parents. It lost a lot of credibility when trying to make the parents out to be these uncaring people. The movie was inconsistent in that it portrayed this kid as someone who touched many lives, but yet did not want to be a part of society - also inconsistent was someone who apparently adored nature but disregarded the efforts to try and manage open spaces (as he disregards the lottery system in going down the Colorado). The movie does have some great scenery and I noticed a few wet eyes so it must have 'touched' some people.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

TyranianOct 27, 2019

A bit overlong but has many strong moments and a good performance by Emile Hirsch.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

RalfbergsFeb 2, 2018

Not my kind of movie. Of course the story is based on real events and it is touching, but this is not really for me. I guess that's just my preference. The story is quite philosophical and makes you think, but in the end what it really provesNot my kind of movie. Of course the story is based on real events and it is touching, but this is not really for me. I guess that's just my preference. The story is quite philosophical and makes you think, but in the end what it really proves I don't know.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews