Sims Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 A big meh. It alternated between trashy and bland. Luhrmann's need to eliminate every possible subtlety and nuance of the source material was expected but still grating. I love Moulin Rouge, but his style simply did not work for this adaptation. The acting was a very mixed bag. Some like Edgerton and Debicki really surprised me with their takes. Others like Mulligan and DiCaprio were trying their best but clearly miscast and misdirected. Then you have Tobey Maguire, who was abysmal, even Razzie-worthy. Sounded like a child reading Christmas cards. I don't know what movie those who enjoyed his performance were watching. I'm not usually a stickler for faithfulness to the original source material, but some of the narrative liberties were just too much to handle. The framing device was garbage, absolute garbage. It only served to remind us that we were watching an inferior version of a story that belongs on the page. If Luhrmann's so concerned about the 'realism' of Nick's narration, why not just cut it entirely? It certainly distracted from the film anyways. Things like Jordan's lack of screen-time and Myrtle's complete irrelevance (until the very end) were also poor adaptive choices. Where the film fails most, however, is when it tries WAY too hard to capture the "spirit" of the novel. Things that were subtle and inconspicuous in the written word, such as TJ Eckleburg's glasses, become obvious and condescending on screen. Adding Jay-Z and Lady Gaga music to highlight the excess of the 1920s isn't so much an inspired choice as it is a nauseatingly unsubtle and uninteresting one. Luhrmann's direction is the cinematic equivalent of telling and not showing. The film does improve considerably after the half hour mark, but it's only a step up from gaudy and insulting to bland and rushed. The moments where Luhrmann tones down the visual pomposity reveal his weaknesses in directing actors. DiCaprio and Mulligan have weak chemistry, and they, along with the rest of the cast, seem completely confused as to what they're supposed to be doing. I didn't hate it entirely. I thought the climactic confrontation was executed really well (even if it is spoiled immediately after when Myrtle's gory body flies through the air like a corpse in a slasher flick), and it made me wonder what these actors could have done with a better director. I also thought the costumes and sets were gorgeous, even if they were slightly spoiled by asinine cinematography and haphazard edits. In the end, it wasn't quite as offensive as I thought it might be, but it was nowhere near as innovative or daring either. C, 5/10 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxOfficeFangrl Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 (edited) Where the film fails most, however, is when it tries WAY too hard to capture the "spirit" of the novel. Things that were subtle and inconspicuous in the written word, such as TJ Eckleburg's glasses, become obvious and condescending on screen. I know this is just a thread for the 2013 movie but earlier Gatsby adaptations feature the billboard just as heavily. The eyes are even in the trailer of the silent version. If TJ Eckleburg had been left out or minimized here it would have been just another thing someone would have complained about Luhrmann getting "wrong", I suspect. I really liked Leo's performance a lot. The book makes Gatsby out to be a tragic dreamer who also got caught up in the wrong world but I could appreciate this version where he seems more delusional to the point of being a little creepy and that scared Daisy off as much as her fickleness and the impossibiliy of their situation. I look at it like Shakespeare where there's always a slightly different take on Hamlet or Lady Macbeth or King Lear. Edited May 26, 2013 by BoxOfficeChica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webslinger Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 (edited) I know this is just a thread for the 2013 movie but earlier Gatsby adaptations feature the billboard just as heavily. The eyes are even in the trailer of the silent version. If TJ Eckleburg had been left out or minimized here it would have been just another thing someone would have complained about Luhrmann getting "wrong", I suspect. You nailed it. I didn't feel like Dr. T.J. Eckleburg was handled in a condescending manner in the movie - or if it was, it wasn't necessarily out-of-place; the symbolism is spelled out just as clearly in the novel. Edited May 28, 2013 by Webslinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 B+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lab276 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 It's great.A- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 (edited) I enjoyed it somewhat. Luhrmann's directing style isn't quite my thing, but it worked here for the most part. DiCaprio gives a powerhouse performance, but Maguire comes off as awkwardly funny in a lot of scenes. Story's great, but why wouldn't it be? C+ Edited September 1, 2013 by Blankments Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Almost everything about this film worked for me. I thought the performances were fantastic across the board (Leo is brilliant, Mulligan is a pleasant enough surprise, and Tobey was good). Love it or hate it, Baz has such a terrifically unique sense of style, and it's radiant here. One of my favorite films of the year. A 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 Yeha, when I look back at what I watched this summer, TGG sticks in mind. The rest I forgot about. Can't wait for Baz's next. Love his style. Just terrific. Veyr happy he got a bone-fide blockbuster with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 He called himself an idiot for turning down HP1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 He called himself an idiot for turning down HP1. I would've been way more interested in a Baz HP than a Columbus one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I would've been way more interested in a Baz HP than a Columbus one.I agree...but he would never have gotten a cast as perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I agree...but he would never have gotten a cast as perfect. Sure it's possible. (Assuming you're talking primarily about the kids?