I wasn't familiar with the story on Chris McCandless and
I must say I'm impressed and still am.
The movie itself? Too much symbolic shit, seemingly film trics,
instead of serving the story in a simple chronological order,
Penn or someone else has chosen for a complicated road
which I find needlessly and unnecessarily.
Hal Holbrook (don't know him) has a small role in the movie, heartbreaking.
Intimate, light, serious, simple, etc. x a dozen.
Interesting part of a review on imdb:
I have just come from the FRENCH FILM FESTIVAL in Richmond, VA (2008), where I saw this film. I don't view a lot of American films, so I can't adequately compare, but I do know American film makers don't develop relationships between people the way French film makers do. While American films seem to give little short glimpses into people's lives, French film makers give us long conversations between actors and show us how one person can change the life of another.
When the director answered questions at the end of the screening, it was very interesting to hear the Americans trying to insert and look for symbolism in many of the scenes, but the director's replies indicated that symbolism was not intended, rather bare content.
Into the Wild was ruined by the acting style of Emile Hirsch, in my opinion. It was most apparent in the scenes with Hal Holbrook. The director should have noticed that and made the correction. Not everyone is as talented Sean Penn. The book was better but that's a cop out to say.
Emile Hirsch was much better in his role in Alpha Dog.
"Schultz gets the blues" is one I recommend watching from the couch. German film , I believe.
A guy movie you'd say I guess, but who am I to say, I don't know who I am really...
I still only go by what I do not like.
Okay, back to the pot head thread or the wine one, but I lost both of them threads once again.