The Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby

Posted on May 9, 2013 at 6:00 pm

Kids, here’s a hint: Don’t think you can pass a sophomore English exam on F. Scott Fitzgerald’s jazz age classic and high school reading list perennial by watching this movie.  While this version of the story of a man who changes everything about his life so that he can win back the woman he loves hits the Cliff’s notes highlights, spending more time on the green light on the dock than Gatsby and on the eyeglass billboard than Nick Carraway, co-writer and director Baz Luhrmann misses the forest for the trees.   His trees are fun to look at, though.  

Copyright Village Roadshow 2012

It goes off the rails from the very first moment, when it turns out that narrator Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) is telling the story in a snow-covered sanitarium, presumably because the events he is about to disclose are so traumatic they have caused him to have a breakdown.  Or, perhaps this is Luhrmann’s way of eliding Carraway with Fitzgerald himself, though there is no indication that Fitzgerald wrote this book as therapy.

The more significant violation, though, comes from the mangling of the book’s famous opening lines.  Like the book, the movie begins with Carraway telling us that his father warned him not to judge people.  But it leaves out the most important part — the reason why. “In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice that I’ve been turning over in my mind ever since. ‘Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone,’ he told me,‘just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.’”  This is crucial for understanding the way Nick looks at Gatsby and his rival, Tom Buchanan.  But Luhrmann inexplicably does not think it is worth including.

Perhaps it is because he is so eager to get to what matters to him, the pageantry.  He is the genre/mash-up “Moulin Rouge” guy whose motto seems to be “more is still not enough, even with glitter on it.  And firecrackers.  And 3D.  And Jay-Z.”

The story takes place in 1922.  Nick is a WWI veteran who has literary tendencies but is working at a low-level job “in bonds” on Wall Street.  He is living in a small cottage in the Hamptons, next door to a vast mansion owned by a mysterious man named Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio), who gives fabulously decadent parties but is seldom seen.   They are across the bay from the old-money side, where Nick’s cousin Daisy (Carey Mulligan) lives with her wealthy, upper class, polo-playing brute of a husband, Tom Buchanan (Joel Edgerton).  He is having an affair with Myrtle (Isla Fisher), the restless wife of the struggling owner of a garage.

It turns out that Daisy and Gatsby knew each other five years earlier, when he was in the military and before she was married to Tom.   But “rich girls don’t marry poor boys.”  Gatsby has changed everything to change himself into the man Daisy could have married.  He lives across from her home so he can look toward her (and the green light on her dock).  He hopes that his parties will lure her to his home.  When he discovers that his neighbor is her relation, he goes to great lengths to assure Nick that he is trustworthy and to persuade Nick to invite him to tea with Daisy, so he can see her again.  He is convinced that they can erase the past and go on together as though five years that included her marriage and child never happened.  Nick admires Gatsby for his ability to hope.  And in Lurhmann’s version, that is a quality that more than makes up for the compromises and selfishness of Gatsby’s single-minded quest.

Of course, thoughtful consideration of issues like those is not the purpose of this film.  It is a confetti gun of a movie, all sensation and senseless mash-up.  The party scenes and period details are gorgeous for the sake of gorgeousness, with no sense of perspective or irony.  Fitzgerald, who had a love-hate relationship with wealth and status, had some ambivalence in his descriptions of the characters luxuries, but in general Lurhmann’s portrayal of the negligent opulence of the old money Buchanans and gauche display of the new money Gatsby is somewhere between awe and envy.  The Jay-Z-produced soundtrack is not as anacronistically intrusive as one might fear, only because the sensory overload barely allows it to register.  But it is thin compared to the book.  Fitzgerald’s carefully chosen songs and the lyrics of the era that he included are far more evocative and illuminating as words on a page than all of the thump thump thumping  of the music we hear.

Luhrmann may be trying to make some point with the marginalization of African-American characters, relegated to playing music, dancing, and looking on at what the white folks are doing from tenements.  But it is distracting and unsettling to see them treated as just another set of props.   But then, the white characters are not much more than props, either, with a director more interested in posing them and moving the camera than in any kind of performance.  Daisy’s friend Jordan (Elizabeth Debicki), impossibly long and thin, is like a Giacometti sculpture towering above mere mortals.  DiCaprio has some affecting moments, but seems too old and too sleekly comfortable for the role.

