O Grande Gatsby

OK, when I read this book, I hated the Gatsby Story. But I loved that Fitzgerald made me feel like I was in New York in the summer of 1922- the heat, the droning of fans, the smells, the ashes...

Knowing that I didn't care for the story, THAT was what I wanted, to feel like I was there. I wanted to see 1922 New York, to be a part of a party in the Roaring 20's, to sweat with the characters, to feel the wind in my face during a ride in an open 20's era car...

It almost did it for me... except the music. The pounding bass and the rap just ruined it for me. I wanted some amazing jazz. I wanted a real Roaring 20's party. The Rhapsody in Blue was cool, but I was already disappointed.

The cast was great and the acting superb.

Leonardo was impressive, maybe one of his best roles. Mulligan, breath-taking, she looked like an angel. Toby McGuire was a great choice for Carraway- who else could pull off an awkward mixture of likable guy, wallflower, and main character? They did a great job of sticking to the plot and emphasizing famous lines of the book.

Overall, everything was done really well... but why couldn't we get era-appropriate music?

Maybe it's not possible to portray one of the greatest books ever written on the silver screen. This is at least the third time and I've been really disappointed all three. Neither DiCaprio or Redford (both of whom I really like) catch the true sense of the mysterious Gatsby. At least Redford was a bit detached. His failures of the past are in his head. DiCaprio (or the script he must follow) make him seem like a giddy love soaked schoolboy. He is so obsessed as to appear weak and maudlin. Another issue, however, is with the portrayal of Nick Carraway. Tobey Maguire is just too cute. I never pictured Nick as the little boy seen here (Sam Waterston, while not perfect, at least seemed like a possibility). Again, I like Maguire in other roles, but here he seems nothing more that Gatsby's toy. He's still physically lacking as a leading man. Mostly, it just lacked a bit of pizazz. Luhrman seems to think he can do it all visually, but this is a story of lost souls, trying to recover something they can't seem to reach. It fades and fades and in the end, it's hard to care much. Also, the portrayals of Daisy and Jordan just don't seem to draw us in.

The use of modern music (rap, EDM, etc.) that sounds nothing like the Roaring '20s is jarring. It rips you from the story, and it's hard to get back into it afterward. In some scenes, it's like watching a parody because the mismatch is flat-out laughable. Using era music for an era piece would've added a lot of character to the movie. And this movie, which I otherwise loved, deserved better.

Don't get me wrong; I do like those songs, and I get why the soundtrack was a hit. They just shouldn't have crashed a movie that's set in the 1920s. The distraction they caused did nothing but damage -- lots of it.

I like Luhrmann's take on films and soundtracks usually - but this film's strange annoying choice of music style was really off-putting. It was so mismatched like they were trying to MTV it with advertising Coke or something mainstream. Shame, would be great to see this with a soundtrack that suits the style of the storytelling/theme.

Whoever decided that blaring modern pop/ hip hop music into a story of the early 20's was a good idea needs their heads examined. It not only removes you completely from the story but jolts you so far out of it that you need a few minutes to try and refocus yourself back into the story. (and that's not a knock on this genre of music, it just has no place here..)

After an hour, I could stand no more, the acting and story seemed great, but the soundtrack was too much to take.

So much great music was made during this time period that if used effectively could have elevated this story. Such a waste.