The Great Gatsby Trailer — Page 2
Posted: 5/23/12 at 11:22pm
The visuals in the 'Gatsby' trailer are stunning and feel--to me--like he's gotten drunk with the ability to spend $$$$$ achieving spectacular images whether or not they have any relevance or resonance with the story he's telling.
On the other hand--I've always felt that films based on prior works, such as books and plays, should be judged fairly on their own merits as films. I like the director, the cast (gimme some Tobey Maguire any day!!) and the source material. I will definitely see the film. But my gut tells me this isn't going to be my idea of 'The Great Gatsby'.
Updated On: 5/23/12 at 11:22 PM
Posted: 5/24/12 at 8:56am
As for the 3D, somethings are great in 3D but a story about the destruction of dreams, wealth, and the loss of innocence is not one of them. I am sure this masterpiece about the bastardization of the American dream will never be fully achieved on screen.
Posted: 5/24/12 at 9:00am
Posted: 5/24/12 at 10:32am
I agree about the parties. There's even that line of Jordan's... about big parties being more intimate. Fitzgerald captures the intimacy that happens in the big parties.
In fact, it's very telling that the party Nick gets most involved in is really just the small get together at Tom and Myrtle's flat in Manhattan.
Posted: 5/24/12 at 10:42am
Posted: 5/24/12 at 10:49am
Updated On: 5/24/12 at 10:49 AM
Posted: 5/24/12 at 10:53am
Having said that--I would love to have seen Matt Damon as Jay Gatsby.
And I think Tobey Maguire has just the right kind of wan, mid-western, shrinking-violet quality that Nick needs. He's an outsider, looking in at the glamor and chaos, with--at the outset--a kind of hero-worship for Tom Buchanan that is eventually ***spoiler alert*** destroyed by Tom's actions.
Posted: 5/24/12 at 10:56am
Posted: 5/24/12 at 10:59am
Posted: 5/24/12 at 12:53pm
I'm also hoping that the film isn't faithful to the book necessarily, I'm more interested in adaptations that use the source material as an inspiration more than anything. The GOD OF CARNAGE film is as faithful an adaptation as you could ask for and it's absolutely dreadful in every way. I think the trailer looks exciting and intriguing.
Posted: 5/25/12 at 11:14pm
Yes, exactly, which doesn't involve people swinging from chandeliers. I dunno, I actually really do like Bazz as a director in terms of how he captures a feeling--and in Romeo + Juliet and parts of Moulin he managed to make stunning contrasts between big showy "production number" moments, and then really intimate scenes. And that could play well for Gatsby. I just don't get that sense *judging from this trailer*.
So Ray I agree with you there. I guess one thing though is in Gatsby (last read it about three years back but it was only my second time) I'm not sure it's justified to contrast such HUGE racuous events with the intimate as Moulin Rouge often did really well. The parties, as any of the major characters experienced them, never felt that way except in briefly alienating ways. Maybe the trailer is just emphasizing those elements?
I also don't feel that (again in the trailer) the aspects of the 20s they focus on (ie the huge lights of Times Sqaure and the decadence all around) were really what was the point. I guess it's hard to capture that internal decadence, but... The way this looks (once more from the trailer :P ) would be like doing Cabaret as if the actual nightclub Sally belonged to was a glirttering, gorgeous, PARTY.
But that said, I agree that I don't think it should be faithful to the letter (as the TV movie version proves whhere they use much of the actual dialogue). Still, if you're not going to be faithful to the tone as well, why not just call it Gatsby's World or something?
Posted: 5/25/12 at 11:34pm
God YES. This is why even if , in addition to this film, Django Unchained is a misfire seeing him as a unhinged baddy is going to be satisfying. He needs to have some fun once in a while instead of looking so serious and having Oscar-bait roles. Hopefully working with Baz again reinvigorated him as he has signed up for another Scorsese flick which reads as comfort zone for both of them.
Updated On: 5/26/12 at 11:34 PM
Posted: 5/25/12 at 11:45pm
I wish more of them were like Meryl Streep, who always seems to be doing films for the sheer joy she gets from doing them.
Posted: 5/25/12 at 11:58pm
Posted: 5/26/12 at 5:45am
Posted: 5/26/12 at 9:34am
Posted: 5/27/12 at 3:30am
Posted: 5/27/12 at 11:58am
>>> I've enjoyed Baz Luhrmanns films, but I would rather have seen him use 'Strictly Ballroom' as his precedent, rather than 'Moulin Rouge'.
Totally agree. The story was narrated by Nick, and Nick was not into the parties. He was an outsider to the world of the moneyed East coasters. He didn't dive into that world, but trod carefully around it.
Baz's films have gone down since Strictly Ballroom, even as his budgets and lavish production designs (by his wife, Catherine Martin) have gone up.
I'm reserving final judgement until seeing the film, but my fear is that Baz has blindly bought into the party scene like Gatsby. Gatsby threw those parties and thought everyone was his friend. In the end, we discover that Gatsby had no friends.
Updated On: 5/27/12 at 11:58 AM
Posted: 5/27/12 at 12:02pm
Please! La Streep is the biggest Oscar whore of them all.
Vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra
Salve, Salve Regina
Ad te clamamus exsules filii Eva
Ad te suspiramus, gementes et flentes
O clemens O pia
Posted: 5/27/12 at 12:09pm
Posted: 5/27/12 at 12:23pm
Thoughts?
Posted: 5/27/12 at 12:49pm
OK. Let's just--for kicks and giggles on this holiday weekend--go ahead and stipulate to the truth of that statement. Assuming we even know what an "Oscar Whore" is. For the purposes of this discussion, I'll hazard a guess that it is an actor who selects roles and gears performances with the sole intention of garnering Oscar nominations.
As awards are the coin of the Hollywood realm, and an Oscar can launch a career, why would one use the pejorative term 'whore' to criticize a performer who wants one?
And simply wanting an Oscar nomination doesn't get you one. Talent really helps. We can all think of nominees--and winners--that we consider 'flukes' or the result of complex or unusual competition. But, please: seventeen Oscar nominations and twenty-six Golden Globe nominations?? I would have thought the 'flash in the pan' or 'fluke' discussion might be over at this point.
"Oscar Whore"? I don't know the woman--I have no insight as to her motives with regard to the career decisions she has made. But if she is, she's lucky that she's also one of the most talented actors in the history of film. I bet that helps.
Updated On: 5/27/12 at 12:49 PM
Posted: 5/27/12 at 4:07pm
Well Alan Ladd looked the part. I assume you mean the Clayton film from the 70s (the whole Ladd version is on youtube, and isn't very good--and I guess there was a now lost silent version too, which slightly changes the myth of the book being a huge flop when it came out). I don't think it deserves its reputation for being completely awful--Mia, as much as I love her is not very good, but otherwise I find it well acted. But it's VERY dull--something I assume this film will work its hardest not to be.
Posted: 8/6/12 at 6:44pm
CNN link
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
BroadwayWorld TV