Compare And Contrast Into The Wild

Did you know that over 1,450 books have been made into movies since 1980? Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer being one of those novels. In 2007 Sean Penn turned the book into a film. As can be expected when one artist interprets the works of another artist, there will be similarities and differences. Some of the major contrasts shown between the book and movie are; their perspectives, emotions they make the readers or viewers feel and parts of the story being left out or changed.
One of the main differences between the book and movies are how Penn and Krakauer interpret Chris McCandless and his story. In the book the story seems to focus more around examining and understanding Chris and his life, whereas the movie shows his life as more of an

adventure. Throughout his novel, Krakauer not only tells of McCandless’ decisions but also tries to justify them. In the book he describes three men; Gene Rosellini, John Waterman and Carl McCunn, all of whom went into the wild to escape society and live a more pure and adventurous lifestyle. All of them dies well in the wild as well. Krakauer explains that people have been drawing parallels between McCandless and these men since his death but as he tells each man's story and background it becomes apparent that they were either mentally ill or had no idea what they were really in for. He explains that Chris McCandless wasn’t like these men, he wasn’t mentally ill and didn’t hold unrealistic expectations about the Alaskan wilderness. He wasn’t incompetent, crazy or a loner. Krakauer also provides the background of McCandless’ life and family to give some sort of an idea as to why Chris McCandless would go into the Alaskan wilderness. He describes or more indirectly tells, of the abuse McCandless suffered as a child at the hands of his parents. His father, prone to bursts of anger and carrying on a secret marriage and family with another women and both his parents money obsessed. Chris McCandless didn’t believe in what his parents did or their ideals, causing him to resent them and their way of life. This resentment is what ultimately lead him to leave his family and head for Alaska. Krakauer's main perspective on Chris is that he may have been a flawed and troubled young man, but he wasn’t crazy or suicidal, he was simply trying to escape the life being pushed onto him.
Unlike the book, the movie seems to show mcCandless’ life in a much more dramatic and celebratory way. Sean Penn’s perspective of Chris Mccandless come off as more of a young kid escaping his troubled family well having fun adventures on his way to Alaska. Penn also decides to keep out the more dark parts from the novel. For example when McCandless’ parents went or the bus where he died or how he could have possibly avoided his death had he known a simple alternate route out of the wild. Along with this, in the book Krakauer also shows the parts of McCandless that were grudge-holding and judgemental whereas the movie shows him much more light-hearted and happy. Showing his death as the only sad part in the movie. Sean Penn saw Chris and his journey in a more romanticized way, deciding to celebrate all of his choices and life.
Another major difference between these two versions is the emotions they inflict upon the audience and how they show these emotions.

In books the author relies on words, experiences of the character and others accounts to show emotion. In movies there are more ways to inflict emotion; through images, facial expression, dialogue, and music. Not only did these different works of art show emotion in different ways but they also made audiences feel different things. The tone of the book was a much darker one than that of the movie. Jon Krakauer included stories of McCandless childhood, struggles, and last days alive to show the darker parts of his journey. Some examples of this are; telling readers right away that McCandless is dead, his father's secret family, months that his family and friends spent worrying about him, ways he could have easily avoided his death and so on. None of these experiences described in the book make readers feel an overwhelming sense of happiness of joy. Krakauer focused more on telling the exact facts of Chris McCandless’ life no matter if it made people feel sad. Sean Penn on the other hand, painted a much happier and romantic telling of Chris’s story. Showing him and Tracey bonding, illegally paddling down the Colorado River looking free and happy, or creating amazing bonds with the people he meets along the way. The few sad parts in the movie that are shown are his parents and Carine worrying about him and his death, which is countered with the

image of him and his parents rejoicing showing that he’s finally come to peace with his life. Audiences watching Into the Wild see a touching story of a young man finding himself like most people only wish they had the courage to do. Even the sad parts show a beautiful, touching kind of sadness. These feeling of happiness and beauty are only intensified by the beautiful scenery shown and the music to go along with them. Sean Penn choose to celebrate McCandless and his journey rather than giving cold hard facts.
When one artist makes their own version of another artist's work, there are bound to be differences, big and small.

There are obvious reasons as to why sean Penn had to cut out or change parts of the book; time importance, etc. Some changes were minor and didn’t affect the overall story. Such as changing Bob’s name to Rainy, not having him meet Wayne’s mother or merging his trips to see Wayne into one. Some parts that were left out or changed, however, show much more significance. Sean Penn opted to not show McCandless’s parents visit the bus where he died, making is seem the his cause of death was mistaking the potato plants for different poisonous plants and leaving out parts of Chris McCandless’ childhood. No one except for Penn can say for certain why he did this, but it can be speculated that it helped to show the Chris McCandless that he saw. The fun-loving, adventurer wandering around the US. If Sean Penn had decided to show the parts he left out it would cast a much darker story on the movie. Chris McCandless would have no longer been seen as a fun, adventurous kid who made one wrong calculation that inevitably helped him come to peace with his life but a troubled young man with a troubled family that was trying to escape his problems and who could have easily avoided death. The story shown in Krakauer's novel. In all Sean Penn decided to leave out or change parts of the story to show the story and image he wanted to just as Jon Krakauer decided to leave parts in to

show what he wanted.
When two artists are telling the same story is all about interpretation. Jon Krakauer and Sean Penn both had different interpretations of the life and story of Chris McCandless. Both artists showed their versions of the story using; perspective, emotion and parts of the story being left out or changed. Minor decisions made by artists can help to change the thoughts and feeling provoked by the same main story.