Attention : cet article mentionne des éléments du film.
Nous sortons d’Into the Wild un peu groggy. And for good reason, our eyes are still marked by the sublime beauty of the landscapes we crossed with the hero, the meetings we've done with him, the tragedy of his death, and especially by the predominance of questions to which this film takes us back . Short excerpts of poems by Sharon Olds are important for both aesthetic and structuring, "markup" of the film.
Precisely, the highlighting of the beginning of the film had warned us: the hero (played brilliantly by Emile Hirch) also learn of his adventures in the natural environment and human relations that weave. Sean Penn will treat them similarly. As the sets that since the snowy forests of Alaska to the deserts of Arizona, through the extensive concrete, glass and steel of a metropolis, are of great beauty, but often very hostility.
For Into the Wild is the story of a journey across North America: that of Chris McCandless, said Alex "Supertramp" ("Super-Tramp"). Travel in space, certainly, but also spiritual quest for truth. Some quotes fall here and there as nuggets of poetry, and put into words the feelings for Alex, who are rapidly gaining the viewer.
The story is divided into sections marking the slow road to wisdom. Chris away from a teenage rebellion, injuries caused by parents who involve their children in their quarrels, academic achievements which open the doors of Harvard. His journey is a leak in front where it takes us away from materialism, far too subjective constructions of beauty, justice, fairness, but in search of Truth. Net, gross, wild. Yet as of humanism throughout Into the Wild. The best way to regenerate tainted ideals would he turn away their avatars lame and return only once they faced in gasoline?
Alex is reckless in his travels, sometimes to excess. Sean Penn reminds us to respect the choices of individuals, who have themselves, stressing the damage that can cause parents to their children. Therefore, his hero is no longer an irresponsible: it's free. It does not endanger its own existence.
In any case, the critique of society is strong. Alex does not yet become antisocial. Nor solitude oppressive. And the hero keeps his attitude in the presence of other humans. The attention and silence. Sagacity. Respect. Freed from expectations weighed on him, the bulk of his assets, the pressure of his family, Alex emancipated also anger, conflict and rebellion. Thus he gradually gets serenity that was lacking in his spiritual evolution. No one is prophet in his country. This departure without giving new looks more like a necessity than a leak.
Yet the temptation is sometimes pressing return. On several occasions, it takes little to Alex returns to the "normal" life. After two years of adventures he seems ready to return at the end of his experience in Alaska. He finished his apprenticeship. He has gained wisdom after having faced so many trials. It can transmit his message now. Impossible: we thaw and flooding river is impassable. He will have to continue to survive at any cost. It will eventually poison with a toxic plant. Overwhelmed by hunger, Alex may have committed suicide. The film does not even consider (unlike a scene shows struggle and get out of the swollen river in which he inadvertently slips): it is confusing two plants he condemns himself. The hero leaves a last testimony, annotated in one of the books that accompany the beginning of his adventure: "Happiness only exists when shared." A sign left grateful for the life he had, and as a signature is his real name: Chris McCandless, as a sign of reconciliation.
By its choice of narrative, the film recounts the story of a precociously interrupted prophet. The original name of the hero (Chris), his name change (McCandless abandons it, which is close to "candle less": "no spark"), his brilliance, his will, his rejection, his wandering. We will also be marked by the scene where Alex filmed from above, naked, left to drift on the back, cross body along a river. Moreover, the major figures of the three monotheistic religions (Moses, Jesus, Muhammad), have each experienced a turn in the wilderness, during which they found themselves face to themselves.
Why this approach implicitly? Difficult to be sure. Perhaps a reminder that some paths will travel alone, that wisdom does not necessarily pass through the sermon (as a preacher like as qu'ouaille) and to enhance the spiritual quest that, whatever form it takes, is essential to the vitality of Men.
Perhaps because, realizing he is a true story a shiver runs through the spine. The story of a deconstruction and reconstruction of a pure and authentic. A story that reminds us that travel is used to understand where we are.
0 comments:
Post a Comment