Directors in the Oscar race

With “Into the Wild,” his fourth film as a director, Penn proves his ability to create the same memorable, mournful and probingly human story from behind the camera as in front of it. Since 1991’s “The Indian Runner,” a raw tale of sibling conflict, Penn has delivered distinctive directorial visions every four or five years: “The Crossing Guard” (1995) and “The Pledge” (2001). But with “Wild,” an adaptation of Jon Krakauer’s chronicle of Christopher McCandless’ journey, Penn takes a lighter, more freewheeling approach that’s resonated with audiences and critics in a broader, more visceral way than his previous efforts.

GENESIS: “I read the book when it came out, tried to get the rights. … I had written so much of it in my head over the years subconsciously that the first draft was (written in) less than a month. I got a lot of input from (Krakauer and the McCandless family), then I went back and did what became our shooting draft, and then that changed every day.”

VISION: “I was interested in an American journey that breathed. You can lose track of your narrative and be a kind of Alaskan travelogue. It was always in my head (to) shoot things that I thought would work transitionally and bring elements of the chapters into that final crossing, which is Alaska.”

CHALLENGES: “It was such a massive undertaking. It was a reasonably good budget — more than I’ve had to work with in the past — but for what we were trying to achieve in eight months of shooting and many locations, we were stretching this baby.”

MAGIC: “The biggest roll of the dice was the unknown of the performance and the commitment that I perceived to be there,” says Penn of his lead, Emile Hirsch. “It was a good hypothesis, but the success of it was blind luck: I got a guy who was clearheaded enough at 21 to put his heart and soul in this thing, do it beautifully and not break his neck doing it.”

Want Entertainment News First? Sign up for Variety Alerts and Newsletters!
Post A Comment 0