|
roflcakes
Nov 11, 2007, 5:42 AM
Post #1 of 15
(1910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2007
Posts: 90
|
Yeah, so, why would they waste a story on a dork who goes out into the wild and gets fucked over. I mean seriously, they should change the name of the movie to "Hippies Dont Survive Alaska"
|
|
|
|
|
bent_gate
Nov 11, 2007, 6:02 AM
Post #2 of 15
(1907 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2620
|
There was this thread on this, about a month ago:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post=1684462#1684462
My question in there was if anyone who climbs, or does activities where they train, plan and prepare have any interest in the story of someone who doesn't. I simply didn't have any interest, and figured that anyone else on the site wouldn't be that interested either.
There were many more Candless worshipers than I expected.
And some people prefer movies like 'Vertical Limit'. They aren't interested in a story where people learn through traditional methods, train and work hard, and then go have a hard adventure and return successfully. To some, there is nothing to worship about that.
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Nov 12, 2007, 4:03 AM
Post #3 of 15
(1884 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
roflcakes wrote: Yeah, so, why would they waste a story on a dork who goes out into the wild and gets fucked over. I mean seriously, they should change the name of the movie to "Hippies Dont Survive Alaska"
If you thought that was the point of exploring McCandless's death (and life), then you really missed the point.
Think, in the future, about how arrogance and bitterness can blind you to reality, for instance. I found that the film depicts an upsetting level of inevitability to what eventually happens. The soundtrack is spectacular though.
|
|
|
|
|
roflcakes
Nov 12, 2007, 8:01 PM
Post #4 of 15
(1840 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2007
Posts: 90
|
you can do that, through a story that is worth it, like one about life, hmm, you have great insight though, I hope to attatin the level of zen you have. LOL
|
|
|
|
|
themadmilkman
Nov 12, 2007, 8:11 PM
Post #5 of 15
(1837 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2006
Posts: 510
|
roflcakes wrote: you can do that, through a story that is worth it, like one about life, hmm, you have great insight though, I hope to attatin the level of zen you have. LOL
it is a story about life. It's the story of a person who chose to live his life exactly how he believed life should be lived. Did it get him killed? Yes. Do you think that because he died it wasn't a life worth living? I'm in no position to say. Are you?
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Nov 12, 2007, 10:18 PM
Post #6 of 15
(1823 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
roflcakes wrote: you can do that, through a story that is worth it, like one about life, hmm, you have great insight though, I hope to attatin the level of zen you have. LOL
Now I understand why you didn't get anything out of the movie, or book.
See, McCandless was unable to cope with his problems in a mainstream fashion (and really, at all) and so instead he convinced himself that his way was so right that when his way fell through, it killed him. He was obsessed, he was arrogant, he was profoundly inexperienced and his life serves, if nothing else, as a warning to us to not fall into the same traps that he did, by luck and selective deafness.
|
|
|
|
|
coastal_climber
Nov 12, 2007, 11:55 PM
Post #7 of 15
(1807 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2006
Posts: 2542
|
petsfed wrote: he was profoundly inexperienced and his life serves, if nothing else, as a warning to us to not fall into the same traps that he did, by luck and selective deafness.
Good call. In the book, it says he actually shot a caribou and thought it was a moose. Goes to show.
>Cam
|
|
|
|
|
themadmilkman
Nov 13, 2007, 2:02 AM
Post #8 of 15
(1801 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2006
Posts: 510
|
coastal_climber wrote: petsfed wrote: he was profoundly inexperienced and his life serves, if nothing else, as a warning to us to not fall into the same traps that he did, by luck and selective deafness. Good call. In the book, it says he actually shot a caribou and thought it was a moose. Goes to show. >Cam
Go read it again. Krakauer states that he personally investigated the bones, and that it was in fact a moose.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Nov 13, 2007, 2:55 AM
Post #9 of 15
(1790 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
petsfed wrote: See, McCandless was unable to cope with his problems in a mainstream fashion (and really, at all) and so instead he convinced himself that his way was so right that when his way fell through, it killed him. He was obsessed, he was arrogant, he was profoundly inexperienced and his life serves, if nothing else, as a warning to us to not fall into the same traps that he did, by luck and selective deafness.
