Geo.

[Geo.]

Tree Top Flyer wrote:

I sort of missed one of the biggests parts. Did he simply starve to death or was it something he ate that caused him to starve to death?

While his family had some severe issues (who’s doesn’t) they truly seemed repentent of their actions. I wonder how true that was to form?

I’ll be getting the DVD and for me to buy anything of Sean Penn’s that’s a testament of how much I liked the movie.

Finally watched the movie after reading the book and several articles.
I think Penn did a pretty good job and it was quite an engrossing movie with some nice scenic shots.
Just hope the movie will give anyone with ‘like ideas’ the warning that they’ve got to take on something like that with more forethought than the unfortunate McCandless did.
From all I’ve read on the incident, the general opinion is that he slowly starved to death. He just didn’t have the supplies with him or the skills or availabiilty of food that was needed to survive. He may or may not have eaten something that hastened his death in his weak state, but he was on the way out in any case.
I got the impression that it wasn’t so much his family’s fault with ‘issues’ but more his own ‘self destructive’ and sadly misguided ideals that lead to his demise.
One thing that the movie didn’t show was that if he’d taken a wider look around or carried a map, he would have found a bridge to get himself out less than a mile from the bus. So if nothing else: Rule One – always carry a map.

[Geo.]

Having read the book and several articles, I’m looking forward to the movie which is due here soon. Not least, for the scenery.
I’ve read that McCandless didn’t actually kayak through the canyon rapids as depicted in the movie, (when queried on that, Penn commented that he put that in just to illustrate McCandless’s rebellious nature) he actually put in below the rapids. I wish Hollywood wouldn’t mess with facts. The story stands alone without any embellishments – just makes you wonder what else was ‘added’.
I couldn’t understand why McCandless, having spent such a long time static in the area, hadn’t ‘scouted’ it out better. If he’d followed the river for about half a mile in one direction he would have found a bridge to get himself across. If he’d followed the river in the other direction for what is apparently an easy day’s hike, he would have found a ranger’s cabin stocked with food. And if he’d carried a map of the area he’d have realised those two life saving facts without even having to search. Just seems to me that he was incredibly ill prepared and was either suicidal or took the wilderness too innocently and too lightly. He followed his dream, which is not a bad thing – but maybe he dreamt too much.
George

[Author]

Posts