After at least five unsuccessful attempts to make this novel into a movie, it may be time to declare it unfilmable.  There is no cinematic equivalent to Fitzgerald’s voice.  This is not “The Great Gatsby.”  It’s an often-visually pleasing kaleidoscopic music video with a 3D shower of shirts.

Parents should know that the movie features violence including murder, suicide, a fatal traffic accident, and domestic abuse, also drinking and drunkenness, pills, smoking, sexual situations that are explicit for a PG-13, and brief strong language including racist and anti-Semitic epithets.

Family discussion:  What do the green light and the billboard symbolize?  Why does Nick say that Gatsby is hopeful?

If you like this, try: the book by F. Scott Fitzgerald and compare this to the other versions, including the 1974 Robert Redford film, the Mira Sorvino miniseries, and the updated “G”

Related Tags:

 

3D Based on a book Drama Remake Romance

A Remake of “Guys and Dolls” with Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Channing Tatum?

Posted on April 24, 2013 at 10:12 pm

New York Magazine’s Vulture blog says that a remake of the Frank Loesser classic musical “Guys and Dolls,” based on the stories of small-time gamblers and crooks by Damon Runyon.  The original movie starred Marlon Brando, Frank Sinatra, Jean Simmons, and, from the Broadway cast, Vivian Blaine and Stubby Kaye.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m0yN3j7fLU

It’s a delightful movie, but Brando and Simmons were not known for their singing and dancing, and Goldwyn was not the musical powerhouse of rival MGM.  I’d love to see another movie version.  Like Tatum and Gordon-Levitt, they’re too young for the roles, but I’d love to see Anna Kendrick as Adelaide and Amy Adams or Anne Hathaway as Sarah Brown.  Three of my favorite songs from the play were omitted from the movie — I hope if they do a remake they will include “Bushel and a Peck,” “More I Cannot Wish You” and “Marry the Man Today.”  Here are Lauren Graham and Kate Jennings from the recent Broadway revival.

And wouldn’t it be nice to have Sir Paul show up to sing this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HThERfdA1BA
Related Tags:

 

Musical Remake

My Favorite Versions of “A Christmas Carol”

Posted on December 19, 2012 at 8:00 am

My favorite Christmas story is “A Christmas Carol” by Charles Dickens and I enjoy as many versions as possible every year.  I love it in just about any of its movie incarnations. “Bah, humbugs” have been muttered by Scrooges played by top-notch dramatic actors like George C. Scott and Albert Finney, former Miss America Vanessa Williams, former Fonzie Henry Winkler, former Ace Ventura Jim Carrey, and former “Saturday Night Live” star Bill Murray. I love them all. I’ve already listened to the Tim Curry and Jim Dale audio versions available on Audible.com, both delightful.  And I have the book, of course, with wonderful illustrations by Ronald Searle.

Here are my very favorite versions on film and I try to watch each of them every year.

5. “Mickey’s Christmas Carol” Who better to play Scrooge than his namesake Scrooge McDuck? And who better for the part of the unquenchable Bob Cratchit than Mickey Mouse? This compilation DVD includes other Christmas goodies “The Small One” and “Pluto’s Christmas Tree.”

4. “The Muppet Christmas Carol” has the distinguished actor Michael Caine as Scrooge and the equally distinguished Kermit the Frog as Bob Cratchit. Special mention of A Sesame Street Christmas Carol as well.

3. “Mr. Magoo’s Christmas Carol” The voice talent is outstanding, with Broadway star Jack Cassidy (father of teen idols David and Shaun) as Bob Cratchit and of course Jim Backus as Mr. Magoo, in this version an actor playing the part of Scrooge. The tuneful songs were written by Bob Merrill and Jule Styne, who later went on to write “Funny Girl.” (The legend is that their song “People” was originally written for this movie.)

2. “A Christmas Carol” This MGM classic features the top stars of the 1930’s. Watch for future “Lassie” star June Lockhart as one of the Cratchit children — her real-life father Gene Lockhart played Bob. (He also appears in another Christmas classic, as the judge inMiracle on 34th Street.)  Reginald Owen plays Scrooge and this one has my favorite Fred, Barry MacKay.  I love Dickens’ description of Fred’s laugh:  “If you should happen, by any unlikely chance, to know a man more blest in a laugh than Scrooge’s nephew, all I can say is, I should like to know him too. Introduce him to me, and I’ll cultivate his acquaintance.”

