McCandless' story isn't really told in the book or the film

Anchorage Daily News ^ | November 4, 2007 | CRAIG MEDRED

[skeptoid]

"Into the Wild'' is a misrepresentation, a sham, a fraud.

There, I've finally said what somebody has needed to say for a long time.

First the book and now the movie try to portray Alexander Supertramp as the Everyman example of youth gone off to the wilderness in search of the meaning of life. Unfortunately, Tramp wasn't Everyman. And he most certainly didn't go off to the wilderness searching for the meaning of life.

[skeptoid]

Here's the crux of the review:

[snip]When you abandon your car and burn your money, as McCandless did, you aren't searching for yourself; you've lost yourself.
I feel sorry for Tramp.
I feel even more sorry for those who buy the myth of "Into the Wild.''[snip]

I really enjoy Krakauer's writing, but I haven't been especially eager to see the film. I don't want Hollyweird to ruin the 'movie in my mind'.

I may eventually watch the film on DVD, but first, I'll read the book again.

[snip]Study up a bit on schizophrenia, then go read Krakauer's book (which is, by the way, really more about Krakauer than McCandless) and note the signs. [snip]

[PalmettoMason]

I read the book several years ago, and just saw an advertisment for the film in a newspaper last week. I’m considering seeing the film because while stationed in Alaska in the late 80s to early 90s, I used to hunt moose and caribou near Healey.
I thought the scenery might be good for a walk down memory lane. Any idea if it was filmed on location?

[skeptoid]

I have not a clue; ..

... BUT ....

I'll bet the film is 'fact received as idealized fiction' just as Never Cry Wolf was 'fiction accepted as fact'.

The film has been highly recommended to me, but the article is the only "review" I've read.

I know nothing of the production qualities.