Blog Entry: Into The Wild

Into The Wild In Norwegian cinemas we are currently experiencing the flood of excellent films that summed up this year's Oscars: 'There Will Be Blood', 'The Diving Bell And The Butterfly', 'Juno', 'Sweeney Todd' et cetera, and I've seen them all in fairly rapid succession, always intrigued, never disappointed. It has to stop sometime. But it didn't stop with Sean Penn's 'Into The Wild'.

But before we delve into that particular film in greater detail, there are several reasons I could never be a good film critic, but let me offer just two of them:

1) My way of watching films reminds most people more of 'judging' than of actually 'reviewing' them. I have no belief whatsoever in the existence of a 'non-biased' film critic. All films I've ever seen and/or written about influence how I view the next one. Feel free to disagree, but my negative assessment of 'Cast Away', a fairly comparable 'man vs. elements' movie might actually helped elevate my positive view of 'Wild', insofar as the latter highly exceeded my expectations when going into such a film. This is not to take much credit away from Penn's astonishingly beautiful, mind-numbing drama, only to explain that no single film can be viewed or reviewed entirely on its own own terms. However desirable an intention that may be.

2) I am no good at writing those short recaps that every review seems damned to include, and I really don't like neither writing nor reading them. I guess you could say I write for people who have already seen the film in question, or who are smart enough to gather their background information from other sources. I therefore assume that you already know that 'Into The Wild' tells the story of how young idealist Chris McCandless broke off from his old life, only to go all across the country in search of inner peace and purpose in Alaska.

With all this out of the way, Penn's picture is highly succesful as a coming-of-age story inspired by Romanticism, although I have no clue about whether it's equally satisfying as an adaptation of John Krakauer's non-fiction bestseller.

No doubt, this film will split it's audience. Some will find it pompous, drawn-out and self-concious, several of whom are characteristics that seem to fit relatively well with its protagonist. I, on the other hand, would substitute 'pompous' with 'poetic', 'drawn-out' with 'thorough-gong', and 'self-concious' with a film that is sure of what signals it wants to send out. Emile Hirsch's (who, on an entirely different note, has now risen to the #2 spot on my ever-changing Sexiest Male Alive list, just below Leonardo DiCaprio) portrait of the young idealist strikes all the right chords, in askimg one of the many pressing questions the film raises: Is his journey not just an egotistical act of self-realization, and does he not have any responsibilities whatsoever towards the people he's leaving behind?

I found these moral questions interesting, even though I don't fully invest my feelings into the Freudian family trauma storyline, that Penn not so subtly uses to rationalize Chris' run for freedom. That is also why it's a great strenght to the film that Penn eventually leaves the narration to the events and eventually to nature itself, instead of the voice-over narration of Chris' curiously knowing sister. He's an idealist, no doubt, and we need more of those (as long as they don't die in the end), but he also has troubles seeing past his own place in the fabric of society. This is why the supporting characters are so important, and also why it is so deeply satisfying to see them acted out in such a gracefully interesting way.

Chris being as stubborn as he is, both the hippie couple Jan and Rainey (played by Catherine Keener and Brian Drieker, respectively) and the old and lonely Ron (magnificently portrayed by the always reliable Hal Holbrook), know that their advice and guidance for him must be chosen carefully, for him to not impale harm on himself as he prepares for his ultimate journey. Jan's plea for Chris to re-establish a relationship with his family of course meets nothing but refusal, but it nevertheless is a scene of nearly motherly endearment from Jan on his behalf. There is a sense of destiny in every word coming from both Keener and Holbrook that sets the tone of things to come. This doesn't mean that Penn can not also elegantly generate moments of subtle optimism, as in the beautifully minimalist way he approaches the films fine, underplayed love story.

But I was not only surprised by how good the film itself is. I was also taken aback by what elevated it from good to great for me; the scenes with the hyper-talented Hirsch alone in the wild. He strikes a near perfect balance between the emotionally tortured grumbler, and the increasingly physically exhausted ascetic slowly realizing that he may no longer be in his charge of his own destiny. One of the film's key scenes, in which Chris first kills and then slaughters a moose, does not stand back in any way to the epic quality of the uniformly praised opening scene of PT Anderson's 'There Will Be Blood'. Only then this becomes a film about a young man refusing to go with the mainstream, and and an inspiring – if utterly tragic – one at that.

The emotional impact of these and other key scenes are in no small way attributable to Eddie Vedder's somber folk-country inspired songs and lyrics. I can think of no better way pay tribute to what is sure to be one of the best films to hit Norwegian screens this year, than to quote the opening verse of his song 'Society', which seamlesly intertwines with the powers of the story and the pictures to sum up the meaning of it all in this always interesting, never cynical and often exceptional film:

"It's a mystery to me
We have a greed with which we have agreed
and you think you have to want more than you need
Until you have it all
you won't be free

Society
You're a crazy breed
I hope you're not lonely without me"