1. “A Christmas Carol” This is the all-time best, with the inimitable Alistair Sim as Scrooge. There has never been a more embittered miser or a more jubilent Christmas morning rebirth. When he orders that turkey for the Cratchits and walks into his nephew’s celebration at the end, everything Dickens hoped for from his story is brought to life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWdJ1EXf5zo
Related Tags:

 

Based on a book Classic For the Whole Family Holidays Lists Movie Mom’s Top Picks for Families Remake

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Posted on December 13, 2012 at 6:00 pm

B
Lowest Recommended Age: Middle School
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for extended sequences of intense fantasy action violence, and frightening images
Profanity: Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs: Drinking, smoking
Violence/ Scariness: Extended fantasy violence and peril with swords and arrows, characters injured and killed, scary monsters
Diversity Issues: Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters: December 14, 2012
Date Released to DVD: November 4, 2013
Amazon.com ASIN: B00E8S2JZ4

As the second in the Hobbit trilogy is about to be released, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Extended Edition).  Director Peter Jackson returns to J.R.R. Tolkien’s Middle Earth for this “Lord of the Rings” prequel, the adventure of young Bilbo Baggins, the hobbit we meet in the LoTR trilogy as the middle-aged uncle of the heroic Frodo.  We see many familiar faces, especially Ian McKellan as the wizard Gandalf, the sepulchral Christopher Lee as Saruman, Cate Blanchett as the ethereal Galandriel, Hugo Weaving as the regally gracious Elrond, and Andy Serkis plus CGI as Gollum, and the now-familiar but still marvelously eye-filling New Zealand locations.What is most different here is that Jackson has doubled the frames-per-second for a new hyper-clarity.  The 24 frames per second standard that has been in effect since the beginning of the sound era has been upped to 48, giving the film a depth of detail that is so fresh it can be a little unsettling.  We subconsciously associate the quality of light and focus with the video used for news programs and lower-budget sitcoms (think of the difference between the indoor and outdoor scenes in the old “Monty Python” episodes), so it can take a while to get used to it in a richly imagined fantasy, especially when close-ups reveal the pores of a character’s skin like a magnifying mirror at a department store makeup counter and the quality of light seems chillier and more sterile.  We get so much visual information that it takes a while to re-calibrate our ability to separate the meaningful from the superfluous.

It does not help that Jackson himself seems to miss the forest of the story for the literal trees.  Blowing out the shortest and most accessible of the books to a projected trilogy of nearly nine hours suggests that Jackson has fallen so in love with the project that he has lost touch with what it feels like not to be completely obsessed with it.  Of course, he is enabled by the intensity of the fans, who are famously dedicated to every leaf, twig, and Elvish declension.  But he seems to have lost track of the thread of the story and dulled his sense of how to communicate with those who are not as deeply involved with the story as he is. He glosses over the important discussion of Bilbo’s two competing heritages, one open to adventure, one devoted to home and hearth, which makes it hard to understand why he changes his mind about accepting Gandalf’s challenge.  Since it is a prequel, we are all familiar with the destructive power of the One Ring to Rule Them All, which makes it confusing when we see it 60 years earlier as a simple and benign invisibility ring.  Meanwhile, it takes all of 40 minutes before Bilbo leaves his house as what should have been a 10-minute scene about the unexpected arrival of a bunch of rowdy dwarves is expanded to include two different musical numbers.  And yet, it still does not give us enough of a sense of who the individual dwarves are.

The action scenes are filled with vitality and dynamically staged, but the film assumes a commitment and understanding on our part that it has not earned.  In a story about a quest of honor, that is an unexpected disappointment.

Parents should know that this film includes many battle sequences and scenes of peril, scary monsters, characters injured and killed, some disturbing images, smoking, drinking, and some potty humor.

Family discussion:  Why did Bilbo decide to join the adventure?  Why did Gandalf pick him?  Why didn’t Gandalf use his powers to help the dwarves sooner?

