Baz Luhrmann’s The Great Gatsby is not a great film. It has moments of greatness, flickering beneath the spasms, shrieks and glitter. Much of the film’s gifts lay in the singular performance of Leonardo DiCaprio as the elusive, provocative dreamer, Jay Gatsby. DiCaprio captured something Robert Redford didn’t when he portrayed Gatsby in the 1974 film. F. Scott Fitzgerald, if he could have stomached the rest of it, would have been dazzled by Leo — a wreck behind his sparkling baby blues, the American dream coiled within him attempting to buy his way into a world that did not want him. The reach is what matters when we fumble towards that dream. But the fix is in, especially now in 2013. The extreme differences in wealth of the few is all around us now.
What Baz Luhrmann appears to be doing, however, doesn’t match with the parts of the movie that do work — DiCaprio and of course, the costumes and art direction. Catherine Martin’s work is jaw-dropping throughout. Though I appreciate his approach to that world, the roaring 20s before the stock market crashed and then, like now, the wealthy escaped unscathed but the self-made rich men and the underclass took the brunt of the punishment. It’s hard not to watch this Great Gatsby and not think about how things have been going in America lately.
All the same, the irony remains — what Luhrmann has done to Gatsby the work of timeless fiction is what Gatsby himself did in remaking his image; they made the mistake of thinking more is better. It didn’t matter for Gatsby and for Luhrmann, and this film, it doesn’t much matter either. It is a good thing, then, that his actors are working so hard.
The film is worth seeing for DiCaprio’s performance alone. Carey Mulligan is miscast as Daisy as she brings too much humanity and compassion to a character who really should be more opaque and childlike under her mask of allure. Nonetheless, she’s done her research and has carefully laid out a Daisy that makes some sense in the Luhrmann realm; it’s not unlike casting Claire Danes as Juliet — an unlikely decision that mostly paid off in that case. A golden girl is a golden girl and Mulligan’s Daisy isn’t one of those. Thus, this story of Great Gatsby must reveal more deliberate, palpable cruelty than is necessary.
Another problem is Nick Carraway as realized by Tobey Maguire. While his work, like Mulligan’s, is heartfelt his character continually narrates stuff that’s about to happen and then we must watch as it did happen then we must hear the voice-over of what just happened. What the movie really wanted to be was a balls-out musical or opera. All that was missing were the songs.
On the other hand, it is difficult to hate a movie that so illuminates our ongoing American tragedy. Will audiences still be able to feel the heartbeats of Fitzgerald’s novel when Luhrmann has his hands so firmly around its throat? Does the big picture remind us that it’s always a good thing to remind people of Fitzgerald’s novel, Gatsby’s struggle, and the unending, distinctly American desire to reach, however futilely towards the green light at the end of Daisy’s dock — the one that means so much to Gatsby, that Daisy never even noticed at all. Everything came to her so easily, why would she notice.
Despite its flaws, Gatsby is a film by an artistically committed director who let his interpretation hang out completely, balls, warts and all. It is a surrealistic rendering of a great story. Somewhere in there the story still lives and breathes, maybe through the aqua blue of DiCaprio’s eyes, maybe in his desperation to impress the girl he was never good enough to have. It’s still there as we watch DiCaprio try to look like one of them in his ridiculous pink suit. Gatsby was a man of hope. His mistake was thinking what looks so fabulous on the outside was really nothing more than easily distracted people waiting for the next party, the next fun car ride, the next dance. Poor Gatsby. He thought it all meant something.
Even though the movie itself doesn’t seem to achieve what it so bravely reached for, DiCaprio quietly gave one of the best performances of his career. Imagine that.
OSCARS 2014 NOMINATION PREDICTION FOR THE GREAT GATSBY
Best Costume Design
The Great Gatsby, Catherine Martin
Best Music – Original Song
Lana Del Rey, Young & Beautiful, from The Great Gatsby
Best Production Design
The Great Gatsby, Catherine Martin (Production Design); Beverley Dunn (Set Decoration)
Saw this last night and was blown away by most of the performances, but especially Leo’s. He’s been taking baity roles lately and I wonder if he knew coming into this that the outcome wouldn’t involve Oscar. Maybe that relieved him of some of the pressure he’s put on himself in the past few years to deliver because this was the best he’s been since The Departed.
just watched the film
Best in Show: Joel Edgerton, undoubtedly!
I was impressed with Carey Mulligan.
I was OK with Leo and Tobey.
and hated the fact that Myrtle’s character was reduced to nothing!!!
Karen Black gives an Oscar-worthy performance as Myrtle in the 1974 film version.
Karen Black gives an Oscar-worthy performance as Myrtle in the 1974 film version.
I agree about Karen Black.
But am I the only one who thinks Baz Luhrmann gives Mytle exactly the same amount of weight in the movie that Fitzgerald gives her in the novel?
