The Great Gatsby (2013)

[pinkrenata]

Gatsby review!

http://www.dvdizzy.com/greatgatsby-film.html

I saw this last week and, as I believe I said on this forum earlier -- I had hopes. I wasn't sure if they were bad or good hopes; just hopes. Thankfully, the hopes turned out to be mostly good! The frame story was lame and parts were way too Moulin Rouge-ish (which, by the way, if an absolute favorite of mine -- but just because certain elements worked once doesn't mean I want to see them repeated over and over and over again). Gatsby is just ... a really hard text to adapt. It's simple yet grandiose at the same time. So, moments in the film where Baz went all crazy and epic DIDN'T work -- but then at the same time, they sort of DID.

Anyone else see it yet? Anyone else (besides me) who just re-read the original text?

[dvdjunkie]

Sorry, but after seeing an Advanced Screening of this film, I came home and pulled out my Blu-ray copy of the original film starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow. In comparison there are some good points of the new version, but Lenny DeCrapio is among my least favorite actors, so the film loses a lot right there.

I really think you need to watch the original "Great Gatsby" before falling in love with this 'over-done' remake, that fails on so many points.

By the way, "Moulin Rouge" is in my Top Five movies of all time, so I am not a Director hater.

[TheSequelOfDisney]

The 1974 version is far from the "original" (there were three adaptations prior to it).

Anyway, I recently re-read the novel and I have to say that it is fairly mediocre. Not too much happens until the end of the novel, and many of the characters are vague and bland (though, that's probably because the novel is written from the vague and bland Nick Carraway point of view). Therefore, I knew much couldn't be done in translating the novel into a film. I have seen the 1974 film version prior, and found it pretty lackluster (it's been awhile since I've seen it, too). The soundtrack for Luhrmann's adaptation is pretty good, though it doesn't always fit in with Jazz Age. The soundtrack, party scenes, and cinematography are what holds the film together. The film isn't bad per-say, but it's not overly magical. Not good, not bad, just kind of meh, like the novel itself.

[estefan]

I said this in the May movies thread, but this new Great Gatsby is not a remake of the Robert Redford film. It's an adaptation of F Scott Fitzgerald's book. And as SequelOfDisney said, there have been film adaptations before the Redford version. Do people honestly not know what "remake" means?

With that said, I do have to agree that this new adaptation was very disappointing and I'm somebody who likes Baz Luhrmann's previous works, especially Moulin Rouge. I posted a short review on my personal Facebook, so I might as well copy and paste here, too, for you to see my full thoughts:

I have a fondness for Baz Luhrmann's work, as they contain a unique style and while the themes are hardly anything new, he presents them in a way where you still feel for the characters and what they fight for to attain their ultimate goals. His beginnings tend to be a tad too chaotic and wild, but he calms down after a while. The Great Gatsby rarely does so, though, and as a result this is the first Luhrmann film that has disappointed me. This over-the-top style fit well with his wonderfully delightful musical Moulin Rouge, but doesn't fit into the world created by F Scott Fitzgerald's iconic novel. It ultimately started to get on my nerves and when the film did take a rare breather, the characters themselves failed to capture my interest. While Gatsby, Nick and Daisy were fine on the page, they're as thin and interesting as wallpaper in Luhrmann's adaptation. Never once did I care for Gatsby and Daisy's romance and poor Jordan Baker is relegated to the background. Unless you've read the book, you would have no idea that her and Nick Carraway are dating until somebody actually mentions it in the dialogue. To the actors' credit, they all do a very good job. Joel Edgerton is the definite standout as Tom Buchanan, showing the right gruffness in the part and he definitely tries his best to not make the character as written so one-dimensional. Leonardo DiCaprio is also strong as Gatsby and relative newcomer Elizabeth Debicki definitely shows promise, despite her underwritten part.

As expected from Baz Luhrmann, the visuals are fantastic, despite the crazy editing. Catherine Martin's production design and costumes do a splendid job of bringing the Roaring Twenties to life, though I'm somebody whose still waiting for the Charleston to be a hip dance move again. Unfortunately, the soundtrack is absolutely awful with one annoying rap tune and modern pop tune appearing out of nowhere and not mixing with the 1920's culture. Luhrmann utilised new songs with a classic setting in Moulin Rouge, but that worked, because not only did it fit the mood, but the music was very carefully chosen. With the exception of era-appropriate tunes like "Rhapsody in Blue" and "Let's Misbehave", all of the songs that play during the film are absolutely terrible and I so desperately wanted to stick cotton balls in my ears. I've long been a supporter of Baz Luhrmann's filmography, despite his many detractors, but sadly have to side with them on this one and it actually felt like I was watching Moulin Rouge and seeing all of the things it was criticised for.

