Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Borges

Is it just me or was the book ridiculous and depressing?


2 posted on 04/26/2013 1:59:46 PM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Williams

It isn’t just you.

And the mere fact that the film stars Leonardo DiCrapio and was directed by Baz Luhrman would keep me from seeing it even if I did like the book.


3 posted on 04/26/2013 2:01:13 PM PDT by ZirconEncrustedTweezers (Some people take there grammar way to seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

Not as depressing as DiCaprio..


4 posted on 04/26/2013 2:02:18 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

It’s a tragedy so ‘depressing’ depends on the context.


5 posted on 04/26/2013 2:02:20 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams
I don't see how either of these perfectly valid takes on the book should impede enjoyment of it. Here, try this out.
6 posted on 04/26/2013 2:03:31 PM PDT by OnlyTurkeysHaveLeftWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

The story is ridiculous and depressing.


9 posted on 04/26/2013 2:08:07 PM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

Somehow looks like they have the female lead character right (Daisy?). Also DeCaprio does a good job looking like a gangster on the cover. Expected it to look laughable but I think DeCaprio does a great job actually. Maybe his hair stylist helped him accomplish the look. Maybe those poker games he was reportedly playing in helped him here.


15 posted on 04/26/2013 2:22:00 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams
Yes, it was depressing and that was Fitzgerald's intention.

One can't portray the rich and prosperous as happy and productive people, you know.

25 posted on 04/26/2013 2:27:29 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

For a better (IMO) novel of that time, I recommend “The Old Bunch” by Meyer Levin.

For a general sense of the era (and a rollicking good read to boot), you can’t get much better than “Only Yesterday: A Social History of the 1920s” by Frederick Lewis Allen.


36 posted on 04/26/2013 2:40:15 PM PDT by M1903A1 ("We shed all that is good and virtuous for that which is shoddy and sleazy... and call it progress")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

I never cared for it. I read it once, and I swear all I remember was that I think someone drowned and I think someone was hit by a car. But I’m not sure and I don’t care enough to read it again.


39 posted on 04/26/2013 2:46:23 PM PDT by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

ITA Read it in HS and it was simply BORING.


43 posted on 04/26/2013 2:53:58 PM PDT by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

I like some of Fitzgerald’s other stuff - he wrote some fine essays and the Pat Hobby stories are fun. But Gatsby bored the crap outta me.


77 posted on 04/26/2013 4:45:33 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Williams

Not just you. The book was ridiculous & depressing- & I found it repulsive.

Why this dog (sorry, pooches, no offense meant) keeps being resurrected every decade is beyond me.


92 posted on 04/26/2013 5:33:59 PM PDT by KGeorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson