|
Published: June 21, 2008
Talk About Movies: “Into the Wild”
Matthew Lickona and Ernie Grimm discuss current and classic films from a Catholic perspective
Into the Wild
Directed by Sean Penn
Starring Emile Hirsch, Hal Holbrook
2007, 148 minutes, Color, English/Danish, USA
Bishops' rating: A-III
Content advisory: nudity
 Ernie: I really enjoyed and appreciated this movie on a lot of levels. It's very beautiful to look at. The outdoor scenes in Georgia, West Virginia, Arizona, the California desert, the Dakotas, and Alaska are stunning. I wish I had seen it on the big screen. The landscapes are as diverse as can be, but equally beautiful. And we see the same thing in the people Alex meets on his travels. Each has his own rough edges, but each has something beautiful about him too, even the tiny parts such as the border guard, the guy who teaches him to hunt, and the man who gives him the boots. Even Alex's parents, about whom we learn some horrible things, are shown to have loved their son. Unfortunately for them, they don't realize how much till he's gone. In a very quiet way, this movie got across the idea that we're all radiant creations of God. Am I getting too gooey here?
Matthew: Absolutely not. I started sobbing just talking about this film with my wife. Beautiful is the word that keeps coming to me, even in the midst of the film's depiction of serious pain and its thoughtful criticism. As you say, none of the people he meets are presented as some kind of saint -- Wayne is a criminal, Ron is a man in a shell, Hippie Mom is wounded. Yet their human goodness comes through in every case, and it never seems anything less than perfectly true. Wayne gets off a beautiful line when Alex is yammering about going into the wild to get away from "people." "What people are we talking about?" he asks. Because while his parents have left him hurting terribly, the other people in Alex's life gradually teach him what he learns by the end: happiness is only complete when shared. And while I'm on the subject: for a film about learning (ultimately, it's the story of Alex growing up to the point where he can reclaim his true identity), it's amazingly free of speechmaking and preaching. What Alex learns comes out of each person's story -- Hippie Mom's loss of her son, the decency he's shown by others, and most movingly, Ron's musing on forgiveness, the forgiveness he had to learn for the man who killed his own wife and son.
Ernie: That scene was truly devastating, as was the scene when Alex leaves Ron. But it was a good devastation, if that makes any sense, the true catharsis the ancient Greeks talked about. And Ron's riff on forgiveness -- "When you forgive, you love. And when you love, God's light shines upon you" -- is the best movie line I've heard in a long time, maybe ever. And Hal Holbrook delivered it perfectly. His acting was brilliant. All the acting was brilliant. Sean Penn deserves a lot of credit for his direction and writing. The fact that this beautiful movie was shut out on Oscar night -- except for a supporting actor nomination for Holbrook -- makes me sad. Instead of recognizing the beautiful masterpiece that Into the Wild was, the Motion Picture Academy gave all its big awards to movies featuring, you could even say glorifying, over-the-top ugliness and evil, No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood.
Matthew: I take your point. Fans of those films talk about being willing to face the dark, and I'll go along with that, maybe more than you would. But here was a film that managed to bring the light -- literally -- without ever giving in to sentimentality or cheap grace, which I think is a more difficult task. You mentioned that Hal Holbrook's line was maybe the best ever. I'll add that the death scene is maybe the best ever as well.
Ooh, ooh -- last point. You say the film gets across that we're all radiant creatures of God. I thought it was a film about reclaiming one's true identity. Now I'm thinking it's both. That's why we get the argument between Mom and Dad, where she tells him he's not God, and he says, "Yeah, I am. I'm God." Alex is heading out into nature, but what he's seeking is Nature -- his own, restored. He sees rightly what's sick about human society. He looks at the wretches in LA and rejects a system that results in such suffering. But at the same time, he's not quite like the loopy nature-lovers from Copenhagen (who end up digging Vegas), nor the pagan nudists who seem to worship nature outright. And what is the Nature he finds? He is a son, and a son of God, part of a beloved family. I loved this movie.
