Showing posts with label 'The Great Gatsby' (novel). Show all posts
Showing posts with label 'The Great Gatsby' (novel). Show all posts

Thursday, May 30, 2013

FURTHER ON THE FILM VERSION OF "THE GREAT GATSBY"

In an earlier post, I said that I would probably go with my granddaughter to the the latest film version of The Great Gatsby, even though I did not particularly wish to see the movie.  When I've enjoyed a book as much as I did Gatsby, I hesitate to see the movie version unless the reviews are very good.  The critics' opinions were evenly divided between positive and negative, but audience reviews were and still are positive in the ratings.

Last week, we went to the theater, and, after we bought the tickets and were in line to buy high-priced concessions, GD told me, "My friends decided to see the movie, and I'm going back with them this weekend."

"You tell me now?" says I.

"I want to see it twice," says she.

Oh well.  In we went to our seats and, after a series of trailers, the movie began.  For the first half hour or so, I found myself noting the period details of the clothes, cars, and home decor of the 1920s, which usually means the film is going slowly.  Still, I sometimes enjoy long, slow movies with lots of period details, so I was not unhappy.  Then, the pace quickened, and I became completely absorbed in the film.  I found that the more I forgot the movie was about Fitzgerald's novel, the more I enjoyed the film for itself.

We did not see the 3-D version, which I think was a good thing.  Aside from the fact that I'm not a great fan of 3-D, I think all the popping out would have been a distraction for me.  GD saw the 3-D version on the weekend, and she expressed a slight preference for the 2-D version.

Leonardo DiCaprio was splendid in the role of Jay Gatsby, and Carey Mulligan was very good as Daisy Buchanan, as (I read somewhere, now forgotten) the young woman whom two men want to possess, though she doesn't yet own herself.  To me, Tobey Maguire was miscast as narrator Nick Carraway, as he seemed dazed throughout the film.  Of course, in the film, he wrote the Gatsby story from a rehabilitation center for alcoholics, so perhaps his befuddled state was as intended.  Although Fitzgerald himself was an alcoholic, Nick in rehab was not in the novel.  Joel Edgerton as Tom Buchanan was appropriately repulsive.

When I completely suspend disbelief, and become part of a movie, though in the role of a spectator, I consider the the film a success, thus I fall on the side of movie audiences who give the film an 84% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes, rather than on the side of the divided critics.     

Monday, May 13, 2013

TO SEE OR NOT TO SEE...

Continuing with the Hamlet theme...

As most of you know, a new film version of F Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby is in the theaters.  The older version with Robert Redford was boring; the good looks of Redford were not enough to carry the movie, and I don't know if I'm up for another disappointment because I've read and enjoyed the book more than once.

Movie critics are about evenly divided between positive and negative reviews, but audiences give the film higher approval ratings.  My first impulse is to give the movie a pass, but my granddaughter liked the book and wants very much to see the film.  None of her friends will agree to go, so I expect we will go together.

From what I've read, the latest film version of Gatsby consists of lots of movement and a good many spectacular scenes in 3-D.  Now it's quite true that Jay Gatsby's extravagant way of life, especially the wild parties at his expensive estate, is over the top and an invitation to a director to use this sort of treatment.  Still, spectacles are not my favorite type of movie, nor am I especially captivated by 3-D.  The film runs for a relentless 2 hours and 30 minutes, whether I'm enjoying myself or not.  Sigh....  Give me a well-made movie with a good story and fine acting, and I'm happy.  Is Gatsby that movie?  I doubt it, but I will let you know, if I go.