[disneyftw1]

THIS IS MADE BY THE DIRECTOR OF ROMEO + JULIET AND MOULIN ROUGE?! Oh, f*ck this. I'm out. I don't care what everyone else says on what I said, I'm out. (Romeo + Juliet: Hated this adaptation! Moulin Rouge: ... my God, is this overcooked. Subtlety? What's that?!)

[DVDBuff1]

I said this in the May movies thread, but this new Great Gatsby is not a remake of the Robert Redford film. It's an adaptation of F Scott Fitzgerald's book. And as SequelOfDisney said, there have been film adaptations before the Redford version. Do people honestly not know what "remake" means?

I'm guessing (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Dvdjunkie) that he's probably never read or heard of the book or seen any of the other versions.

Anyway as I said in the May movie thread, I am not the biggest fan of Mr. Luhrmann's films, so that's what preventing me from spending the money to see it on the big screen. But I do plan on possibly renting it when it comes on Blu-Ray, because like many people have mentioned already, Baz definitely has a creative mind when it comes to visuals that's worth experiencing at least once in his movies.

[pinkrenata]

The film isn't bad per-say, but it's not overly magical. Not good, not bad, just kind of meh, like the novel itself.

So in your opinion, it was a pretty faithful adaptation.

dvdjunkie, I saw the 70s version back in high school and I remember liking it A LOT. However, there were a lot of movies I liked A LOT in high school, that later turned out to be not-so-very-good movies, so I'm due another viewing. Critically, though, it sounds like it was a dud and very slow-moving. The crazy thing about the book, which is why it's so hard to adapt, is that it is epically elaborate and plain-old simple at the same time. So, people aren't going to like it if it's done straight (à la 1974), and others won't like it if it's done in the style of Baz.

I also think there's this idea that we have to like the characters in order for a book or movie to be good. I think that's the point here. Nobody is likeable. It's on purpose -- not a matter of bad writing or directing.

[TheSequelOfDisney]

The film isn't bad per-say, but it's not overly magical. Not good, not bad, just kind of meh, like the novel itself.

So in your opinion, it was a pretty faithful adaptation.

Yup, pretty faithful, haha

[Disney's Divinity]

I also think there's this idea that we have to like the characters in order for a book or movie to be good. I think that's the point here. Nobody is likeable. It's on purpose -- not a matter of bad writing or directing.

Most people understand it's done on purpose. But it is natural to find it difficult to enjoy a book or movie about characters you don't care for. Difference between recognizing something that is well-done and entertainment.

I think TGG is a great book, well-written, etc. But I have no urge to read it again.

[Disney Guru]

I saw it last night and enjoyed it, good casting good story-line. Loved the mix of recent music with remixes of some old standards from that era. The costumes/settings were superb. Must admit I have never seen the original '74 film with Robert Redford and Mia Farrow to compare it to. But I for one thoroughly enjoyed it.

[Edthehyena]

PLEEEASSSSE, here is my DRAMA : are my ears the only ones who caught the gorgeous bitter sweet musical patterns and themes from C. Armstrong score in that dazzling movie ? Every minute of it is bliss. I heard it.

Where and when will be able to get that REAL soundtrack, and not those patchworks of covers and songs available everywhere ? Florence, Lana, Jay Z and Mr Ferry are great artists, but i need the REAL score. It's a masterpiece. Please let me know and join my claim.

[Atlantica]

I saw this and loved it. Though being a fan of the director, that was pretty much a given

The only let down for me was Carey ..... felt totally uninspired by her as Daisy; I couldnt see any of the captivation that Gatsby felt. Though her accent was spot on. Would liked to have seen more of Isla, she was underused.

[pinkrenata]

The only let down for me was Carey ..... felt totally uninspired by her as Daisy; I couldnt see any of the captivation that Gatsby felt.

I think that's sort of the point of Daisy.

[Mooky]

It was a grand spectacle but it needed more meat on its bones. There's juts too much overacting and shallowness that it gets very boring soon. Then again, one can make an argument for it, being that characters themselves are all shallow, vapid and fake, but I'm not sure how much of that was actually on purpose and how much of that was Luhrmann's style coming through. Tobey Maguire's Nick was the biggest disappointment - he plays him as a bland dweeb (no surprise there, it's one-note Tobey after all), but Nick in the book actually had a character and was sardonic at times.

All in all, I think the book and the film quite compliment each other. For a wonderful visual representation of the Roaring Twenties, see the film; for characterizations, read the book. The ending is much more sadder in the film too. Oh, and the song... the song...