And I just watched the whole thing. I thought it was very good. Great cinematography, interesting characters for an "off the grid" concept extended into old age. From what I know of the road, and friends who have lived on it for weeks or months at a time (mostly in bands, but some guys working seasonal jobs), you would run into a lot more people with mental problems and come across more situations of potential violence, but I understand injecting themes like that into a movie like this would have defeated the more contemplative purpose. As I noted above, taking to the road at this point in one's life is a health risk, which was touched on tangentially in the movie but not indicative of how these situations would play out in reality. (David Strathairn's character having surgery for diverticulitis (which could have been headed off by a routine colonoscopy and antibiotics) would have been an expensive week in the hospital and a slow recovery period. Thus, it made sense for him to "stay home" with his relatives afterwards, although his choice wasn't positioned as such. But I don't want to nullify the movie's intent with medical conjecture! It made sense, especially with the virus going on, finding purpose in menial tasks and routine, more than searching for big meanings in life, when the big meaning is to keep moving - in this case, literally. It's a long way from Easy Rider!