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxOfficeFangrl Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I would've been way more interested in a Baz HP than a Columbus one. I've never heard that Baz was offered HP1! That one really had to play to young kids and his style can be so polarizing, I'm surprised WB offered it to him. I always wonder if the cast, the trio would've been the same if the first HP had had a different director. Probably not and that film history "what if" is interesting to consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezen Baklattan Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I can't fight it anymore. Two months later, and I think I almost love this movie, flaws and all. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Why fight? It's a interesting movie, most likely the best take on Gatsby we'll ever get. I'm so hyped for Baz's next project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezen Baklattan Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChD Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 (edited) Wow... Just wow. Initially, when I saw that people were worried about Luhrman taking on to the project, and when I saw that the reviews weren't that favorable, I didn't think this movie would be for me so I decided to wait for a DVD release. Well, I just finished watching it and, once again, I learned that I shouldn't listen to the haters. I love movies that have narration and music that fits with the scenes, especially the kind of music used in this movie: the kind of energetic one, mixed together with beautiful visuals, so, as you can guess, this movie clicked with me from the moment the narration started. The surprise is honestly Tobey Maguire who has a great performance that should gain him some more attention from award winning movie directors. Leo was great, but not as great as Tobey. I also liked that other guy (Buchanan, I forgot his real name, I'm sorry) and his wife (again, name forgotten). Overall, I enjoyed it tremendously. The last fifteen minutes of the movie were simply the best ones and earned this movie a very decent score. A/A+ Edit: I just looked back over a few of the reviews. The reasons stated for hating the movie are downright idiotic and has 'hater' written all over it, to be honest. "The green screen hurt my eyes." LOL Edited August 10, 2013 by ChD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatMovieGuy Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 Wow... Just wow. Initially, when I saw that people were worried about Luhrman taking on to the project, and when I saw that the reviews weren't that favorable, I didn't think this movie would be for me so I decided to wait for a DVD release. Well, I just finished watching it and, once again, I learned that I shouldn't listen to the haters. I love movies that have narration and music that fits with the scenes, especially the kind of music used in this movie: the kind of energetic one, mixed together with beautiful visuals, so, as you can guess, this movie clicked with me from the moment the narration started. The surprise is honestly Tobey Maguire who has a great performance that should gain him some more attention from award winning movie directors. Leo was great, but not as great as Tobey. I also liked that other guy (Buchanan, I forgot his real name, I'm sorry) and his wife (again, name forgotten). Overall, I enjoyed it tremendously. The last fifteen minutes of the movie were simply the best ones and earned this movie a very decent score. A/A+ Edit: I just looked back over a few of the reviews. The reasons stated for hating the movie are downright idiotic and has 'hater' written all over it, to be honest. "The green screen hurt my eyes." LOL you're opinion is completely bias, just letting you know. There's nothing wrong with people if they didn't like this film nor is it wrong if they liked it, If anything you're opinion is the idiotic one. I said one thing in the other thread( what was with all the jayz music?) and you attacked me, basically asking for my opinion, it's almost like you wanted other people to hate it so you could flash out your narcissism and claim I am different! anyways grow up and join the real world. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChD Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 you're opinion is completely bias, just letting you know. There's nothing wrong with people if they didn't like this film nor is it wrong if they liked it, If anything you're opinion is the idiotic one. I said one thing in the other thread( what was with all the jayz music?) and you attacked me, basically asking for my opinion, it's almost like you wanted other people to hate it so you could flash out your narcissism and claim I am different! anyways grow up and join the real world. No, but that reason was stupid. You just said "That movie with the Jay Z music" ? What I got from that? The way you said it it's like that movie sucks because it has Jay Z music in it, which is an idiotic thing to say. If you would've said that I don't know, it was boring or something like that, that would've been something else, but saying that it sucked because Jay Z had music in it is just as idiotic as saying that your eyes hurt from the green screen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatMovieGuy Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 i'm not trying to fight with you. but what I said was "Whats with all the jayz music?" it was question, I didn't understand why everytime I heard music it was something completely out of it's century. It just felt out of place that and when Gatsy's in the car with tobey's character and it looks like there going 100mph which those cars would not have been able to do back then, flying passed cars, I mean there's lots of stupid little bits in this movie just made it an unpleasant experience. Now if that's idiotic to you, then call me what you will. I can see how some people might like this and that's fine but I didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...