When reviewing a book-to-movie adaptation, the best thing to do is to ignore the books existence entirely and treat the movie as a separate entity. This way, the movie can work on it’s own merits, and it’s successes and failures can be properly examined without the influence of its literary source.
Whether or not I compare “The GReat Gatsby” to the book or not is inconsequential; the undeniable truth is the film fails to live up to the promise it’s very basic premise suggest. This whole exercise winds up being so filled with plot, parties and people that instead of feeling exhilarated, you’re more likely to be exhausted.
The story is set in 1922. Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) moves into West Egg, hoping to become a big name on Wall Street. Instead, he finds himself in the middle of a love triangle involving his cousin Daisy (Carey Mulligan) and his rich neighbor, Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio). The love affair soon winds up causing mayhem and trouble, the kind that will show who Gatsby truly is, and to what lengths he will go to to protect the love of his life.
Director Baz Luhrmann reminds me of the modern day George Lucas, consistently utilizing technology over actual story. Like Lucas, he has some superb visuals in here, but the script he’s working with is a mess (Luhrmann and Craig Pearce wrote the flick). No amount of superbly staged party sequences can make up for what a dreary bore the movie is. The movie attempts to adapt the books many dialogue exchanges to the screen, resulting in moments that make one feel like time itself has come to a halt. Again, when one disregards the books existence, these scenes of constant conversations feel pointless and uncomfortable.
Then of course, there are the party sequences; juxtaposing the 1920’s era with a fury of activity that calls to mind more Pitbull music than the Roaring 20’s. While the dazzling soundtrack make it a feast for the ears (the movies main tune, Lana Del Rey’s “Young And Beautiful”, will be played at wedding’s for decades to come), the visuals accompanying such music and Gatsby’s parties are more likely to overwhelm than astound.
Thanks to Luhrmann’s habit of holding a shot for barely an entire second, the movie begins to resemble not a captivating drama, but something Michael Bay would’ve rejected for being too all over the place. The worst part about all of this is the waste of some fine actors, especially Joel Edgerton, who secures his place as one of the best actors working today in the role of Tom Buchanan; delivering every line marvelously and having genuine presence in the movie (his amazing acting should be no surprise to people like me who saw him in “Warrior” and “Zero Dark Thirty”). Leonardo DiCaprio is also great as Gatsby, really selling his characters ambitions and ideals through every sentence and every facial expression. Tobey Maguire makes a great Nick Carraway, reinforcing what an underrated actor he is through every one of his scenes.
Thankfully, this movie finally utilizes all of these great actors towards the end of the film, which is where all the potential of both plot and actors is finally realized. Here, all that visual splendor is finally pushed aside for some wonderful character moments that show just how terrible most of “Gatsby” truly is. What it could’ve been makes the whole experience almost heartbreaking. To get to feel that truly saddening pain of what might have been, one has to survive the first two hours of the film, which drag on for what feels like an eternity. More than even a proper screenwriter, Luhrmann needs an editor.
At least the 3D is well used; the only area, beside the music, where the party scenes excel is in the third dimension, with the 3D lending such moments an extra dash of realism and depth. It’s not perfect, but the 3D here is still something interesting to experience, something that cannot be said for the film on a whole.
I once tried to bake this cake for a school project; a simple task to be sure, but it quickly went south. I had all the ingredients right in front of me, but it wound up being a mostly burnt cake that was far from ready for human consumption. “The Great Gatsby” is like that cake; the ingredients are there, and there are some bits and pieces that work, but it mainly just doesn’t come together like it should have. Unlike that cake, “Gatsby” has some terrific music and one of the best casts of the summer, but the film still falls short. A waste of a time period that has so much dramatic and cinematic possibilities, “The Great Gatsby” winds up wasting all of that potential for mediocrity, with the films cast, music and 3D being the only positive qualities that save it from being truly atrocious.
The Critc Critic • May 27, 2013 at 10:51 am
So was Transformers, keep that in mind.
The Critic Critic • May 16, 2013 at 8:46 am
What more would you expect from Baz Luhrmann, a guy too lazy to write an original script for a Romeo and Juliet adaptation?
Sall • May 24, 2013 at 10:23 am
I don’t believe that he was “too lazy” to write the script. Even if he was, it seemed to work as “Romeo+Juliet” was critically and commercially successful.
Anon • May 15, 2013 at 1:03 pm
It was perfect
The Critic Critic • May 16, 2013 at 2:17 pm
Are you referring to the film, is somebody misinterpreting my comment as a criticism AGAIN? Never mind, since I suppose you’re referring to the film, but I just want to ask why. I haven’t seen it, so I’m not disagreeing with you, but I just want some people these days to defend their opinions(which is why Doug is the only critic on this site that doesn’t publish rough drafts to the site). It annoys me when someone says something like Battleship is good, I ask why, and they say “Just because it’s a good movie.”.
Speaking of which, Doug, the only problems I’ve been noticing with your reviews as of late are a handful of grammatical errors(mostly this is apostrophes being in the wrong place and absent where they belong).