What readers think of Into The Wild, plus links to write your own review.

Into the wild is a boring book. I chose to read it in my English class from a list of books because everyone was reading it so I figured it would be good. I guess I was wrong. I don't know how anyone can feel sympathetic for chris. he didn't have to become a bum and travel across the country, only to be found dead. also the story line is boring. Nothing exciting really happens.

I had to read this book for english, and I did not enjoy it as well as I thought I would have. Sure I understood it better than my friends, but that's beside the fact that the book bored me to death. I agree with other people when they say there are to many characters, and if you're doing a project on it, there is way to much information to be found on it.

I was supposed to read this book for english and i tried reading but half way through the book i just stopped. There are way too many characters, like 2 in each chapter and the book just sucked.

This book is boring so i thought i could go on sparknotes and read em' but it ain't there.its the most boring book i ever read AP english 2 sucks.

Wow, this is incredibly boring...stay away!! Every time i tried reading it, i fell asleep!! However, if you really love semi-biographical-nature-type books and you REALLY try to get "into it"...it's not that bad. I'm just warning you...it can be REALLLLL boring!!

this book was way bad..dont read it...it was confusing and i had to do a huge project on it and it was extremely hard to do...
PEACE OUT

I finished this book, and the only redeeming quality was it was quick. The bad part was reading a hopelessly idealistic young man venture into the Alaskan wilderness to literally live off the land, only to realize his error and die a stupid death. What is so romantic about it? Trying to be Jack London? Starving a lonely, cold death because you thought that you could make such an unforgiving realm work? That's your best accomplishment? As smart as Chris was (with his freshly minted Emory degree), he wasn't smart enough to know that his arrogant, foolhardy and excessively naive outlook ultimately got him dead. The sad part is he passed the point of no return to learn that lesson, something he never could learn about in his Tolstoy or Thoreau books.

My other beef was the author trying to compare his experience to that of Chris McCandless' fatal adventure. Again he seems all too happy to try and spin a "Noble young lad that I once was whose only fault was to die," kind of tale. Jon Krakauer may be trying to channel some of that pure adventurism (more like let's see how close to the sun I can fly without the wax melting) or star struck, I don't know. The comparison to others like McCandless only worked to describe others that have tried to do what Chris did (and died like him) before him. I think the author fell too hard for Chris's story since he was once like Chris, which has warped his writing of the situation and kills any objectivity that is sorely lacking here. Glossing over people who are gratuitously cocky - and die as a result - as great adventurers is not my idea of a morality tale type of story.

it was a book