The Great Gatsby(Novel)
The Great Gatsby(1974)
Let me just throw this out there from the beginning, this is very bad. They follow the novel fairly well but it all just seems like a joke with the atrocious acting. Yes, standards have greatly improved since then but the Godfather didn't seem to have any trouble with finding good actors. I have to say that I agreed with every review that I read about this film. While it sticks with the novel, there are plenty of parts where they stray. As stated many times in class, Gatsby is too cool. They may as well cast a robot for him... or even all the actors. None of them seemed to have depth or dimension. Overall I would recommend just staying away from this film. Classic or not its not worth the two and a half hours that it takes away from your life.
Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MstmidhHNQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MstmidhHNQ
The Great Gatsby(2013)
Where the hell is Leo's oscar and did Jay-Z do music for this movie... I thoroughly enjoyed this film and I actually liked the characters and grew close to them, probably because they actually have emotions. This movie stuck with the book and had a very interesting take on the perspective in which it was to be told. It made me feel like a reader as much as a movie goer, though you'd probably have to have read the book first in order to get this feeling. Some people like to pick on Leo's accent in this movie but I thought he did a perfect job. He had that regal, over the top tone because that's not who Gatsby is, I saw it as him mocking all of the snobs he was surrounding himself with. Now on to the music, like many I think it was a huge mistake using pop music in this film. While everything does have a very polished and modern look to it, I feel that when you put pop music in a 1920's setting it takes away from the authenticity of the era. I don't want to hear something I can hear any time I turn on the radio, I would rather hear revamps of Jazz songs from that era. Though the one modern song I was fine with being in the movie was Lana Del Rey's "young and beautiful" because it had an older and more natural sound and fit the context of the film.
Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaBVLhcHcc0
I agree that the book is heavy on description. I think it's a style of the time it was written in. The 1974 version was so incredibly boring, so I agree with you there! In the 2013 version, I actually enjoyed the music. Revamped versions of jazz era music would have probably done well, but I was thinking that the inclusion of modern music gave viewers a sense of what it felt like to be at Gatsby's parties. In the 1974 I think we see more of what it was actually like and we were constantly bored. What are your thoughts?
ReplyDeleteEven though I didn't love the modern music, I didn't hate it. I agree with you in that seeing the actual period music in the '74 version was just kind of boring, so I'm glad they made that choice in the '13 version. I'm even more glad that it actually somewhat worked. I just can't quite imagine how they could have made it exciting any other way.
DeleteSee, I don't think the 74 version even did a good job of representing of what it might've actually been like at a Gatsby party. It all has that cheesy 70's sound, something along the lines of a Brady bunch episode. But I understand that they are catering to the younger generation to make them feel more like they are part of the party in '13 version but they didn't have to lay it on as thick as they did.
DeleteI loved your post. You are kind of cynical, like me and I loved it. I thought Dicaprio was a better choice for Gatsby, because when I read the book that is kind of who I envisioned. Tobey, oh poor Tobey was miscast, unlike Sam Waterson. You said the cast didn't seem to have depth. I agree. Marlon Brando was what they called a method actor, where they became the part. None of the actors were invested. A script can be a work of art but without the proper actors it would be like watching a staged version of Showgirls.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I think the main fault of the '74 version (beyond it's slow pace) was the flatness of the characters. You just can't bring yourself to care about them, which is hugely important (since, as you noted, there isn't much of a plot for us to concern ourselves with). Having some better fleshed-out characters helped a lot in the '13 version. That scene where Gatsby loses his temper is so important to us as viewers--it gives us a side of Gatsby to feel for. Robert Redford just didn't give us that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with pretty much everything you said. One minor difference is, I did not dislike the novel, but I do think it's overrated. Apart from that, '74 was not worth the time it took to watch, and '13 was very entertaining. I too think Dicaprio is Oscar worthy in this and other performances. He absolutely nails every facet of Gatsby, and, equally as important, Gatz--brilliant performance. I also agreed with your reply saying that '74 did not capture what it might have been like at a Gatsby party. Like everything else in that version, it was poorly done. None of the acting in that film was believable. Jon suggested in a reply elsewhere that poor direction could have been a part of that. I think that's true; although, I don't think Redford ever had the depth to play Gatsby, under any direction. I also was not a fan of some of the musical choices. I think I understand the intention there, and it was probably effective for many viewers. I know I would have preferred some modern arrangements of that era. All things considered, I enjoyed the film, and Dicaprio's performance was the highlight for me.
ReplyDelete