#6 The book was good, the new movie sucks...
Posted on 05/12/2013 10:50:03 AM PDT by EveningStar
If you haven't already, you're going to hear a whole bunch of gripes about "The Great Gatsby" movie out this weekend. And the biggest of them all will likely have something to do with how faithful it was to the classic F. Scott Fitzgerald novel.
Needless to say, there are some significant changes. But there are significant changes in "Iron Man" when put up against the comic books -- sometimes change is necessary, and even good. Then again, sometimes they're not.
(Excerpt) Read more at movies.yahoo.com ...
ping
#6 The book was good, the new movie sucks...
#7: It’s a popular entertainment vehicle product.
I decided that the movie was going to be worthless trash when I heard bits from the musical score - rap and hip hop music instead of twenties and thirties style jazz.
Same thing that ruined Django.
That’s how Baz L directs, same old shtick. On a plus side, I;ve never liked Dicrapio movies. Just like Freeman, Tom Cruise etc, they look the same in every movie. At least Daniel day Lewis changes his looks in every film he does.
That’s from the trailer. Trailers frequently have their own music. I have no idea if it’s also in the movie.
How do you know if the movie is drivel if you haven’t seen it.
I noticed that it’s getting mixed reviews.
There is a reason the 20’s and 30’s were called “The Jazz Age” and to use 21st century music in a period piece is anachronistic.
It’s a postmodernist it’s comment about the pop cultural swirl.
It's a good movie, and I'd be inclined to see it again. Yes, there are a few things, primarily the soundtrack, that keep it from being a great movie. Apart from that, it's well acted and visually stunning. It's far more engaging than the 1974 Redford attempt. I'm no fan of DiCaprio's politics and he's had some stinkers for movies. He's also had some very strong performances and this is one of them.
Joel Edgerton gives a very strong performance as Tom Buchanan. The "Nick in a Sanitarium" gimmick certainly sounds contrived when you read about it in a review, but it works pretty well on screen, and by employing a series of flashbacks it doubles down on the whole Gatsby/Daisy theme of idealizing the past and dealing with the present.
FWIW, I've long held that, as much as I thought the '74 film was an overall bomb, one of the best casting choices in all of filmdom was the selection of Sam Waterston to play Carraway. Prior to seeing the new film, I thought McGuire was really going to have the toughest role in this film, and while I still think Waterston's Carraway was better, McGuire did well enough with a tough role; I could be wrong, but it appeared to me as he spent a good bit of time studying Waterston's performance.
Just my $0.02.
I probably will see it on video sooner or later without expecting much, and probably I'll like it more than Moulin Rouge. I don't think I could like it less.
I didn't mind the earlier version. It sort of defined the novel for me (and for other people too, though I guess we aren't supposed to admit it). It might be interesting to see a new take on the story
But does Meyer Wolfsheim still fix the 1919 World Series?
Yes.
Good. He was always a pivotal character for me, a lens that focuses the nihilism of the Twenties. If a noble institution like the World Series could be bought and sold, then all values and morality had become unmoored.
Although in this movie he has a molar for a tie-tack instead of cuff links (one more difference the purists will be sure to harp upon).
So they decided to keep some of the anti-semitism in without making it so obvious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.