After watching the first part of Into the Wild and reading the book it is obvious that are many differences. One of the differences is that the movie used more detail to describe Chris and what he did on his many adventures. Another difference is in the movie it talks about his parents during their graduation and the book does not mention that at all. Also, the film shows the parents getting mad at Chris because he did not want a new car as a graduation present. A similarity between the book and the movie is that they both follow the storyline of Chris's adventures. However, the film depicts Chris better than in the book. The film also does a good job showing the scenery.
The film does paint Chris in a different light than Krakauer does because it uses different techniques to describe Chris. The film often shows Chris with the different jobs that he acquires on his adventures, such as the grain elevator. The film and the book both show Chris as being a hard-worker through Krakauer's words and the actions showed in the film. The light that the film paints Chris is hard-working and shows his emotions better than the book does. Films are normally better to show emotions because films are meant for viewing and books are meant for reading.
Film does screw our sense of reality and romanticize tragedy because no one would watch the movies. Film is one of these things where it takes away a sense of reality because sometimes reality is not kind to us. It romanticizes tragedy because films like to play with our emotions and make us feel certain ways. This is true in many movies, such as the Disney movies. Films often do things that are not possible in reality and that is what makes people want to watch a particular movie.
No comments:
Post a Comment