2012 and Into the Wild are two films that have the same theme to show the interaction between humans and nature. These films cannot entirely receive the credit of being environmentally and ecologically conscious, but analytically, it can teach an individual, a human, a few things about nature. Moreover, they are different in the message being conveyed, the way nature reacts to human interactions, and how nature is generally portrayed. Overall, 2012 and Into the Wild are two films that carry the same theme but they are very different in regards to message, and the reaction and portrayal of nature.
One difference between 2012 and Into the Wild is the message. The film 2012 was released in November of 2009, when the craze for environmental …show more content…
Christopher McCandless died because of his voluntary and unconscious consumption of poisonous wild potato plant seeds. He died due to the side effects which were vomiting, starvation, and hallucination. He thought he was eating the non poisonous potato plant, but in reality he confused the different parts of the plant with another poisonous potato plant that he then ingested.3 In this film, nature did not have to cause a big storm or weather change to end the life of Christopher McCandless, but instead it only required a small response. Nature simply used the similar and natural phenotypic qualities of two plants and played it against the ignorance of Christopher McCandless, the human, who thought he was prepared to handle a life immersed in nature. The degree of retaliation in Into the Wild was much smaller with its use of plants to kill one person, versus nature’s retaliation in 2012 which was on a grand scale killing billions of people using a …show more content…
However, these films are entirely different in what message each of them are trying to convey. 2012 leans towards raising the awareness of global warming and how nature is being hurt by how we abuse it. While Into the Wild shows that we as human beings don’t belong in nature, that nature has its own rules that we naturally cannot abide by because of how accustomed we are to the conventions of society. These films are also different in how nature reacts to the interactions of humans. In 2012, as a result of the human production of carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere, it causes a change in the climate of nature. Therefore, nature reacts by utilizing a massive tsunami to wipe out the human race. While in the film Into the Wild, nature simply uses two plants with the same phenotypic appearance to punish an individual who tries to interfere with the rules of nature. Lastly, these films have dissimilar portrayals of nature overall. In 2012, nature appears to be a villain with a unstoppable force that is out to destroy mankind, while Into the Wild gives nature positive attributes by fantasizing to be a healing spirit that helps an individual to find peace. Overall, these two films have the same theme, but they are underlyingly
One difference between 2012 and Into the Wild is the message. The film 2012 was released in November of 2009, when the craze for environmental …show more content…
Christopher McCandless died because of his voluntary and unconscious consumption of poisonous wild potato plant seeds. He died due to the side effects which were vomiting, starvation, and hallucination. He thought he was eating the non poisonous potato plant, but in reality he confused the different parts of the plant with another poisonous potato plant that he then ingested.3 In this film, nature did not have to cause a big storm or weather change to end the life of Christopher McCandless, but instead it only required a small response. Nature simply used the similar and natural phenotypic qualities of two plants and played it against the ignorance of Christopher McCandless, the human, who thought he was prepared to handle a life immersed in nature. The degree of retaliation in Into the Wild was much smaller with its use of plants to kill one person, versus nature’s retaliation in 2012 which was on a grand scale killing billions of people using a …show more content…
However, these films are entirely different in what message each of them are trying to convey. 2012 leans towards raising the awareness of global warming and how nature is being hurt by how we abuse it. While Into the Wild shows that we as human beings don’t belong in nature, that nature has its own rules that we naturally cannot abide by because of how accustomed we are to the conventions of society. These films are also different in how nature reacts to the interactions of humans. In 2012, as a result of the human production of carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere, it causes a change in the climate of nature. Therefore, nature reacts by utilizing a massive tsunami to wipe out the human race. While in the film Into the Wild, nature simply uses two plants with the same phenotypic appearance to punish an individual who tries to interfere with the rules of nature. Lastly, these films have dissimilar portrayals of nature overall. In 2012, nature appears to be a villain with a unstoppable force that is out to destroy mankind, while Into the Wild gives nature positive attributes by fantasizing to be a healing spirit that helps an individual to find peace. Overall, these two films have the same theme, but they are underlyingly