Luhrmann’s version restores Mytle to the same shrunken presence she occupies in the novel. In the novel Myrtle is only physically present in the one scene, one chapter. Myrtle only exists as a living, speaking person in Chapter 2. Then she disappears for 100 pages until she’s killed..
Fitzgerald allows Myrtle to speak from page 25-38. That’s it. Just briefly at the gas station and then she loudly presides over the drunken rendezvous at Tom’s crowded fuck-pad apartment in New York.
After that scene, we never see Myrtle in the novel again until she’s flying over the grill of the yellow roadster.
So I’m saying if people are want to complain that Baz Lurhmann isn’t respecting the novel, then Myrtle is the wrong character to worry about. Luhrmann treats Myrtle with the same dismissive disdain that we see Fitzgerald give her in the novel. She’s only there in the novel to look coarse and expendable.
Good review but it is flawed by its use of the word “flawed.” No movie, like any piece of creative art, is completely flawless… well, except for this painting of my ass.
I haven’t seen the movie, but this review strikes me as fair. Gives kudos where they’re earned but honest about it’s fault. And it lacks any venom whatsoever, which is refreshing.
Glad to hear DiCaprio is great in the film. I confess I had no high expectations about it, to my eyes it seems he’s been trying too hard for his own good. But I’ve always liked him, especially his earlier works.
If at least DiCaprio’s performance is worth the ticket admission, I’ll check it out.
Thanks for the review, Sasha.
And here is the “great intellectual” James Franco’s review of the Great Gatsby…He really tries….very hard:)
http://www.vice.com/read/james-francos-impressions-of-gatsby
^
LOL @ actors trying hard to act smart by thinking and writing and stuff.
why don’t more actors skip college and go directly to winning Oscars like Jennfer Lawrence does?
An attack on something related to ‘Silver Lining’s Playbook’ on Awards DailyZ: refreshing.
I love how Baz thinks he convinces everybody that he’s straight. C’mon, get out, people aren’t that stupid.
Convinces who? Is he like a public figure? [deleted]
tsk, Bryce. please think of a less offensive way to express your feelings.
Baz nickname should be “Poppers”. Doesn’t really add anything other than intensity, but impossible not to enjoy in the moment.
Totally agree on Mulligan’s characterization of Daisy. I found it to be more of a problem with the Luhrmann’s view/use of the character as opposed to anything Mulligan was doing.
There is enough good here to make the miscalculations (and a few of them are colossal miscalculations) even more apparent. I don’t want to venture into spoiler territory, but the framing device used as an excuse for the voice-over irked me for a few reasons. 1. It made no sense in terms of the Nick character as written. 2. When you’re cribbing from Fitzgerald, you shouldn’t need an excuse for the narration. Also, the structural shift in the way Gatsby’s back-story is revealed robs it of the power it had in the novel. Also, the film needed a few fades to black. Luhrmann didn’t let the film breathe. It’s the story of an entire summer; this version felt like it was over the course of a few weeks.
Still, I felt that the image of the green light, so entrenched in the mind of any “Gatsby” lover, was well rendered. And the Myrtle’s ultimate fate was perfectly realized.
I was very mixed on the movie as a whole, but as the lights came up, I heard one of the two girls sat behind me (they couldn’t have been older than 15) whisper to the other, “Wow, that was amazing. I need to read that book.” For that alone, I’m inclined to say this film has done a service.
It’s the editing..it’s the cut every second editing that drove me nuts. Beautiful costumes and settings, seems like a lot of work went into these elements, for example the Times Square scene, but I wanted to see all this, not fleeting images
Well, this is a fine review, fair and insightful. But I must say I did like the film more. I agree that Di Caprio was exceptional, but I ddn’t quite have a problem with Mulligan, even if Maguire has always been a shallow actor. This American literary masterpiece is certainly nearly impossible to film, but I thought Luhrmann’s dazzling design and mysterious undercurrent took a good stab at the essence. I know some thought the way T.J. Ecclestone’s eyes were incorporated was rather heavy-handed, but the film is surprisingly emotional all things considered.
No masterpiece, but better than I expected. I know the reviews are split down the middle, but I was happy to see some of the better scribes like Zacharek and Scott among the positive. Even the very hard-to-please SLANT registered a favorable reaction.
I agree with Sam. But I also think Sasha’s review is quite good. Highlights for me were the art direction/costumes, integration of the music, the performances (especially Leo’s, wow).
This was Movie Star Leo. He looked fantastic and gave a charismatic performance which reminded me of his Titanic/Catch Me if You Can days.
its not a “great” film, but I think its a good one that will improve upon multiple viewings. I actually cant wait to see it again to see if any of the rough spots smooth out or are easier to swallow. I also cant wait to just “see”/experience it again.
I thought Leo was fabulous in it, they all look great on the red carpet:)