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 8:09 PM By jonathan edwards
E & M: Puh-leeze! Only in America could a solipsistic, navel-gazing narcissist like "litt'l Alex" be lauded as some kind of hero on an odyssey to find his true identity. Well he finally found his identity as the spoiled rich kid he was who meets his end by his own stupidity.
This picture would make a great double-bill with Werner Herzog's "Grizzly Man"--another story about a man in search of fulfilling a narcissistic desire to "find himself" by being in communion with nature, in this case by going to Alaska to be at one with grizzly bears. (What is it with Alaska? Can't they be who they are in Hawaii?) The bears take their communion with him alright--by eating him. Only in America do young people with too much time on their hands and too much self-righteous indignation have the luxury of finding their manhood somewhere beyond their responsibilities to their families and communities.
Can you imagine young men in third world countries going on "visionquests" in search of their real selves? These men are probably "finding themselves" in assuming their manly responsibilities by providing food, shelter, and clothing for their loved ones. Imagine if Chris McCandless took the thousands of dollars that he ripped up and instead of just looking at those wretches in LA, used that money to actually help them!
This is indeed a tragic story; the tragedy of one life mired in selfishness instead of selflessness.
|
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 9:34 PM By lickona
Wow, Jon; that's pretty harsh. For starters, he did take $24,000 dollars at the outset and give it to feed the poor. For seconds, unlike the protagonist of Grizzly Man, Chris learns and grows through the course of the film, such that, by the end, he realizes that his place is with the human community, and not out in nature. He does not begin the film as a hero, and I don't know as I'd even call him a hero at the end. But he begins the film as an outcast, alienated from his father and his world because he is unloved. And by the end, he has overcome that alienation, to the point where he longs to return, and to the point where he reclaims his name and his status as a beloved son. That's a pretty good analogue of the Christian journey of redemption, I think. I think it's a tricky thing, comparing tragedies and situations. Hamlet was a wealthy young man, certainly narcissistic in some ways, and Shakespeare's tragedy spends a lot of time on his wondering whether or not to kill himself and whether or not to avenge his father. Yet people don't dismiss it by comparison to young men in the third world, because there are worthwhile issues and questions raised. Into the Wild is not Hamlet, but still - don't dismiss it because it's not the story of the Sudanese Lost Boys.
|
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 11:16 PM By John Teresa
Johnathan, I did not see this film. I probably won't, but the themes discussed here are not worthy of a "Puh-leeze". Part of being a man in the third world is going on a "visionquest". What's a "visionquest" in your mind? Part of being a Christian is to go on this "visionquest" if you like that language. Detachment is part of holy union. That means detachment from everything, including the families you mention. You're using Martha talk. Look past the art into the concept, and you will see the real message. The more you know about yourself, the more you can find and eliminate the obstacles that block Union. You know, all those false gods. It's true that Union is a gift given by God, but you have to be open to it. That takes a little navel gazing.
|
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 11:19 PM By Wm Hamilton
I'm with Jonathan on this one. I am forever amazed at how self-absorbed First Worlders become when their basic needs -- food, clothing, shelter -- almost never enter their heads. They have been spared the Curse of Adam by an economic system that preys on the poor elsewhere in the world. Who do you think pays for your low prices at Wal Mart? But I digress... point is that much of the angst of "self discovery" in the "art" of the popular culture is nothing more than selfish, spoiled people who can't figure out that it is their own materialism that has led to their feelings of emptiness and lack of meaning.
