Gatsby (2013) B-
The Great Gatsby (1974) C
The Great Gatsby (1925) A
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald was published in
1925, yet it felt surprisingly applicable to current times. The novel, which has been
adapted to the big screen four times, is superior to the 1974 and 2013 films.
Both films follow the book rather closely, but neither duplicates the imagery,
the intrigue, or the connection I had with narrator Nick Carraway while reading
Fitzgerald’s magnum opus. The films are enjoyable and worthwhile; however,
depending on your preference (contemporary glam or traditional aesthetics), you
would be better served picking one of the two films to watch.
Gatsby (2013)
This redux, directed by Baz Luhrmann is brass, colorful and
splashy. I understand the logic behind such an “in your face” approach. It is
so similar to the book and the 1974 version, something had to be done to make
it stand on its own. However, that something probably could have been dialed
down a notch- less digital effects, less hip-hop (it's a decent soundtrack, but there's no need to beat us over the head with it) and less gloss. The film feels extremely over-produced. Luhrmann,
and the rest of the creators behind this film are ultimately in a lose-lose
situation. They are remaking a classic novel that has already been adapted for
the screen three times prior. A few younger moviegoers may think Gatsby is
“cool” and be inspired to read Fitzgerald’s novel. But, those of us who do not
wear skinny jeans, and do not view film as a vehicle for profit, will likely
find this over the top. That being said, Leonardo DiCaprio (Jay Gatsby) and
Carey Mulligan (Daisy) are preferable to their 1974 counterparts. DiCaprio
evokes more emotion than Robert Redford’s 1974 portrayal of Gatsby, while it is
not difficult for the fresh-faced Mulligan to outshine an anemic Mia Farrow who
portrays Daisy in the 1974 version.
The Great Gatsby circa 1974 felt a little slow and
methodical after watching the newest version. Directed by the late Jack
Clayton and screenplay adapted by celebrated filmmaker Francis Ford
Coppela, this third installment was not well received by critics upon its
release in 1974. However, it did go on to win two non-acting Academy
Awards (Best Costume Design and Best Music) in 1975, while Coppela won Academy
Awards for Best Director, Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay for The
Godfather II that same year. Not to mention, Coppela was also competing against himself for Best
Picture, as the ambitious filmmaker also wrote and directed The Conversation starring
Gene Hackman (a fine film if you have not seen it). So, perhaps Coppela was not
emotionally invested in the adapting the screenplay for The Great Gatsby;
hence, its lack of appeal.
The characters here seemed to run the spectrum. Mia Farrow
as Daisy seemed about as believable as a three dollar bill. Redford ,
a logical choice for Jay Gatsby, seemed stiff and uninspired. On the other
hand, I preferred the young Sam Waterston over Tobey Maguire, the latest
version of Nick Carraway. Waterston brought anonymity to the role that Maguire
could not. From the beginning of the film, Waterston appeared sweaty and
slightly awkward, in a way that seemed authentic and not scripted. That was the
first sign that I liked this Nick Carraway. I also preferred model-turned
actress/former Bond girl, Lois Chiles as Jordan Baker (inspired by Edith
Cummings). Jordan Baker’s role was fairly small in both films, but she
represented one of the more memorable characters in the novel. Tom Buchanan, of
whom who Fitzgerald wrote,“He’s the best character I have ever done,” was the
most consistent and equally matched character in both films and the novel.
No comments:
Post a Comment