Gatsby le Magnifique

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.

There comes a time in a director's career when he or she may face one of the seemingly impossible cinematic feats: to make the movie better than the book.

Director Baz Luhrmann accepted this challenge when he signed on to direct a new theatrical take of "The Great Gatsby." F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel is considered an American literary classic, a staple in high school English courses. To tamper with greatness could spell disaster for the film and disappoint fans. With this in mind, Luhrmann took the details that made the novel so successful and generously applied them to his film.

The result? Beautiful visuals, awkward editing and overblown symbolism.

The adaptation is narrated by Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), who recounts his adventures on Long Island to a doctor while at a sanatorium. Using word-for-word passages from the novel, Carraway describes his move to New York to try his hand in the bond business. There, he reconnects with his cousin, Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan) and learns his next-door neighbor is none other than Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio), the secretive millionaire known for his lavish parties and fantastical reputation. Little does Carraway know that Gatsby acts this way in hopes of winning back Daisy's love despite five years of separation and her marriage to another man.

Hoping to live up to its hype, the movie tries to be as fantastic and flawless as Gatsby himself. Servants open doors and move about the house like choreographed dancers. The grand landscapes of New York City and Gatsby's estate look pristine. And the parties are a flapper's dream, with the vibrant outfits and music for dancing (although the occasional rap songs seemed a bit out of place).

Unfortunately, the flawlessness stops with the visuals. Reminiscent of "Moulin Rouge," Luhrmann's excessive cuts put cinematic emphasis in all the wrong places. The opening scenes fly by with exaggerated zooming and cutaways that disturb the flow of the script. Yet during the climactic standoff between Gatsby and Daisy's husband, the camera comes to a virtual standstill. Without the dialogue, it would appear no different from any other scene.

The film was also keen to draw on, and overemphasize, some of the novel's best traits. Carraway speaks Fitzgerald's words like poetry, which fans of the book will appreciate. Yet seeing them additionally written on the screen is distracting and unnecessary, no matter how artistic the font is. Likewise, the symbolisms that added such value to the novel do not translate as well on screen. We can only see the green light so many times before its significance starts to fade.

Luckily, the lead performances keep the plot comprehensible even when the camera is having a spaz attack. Few (if any) actors would be better suited as the suave, slightly obsessed Gatsby than DiCaprio. He and Maguire enliven the unlikely relationship between Gatsby and Carraway with their occasional comic relief and intimate conversations. Mulligan also gives a strong portrayal of Daisy and her struggle to choose between Gatsby and her husband.

There is potential for the film to be marginally close to par with the novel. Unfortunately, it gets lost in the pomp of Luhrmann's chaotic editing, which proves what literary purists have been saying all along: Only the book can put the "great" in "The Great Gatsby."

Stars: *** ½ (out of 5)

Read more: http://www.973radionow.com

8/10.

I know a lot of the other reviewers will compare this film to the older one and also the book, so if you're interested in a comparison, stop reading here. I want to review this film as a movie that tells a story, like every other film. I don't want to review this as a film that tried to beat its preceding film adaptation.

I myself have read the book and have always been so intrigued with the character of Gatsby, and when I heard a few years back that he would be portrayed on the big screen by DiCaprio, I couldn't wait. The character carries such a mystery about him that was delivered so excellently by Leonardo DiCaprio, and made it so fun to watch. It was almost like I didn't know what the ending was because I was so immersed in 1920s New York, and in the lifestyle of The Great Gatsby.

The film itself, as a film, was awesome! The visuals and soundtrack were captivating and lavish. The acting was great overall, as you can trust these actors to deliver.

I read somewhere on IMDb (message board or another reviewer, I can't remember) that Leonardo wasn't a good fit for the role of Gatsby. I think this statement couldn't be more wrong. If you have read the book, you must have some idea about the depth of Gatsby's character, the depth of his mind, his desires. The false smiles, the phony handshakes, the uneasiness in being in public, the way Jay Gatsby conducts himself in front of Daisy, and in pursuit of her. All these things are delivered so well by DiCaprio. His nerve, his frustration, his determination...all so eloquently portrayed. But most of all, his passion, and as Nick Carraway, our narrator so emphatically reminds us, his hope. The character development of Jay Gatsby, and the development of all those surrounding him gives us such a deep look at the relationships of such a diverse category of people.

The storyline is obviously interesting: A man realizes his new neighbor is a mysterious, and incredibly wealthy man. Like how awesome is that? Throughout the whole film, as the relationships between all the few main characters become deeper and deeper, and the questions become answered, you just can't help but feel so into the characters' lives. Great writing for the characters, great directing, great great great acting.

Overall, this is just a great film. If you go into the theater thinking "oh this'll suck compared to Robert Redford" or "I bet the book is way better", you're setting yourself up for a bad 143 minutes. Don't be so close minded and try to view it as just another film that tells a fictional story, and a great one at that.

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.