|
Posted Sunday, June 22, 2008 2:08 PM By babette
I am so glad you reviewed this movie. The comments of Mr. Edwards and Mr. Hamilton surprise me because their criticisms are far more consistent with the movie than not. That is, I don't think ITW would serve well as a recruitment film for visionquest-ers. Where does CM learn the most? What does he learn? I might add that, as a first-worlder who has lived in a third-world country and worked in development, there are all too many folks who are interchangeable with Chris McCandless, as he was in the beginning of the movie, for whom being able to live with the poor is still a personal conquest. I think there's less damage done by the one who only hurts himself in the end. God works with us right where we are, right? I would agree that at the very end -- I think it was in the sister's voiceover -- that I caught a whiff of the kind of glorification I think the commenters are speaking of, but it goes against so much of what we've just seen.
|
Posted Sunday, June 22, 2008 2:58 PM By Ernie Grimm
Hamilton and Jonathan, you're both missing the point. Alex/Chris goes out into the Wild thinking he'll be happy
"away from people." But he finds that "happiness is best when shared." Alex/Chris may have been a "spoiled rich kid," but only in the sense of having things money can buy. But having everything money can buy isn't the same as having what the human soul naturally wants which is to be loved and to love others and to be part of a loving family. Alex, who is obviously a damaged soul, finds these things out the hard way but finds a sort of redemption in the end. Grizzly Man, on the other hand, operated under a sort of Nietzchean hubris that made him think he could, by force of his own will, live amidst extremely dangerous animals. His hubris led him to bring others out into the bear habitat with him, and ultimately caused him to lose his own life and the life of another.
|
Posted Friday, June 27, 2008 6:26 AM By John L. Sillasen
Lot of great wilderness scenerey in this movie from what I hear.
|
Posted Friday, June 27, 2008 9:14 PM By John L. Sillasen
Also, even though I have not seen the movie, I listened in on a conversation by some who have ... and it pretty much is as John Teresa puts it on that level. I would not like the ending, but the guts of the young man seeking something of God cannot be discounted. The only problem I see is the problem of much of reality ... where the seeker somehow fails to find God. Experientially, it took me a great deal of effort to do so ... I'm not sure why so many ernest seekers come up short. I ran into a few of them during my journey ... and I simply cannot fathom why they miss one too many important road signs.
|
Posted Saturday, June 28, 2008 10:22 AM By Tee
For what it is worth this late in the discussion: On the comments of L& G, I watched this movie. Through the study of Jeff Cavin's Adventures in Matthew, I saw Chris/Alex's emotional and spiritual devastation brought about by the fact he did not have a legitimate filial relationship with his father (nor did his sister.) This is what Satan is constantly trying to do with us just as he did with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and then Christ in the temptations at the beginning of His ministry as the Messiah: sever our personal fililal relationship with the Father. Unfortunately, we also fall for that of our own making which will sever our relationship with our Triune God. Fortunately, when Alex/Chris finally "got it" it was too late to escape the dungeon/trap he had built for himself. Let that not happen to us. Let us reach out to the many hands extended to help us reach the Father, as Chris did not. While always heard, his mea culpas were too late.
|
Posted Saturday, July 12, 2008 5:35 AM By ASG
To John Sillasen: It took two viewings of the movie for me to understand the ending, what exactly was happening. I think that he DOES find God and there is an important cinematic clue. The first time I watched it I thought he was still missing something, but the film captures in a beautiful (not sentimental) way Chris' final breath/deathbed conversion--He forgives his parents and "God's light shines on him" as Hal Holbrook foretold, the sun/cloud imagery is exactly the same. Also, he carves a sign that presumes his belief in God shortly before he dies and points it towards the sky (I don't remember the exact wording).
This is one of my favorite films of all time because I have to ask myself why I'm not going on the same adventure as Chris McCandless. While I'm not so talented or clever as he, primarily I'm not going because I have faith and enough Hal Holbrooks have been given to me in my life that I want to believe them now instead of tragically "after Alaska". Few films portray the deepest part of human nature so truthfully and beautifully at the same time.
PS: Did anyone pick up on Hal Holbrook's character being Catholic? Does anyone know if the McCandless family was Catholic?
|
© California Catholic Daily 2008. All Rights Reserved.
|