into the wild-a review

there are some movies that one remembers as a great watch.
then there are those that one does a re-think about, a movie that forces you to analyze your very own existence, and compare it to the one on screen.
into the wild falls in the latter.
to look at it cinematically is simple - absolutely stunning locales, brilliant cinematography, excellent screenplay and acting.
but to look at it as a tale, as a life-changing experience, is where the trouble begins.

most people desire a break from the monotony of their daily lives, to travel, to see the world beyond their everyday existence. the trouble is to reconcile that desire with the more practical reasoning of
a)funds
b)career
c)family
and that is exactly why christopher j. mccandless is a hero to all those who think on similar lines.

imagine: an A-grades student donates all his savings of $24,000 to oxfam, and hitchhikes across the states finally ending up in alaska, where, in his words, he found that
"And after two rambling years, comes the final and greatest adventure. The climactic battle to kill the false being within and victoriously conclude the spiritual revolution."
living off the forest and the rivers and the sea.
traveling across a multitude of landscapes.
meeting people who re-define the meaning of life, while changing your own.

who wouldn't wish such a life?
but the trouble is, for all his bravery, he didn't have the required skill to survive in the frozen land of alaska. and that is exactly why i have a problem with mccandless' self-belief.
and by the end, he concedes it as well.

his wish was to get away from the social animal that man has become, to be rid of the responsibilities that come with civilization.
and he achieves it.
but what comes of that achievement?
that is the question we are left to ponder.