Taken from true story of Christopher McCandless, told in the novel In the land of extreme Jon Krakauer, a wealthy young man graduated from Emory University in social sciences in 1990, giving all his possessions all'Oxfam to undertake a journey into the land of extremes' Alaska, in hopes of walking away from a dysfunctional family and hypocrisies of society. On his way he meets with unique characters, from which he learns (or sign in) particular life lessons, to reach the designated destination. There they will meet their death (the causes are still unclear, but is expected to be accidentally poisoned after ingesting the seeds of a poisonous plant), and understand that true happiness is only shared with other people ( Happines only real shared When he says at the end of the film, Happiness is only real when shared ).
Personally, I think this movie hypocrisy continues. It 'an opinion that I was hated by many estimators of this film, but my opinion has not changed over the years. So take advantage of the space of my blog to rant at full speed, because now no one can stop me.
worry, my hatred is justified. First
do not understand why Sean Penn wanted to direct this film. He, a highest paid actors in the world (not critical to this, in fact, I think it's an excellent performer, and his large pay is more than deserved), because it has to make a movie that says there is no true happiness in material things surrounding the man? I could understand if to lead a lifestyle like Mahatma Gandhi, or give up his house or his luxury sports car - things that did not - but because it seems that the very existence leads to pleasure-seeking rich man (and I believe, yet I I would do the same in his place) I find this particular beginning of the great hypocrisies of this film. A small survey that only a thorough pain in the ass like me could pull out, but it is also a particular bothered me.
aside then that I really think the theme of freedom (such as love, now abused beyond endurance and retract), this product has brought a myriad of problems within the company have made me hate my heart. I do not claim to possess the absolute reason on my side, but since I have not heard anything but praise about this film, I finally have my say.
do not understand, firstly, how one can be devoted to a character like this - without disgracing the memory of the real Christopher, I call only to his counterpart in the film played by Emile Hirsch. A young man scarred by life, how many, and that as few decides to make a sharp cut radically changing the course of his destiny. What I saw in the movie Penn has been a person of quite irritating personality, ready to launch phrases pseudo random philosophizing, however, messages with very obvious and very repetitive. Also because of a director may not be up to what he wanted, and that has increased the antipathy I felt towards the protagonist of this story (in which the microscena eat the apple has been a pain visual and auditory).
Not to mention also the supporting actors, even those quite unnecessary. From the couple of lunatics who meets the river (well come on, she has shown at least two boobs not bad, if we honest), thresher to cheat - but look at the case full of good feelings. Moving on to the depressed middle-aged hippie couple of characters that made me swear since their first appearance on the screen (I am already way to see the heavy metal concerts forties, let alone two poor fools who still believe in living in the sixties and they wonder why their life is not clear and serene as they would like), and the young girl with dreams singer (of course, and it will be making them realize that life, beauty).
The final coup de grace, however, what made me realize that there was no hope of rising, was the meeting with the veteran lost in their memories, which of course can only teach Christopher to look forward again to discover the beauty of life. Well, yes. It lacked only Pollyhanna sticking from the corner and hopped the picture was perfect.
these were only to go wrong. Another scene that made me start swearing terrible was that which burned the money. Provocation already old at the time of Pink Floyd, then imagine in 2007. To annoy me is not just a repeat something so blatantly obvious already from the first few minutes of film (but enough already to a well deserved harsh criticism), but also the complacency of a provocation in itself so far that is denied immediately after (as Christopher finds himself working in a McDonald? That is really a sign of freedom, free of all hypocrisy). And then you think ... with all the people that was working hard to get money, this idiot burn them (of course, had donated millemila more to charity, but the good writer has decided to further highlight the scene with a dazzling rhetoric beyond measure). Giving to charity even those not? Or, best of all, if you really made him sick, the money could give them to me. But no, the poignant poetry of this film would be ruined ... but please ...
Continue the journey to the death of the protagonist. And there comes the final message, which I repeat re: happiness is only real when shared. A bit 'like saying the sky is blue only when the clouds do not cover it. Obviousness.
Will that I had a life that made me understand this thing for years and years ago, the fact remains that in the end there was nothing that could move me. Only minutes and minutes of tedious viewing, which ended with a trivial and obvious message. I admit, maybe some people have found a truth that did not know before watching this movie ... but I will I could not help but be affected by something I thought was common ground for years. It's like hearing a child's first grade that tells you that two plus two equals four. Bravo small, but I got to know years before you. So, it has had any effect on me. Maybe I'll be too
tax bado too much technique and not the actual message ... filmmaking but also includes knowing the various cinematic techniques. And expect to be used in a manner acceptable (especially with a film that takes as seriously as this Into the wild) to send a message it seems to me the least. Otherwise, the films of Ed Wood and Uwe Boll just waiting to be viewed again.
And for all those who give me a fanboy because of movies like hosannas The Dark Knight and Watchmen ... Well, go ahead. In part it is true. At least those movies are made for people who love that genre and products derived therefrom, that are designed for fun (because let's face it, in the end the main thing that is required of a film is to entertain for an average of two hours, to the highbrow serves no purpose), made by craftsman who know how to do their job well and, for those who want to take, with its own message perfectly tested and not at all rhetorical.
Even so, I doubt that anyone has accused me of not understanding the beauty of the film by Penn never gave me his car, his collection of DVDs or her entire bank account, thus showing that they are linked to material goods ( sure, the blame will surely society requires that this way of life).
If we really want to hear about modern heroes, there are many workers who maintain a family with only eight hundred euro a month. On them though, you are spending a few pages and film.
There will, however, something even a single character, except that in this chaos? A Yes. The policeman that captures Christopher on the train and the stick. Not because I wanted to do what I do personally after forty minutes Smarronando chin, but because among the gang of fools made up to it I found the only one who really made something of his life, perhaps for the reason mentioned a paragraph ago. But maybe it was a figure too ordinary to be equal to the depth of the other ... a sinister servant of the state, as opposed to a depressed rich man, has nothing to teach.
At least that's my opinion. If I offended anyone in my emphasis without realizing it, I apologize from now.
0 comments:
Post a Comment