What could Chris McCandless do differently if he did not go to Alaska? Perhaps he might have been an outdoor writer, or a National Geographic contributor. Instead he decided after graduating from college to explore the great world of Alaska. He decides to live his life on the ed and the result is his demise. The film better represents Chris’s life journey. The film version is a better representation of Chris McCandless’ story because when watching the movie there are dramatic parts and shots that show how much time and effort that went into the movie, it connects the viewer to the characters which shows what they're thinking about deep down inside, and it really shows the different challenges he had to go through.
In the book, you learn a lot about McCandless's childhood years, high school years, and college experience. The movie starts with college graduation and goes from there. how this connects to the thesis to the different type of character is in the movie then the book he goes to different parts of his life to get to where he is now in the movie it explains it better the in the book. this is an example on how Chris’s life changes when he leaves his house to
…show more content…
this connect to the movie more its reeling showing the different dramatic shots and close ups then the book would so it shows more intense and dramatic parts in the movie this shows the difference in the movie from the book. Like the book you can't show the dramatic shots as well as you can see in the movie. it really shows the different challenges he had to go through I believe the story is about Chris McCandless,and the different places he went to and the fellow friends that did or did not believe in his journey to Alaska which goes into greater character