If you like this, try:  The book by J.R.R. Tolkien and the “Lord of the Rings” films

Related Tags:

 

3D Action/Adventure Based on a book DVD/Blu-Ray Pick of the Week Epic/Historical Fantasy Remake Series/Sequel

Red Dawn

Posted on November 20, 2012 at 5:58 pm

There was much to improve in the original version of “Red Dawn,” a simple-minded fantasy film about a communist invasion of small town America: the plot, which asked us to believe that Cuban and Soviet invaders would focus their attention on subduing the teenage population of a town with no military significance; the dialogue, which was hilariously wooden; the special effects (the bad guys tracked our heroes using a locator that appears to have been borrowed from a 1930s Flash Gordon serial); the acting (despite a cast of future stars such as Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen, the original “Red Dawn” left the actors little to do except shoot guns and emote in their mountain hideouts); the production values (unseen artillery and aircraft shelled a lone tank in the middle of a vacant field with what appeared to be firecrackers). In fact, everything about the original “Red Dawn” had a childlike simplicity that made it endearing to audiences.

The plot of the new “Red Dawn” mimics the original in most respects.  Members of the Wolverines, a high school football team, refuse to surrender to or collaborate with the invaders (this time from Asia) the way many of their disappointing parents do. They take to the hills, learn to fight and inspire a resistance movement.  Along the way they learn lessons about loyalty, patriotism, and the price of the freedoms we all hold dear.  Older brother Jed Eckert is played by Chris Hemsworth (Thor from “The Avengers”) while younger brother Matty Eckert is played by Josh Peck. The obligatory girlfriend who looks hot in guerrilla garb is played by Adrianne Palicki.

MGM looked at the original formula and decided that if it was going to upgrade just one ingredient, it would be the quality of the explosions.  No firecrackers here, the new and improved “Red Dawn” has serious explosions and gunfire.  A residential neighborhood is blown up with high definition digital effects.  First time director Dan Bradley was previously a stunt coordinator and it shows.  We see house to house gunfights that look and sound authentic.  The new version uses realistic blood, rather than the Heinz ketchup favored by the producers of the original.

The problem is, this change in the formula disrupts the equilibrium that gave the original its charm.  Every element of the original was equally unpersuasive.  By making bullets more persuasive, Bradley only highlights the dumbnicity of the rest.

Worse, the new Red Dawn is a less kind movie.  Along with the more realistic violence, there is more drinking and profanity.  Unfortunately, the dialogue that is supposed to glue these elements together remains as insubstantial as the dialogue in the cartoonish original.  (Says the young guerrilla leader: “We have to make it too hard and too difficult for them.”)  One other change — the Soviet Union no longer being available as invaders, this film substituted the Chinese when it was shot a few years ago until the distributors who ended up with it after the first group ran out of money figured out that Chinese people constitute a very big audience for films, preferably ones that don’t make them the bad guys.  So, the Chinese invaders were digitally altered to make them North Korean.

The new “Red Dawn” is slicker than the original but it lacks the heart that was the only redeeming feature of the first version.  It is a meaner production, and probably not worth your time unless you go for the explosions, which are pretty good.

Parents should know that this film has extensive and sometimes graphic images of battle with guns and explosions, fighting, with characters injured and killed, and very strong language.

Family discussion: Why did some parents instruct their children to cooperate with the invaders? What made some people in the town choose to resist?  What would be the hardest thing for you about fighting the invaders?  How were the Wolverines like our founding fathers?

If you like this, try: the original 1984 version starring Patrick Swayze

Related Tags:

 

Action/Adventure Remake War
THE MOVIE MOM® is a registered trademark of Nell Minow. Use of the mark without express consent from Nell Minow constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation of federal and state laws. All material © Nell Minow 1995-2024, all rights reserved, and no use or republication is permitted without explicit permission. This site hosts Nell Minow’s Movie Mom® archive, with material that originally appeared on Yahoo! Movies, Beliefnet, and other sources. Much of her new material can be found at Rogerebert.com, Huffington Post, and WheretoWatch. Her books include The Movie Mom’s Guide to Family Movies and 101 Must-See Movie Moments, and she can be heard each week on radio stations across the country.

Website Designed by Max LaZebnik