It's been years since I've read the book, but IIRC, Jon also talked of the the other sides of the statistics... numbers of people who had done things which may have inspired Chris to follow the path he had (by virtue of experiencing and sharing an account of that experience with others), as well as the numbers of people who had experienced an ending similar to Chris's without ever being found.
|
|
|
|
|
geogoddess
Nov 13, 2007, 3:10 AM
Post #10 of 15
(1782 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2007
Posts: 613
|
roflcakes wrote: Yeah, so, why would they waste a story on a dork who goes out into the wild and gets fucked over. I mean seriously, they should change the name of the movie to "Hippies Dont Survive Alaska"
Did you read TC Boyles "Drop City?"
now THERE's a hippies vs Alaska book!
I liked Krakauer's book and how he unravelled what happened to McCandless. I also thought that Emile Hirsch and Sean Penn made a really good movie, albeit a little heavy on the dysfunctional family being McCandless' primary motivation for bailing on mainstream society. Hirsch totally went the mile to film that role.
Individuals who reject society and then disappear, wanderlust, these things jsut irritate some people, and make others uncomfortably itchy. What about Amelia Earhart? She was prepared; and she still disappeared. Everett Ruess disappeared into the Utah deserts, leaving his jackasses and journal and woodcuts behind.
So McCandless was idealistic and hypocritical, dangerously unprepared, and got in waaaay too deep. But watch any young adult wrestling with idealism, angst and a strong need for freedom. I found the story compelling, worthy of the telling, and I have no need to stand in judgement about him.
|
|
|
|
|
justroberto
Nov 13, 2007, 7:52 PM
Post #13 of 15
(1698 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 21, 2006
Posts: 1876
|
bill wrote: In reply to: I also thought that Emile Hirsch and Sean Penn made a really good movie, albeit a little heavy on the dysfunctional family being McCandless' primary motivation for bailing on mainstream society.I'm glad someone else noticed this, I really enjoyed the film but also thought that in comparison to the book the film went way overboard on the family issues.
The movie dumbed it down by heavily blaming the parents and McCandless' inability to cope with the dysfunction. It got to be somewhat obnoxious and then a little shocking when the closing credits thanked the parents and sister...
|
|
|
|
|
coastal_climber
Nov 14, 2007, 3:46 AM
Post #14 of 15
(1659 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2006
Posts: 2542
|
themadmilkman wrote: coastal_climber wrote: petsfed wrote: he was profoundly inexperienced and his life serves, if nothing else, as a warning to us to not fall into the same traps that he did, by luck and selective deafness. Good call. In the book, it says he actually shot a caribou and thought it was a moose. Goes to show. >Cam Go read it again. Krakauer states that he personally investigated the bones, and that it was in fact a moose.
How soon after?
>Cam
|
|
|
|
|
geogoddess
Nov 14, 2007, 6:17 PM
Post #15 of 15
(1624 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2007
Posts: 613
|
justroberto wrote: bill wrote: In reply to: I also thought that Emile Hirsch and Sean Penn made a really good movie, albeit a little heavy on the dysfunctional family being McCandless' primary motivation for bailing on mainstream society.I'm glad someone else noticed this, I really enjoyed the film but also thought that in comparison to the book the film went way overboard on the family issues. This was my only real beef with the movie, too. Krakauer was interested in peeling back the layers of McCandless to figure out why he did it, but was good about not casting judgements or laying blame without really knowing what was going on. The movie dumbed it down by heavily blaming the parents and McCandless' inability to cope with the dysfunction. It got to be somewhat obnoxious and then a little shocking when the closing credits thanked the parents and sister...
That angle- that's not Krauker's angle; that's Sean Penn's angle, based on his interviews; he gets to tell that part of the story his way; its his film.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
