Personally, I believe the death of Chris McCandless in the movie, “Into the Wild”, was portrayed more powerfully than in the book. The beginning of the movie actually starts with Chris writing his last words in Alaska almost alluding to his eventual death to come at the end. Just like in the book, Chris’s death is started with, but in the movie you can see fear in the character’s eye and you can witness his aching body which is more powerful for me as an audience member. In the beginning of the movie, we as an audience, see what Chris in endures in the Alaskan wilderness. You can see his tiresome body stumble around as he approaches the bus, but at this point in the movie the cause of death is un determined. It is not until the end of the movie where there is confusion with the end of the book. In the movie Chris’s death is caused by the mistaken potato seeds. In the book, it is unclear what the weather the potato seeds actually caused Chris’s death. For a director, I understand why making the seeds the cause of death. It is easier to act out. How does one make starvation entertaining? Starvation is not exciting enough for an audience.
Surprisingly enough, tv producers now a days, have created shows where starvation is a key aspect in keeping viewers interested. The show is called “Naked and Afraid”. Just like Chris McCandless, two people, a man and a woman, attempt to demonstrate their survival skills in a remote location for 21 days just because they think that they can. Both this man and woman get nothing to survive with, but their wits, similarly to Chris. You actually watch these two people attempt to survive and avoid starvation and dehydration. Unlike Chris McCandless, these people can back out of the 21 day challenge whenever they feel they’ve had enough.
Obviously, making the potato seeds the cause of death in the movie makes logical sense because it adds more spice to the movie, but why is there a controversy in the book? Maybe it’s because he was alone and no one can really know. Also, books like to have the reader question endings and make their own opinion. I also ask myself why this book is even successful. Is it because we get to watch someone experience nature and fail? Why is it entertaining to watch someone survive? We see it on tv everywhere, but why is entertaining and how far will producers take this survival. In the future of reality tv, we will witness death?
Jake- I recall a few movies predicated on using death as an audience draw. I'm struck by the difference between your emotional response to the images of McCandless in the movie and the more intellectual and perhaps spiritual questions raised by the book. Krakauer avoids pathos, and movies thrive on it. Of course as no one really knows what happened exactly, the movie has to imagine/invent it. You prefer the movie version, but of your peers seemed to resist the idealization of the movie.
ReplyDelete