A Spoiler- Filled Review of The Not So Great, Great Gatsby Film

I’m just going to be really personal on this review because I have never loved any book as much as I love The Great Gatsby. The book is a symbol of the American Dream, although I am not American. Jay Gatsby is a constant reminder to be aware and not let that dream go out of my grasp. Nick Carraway has been vital to my personal emotional development. Needless to say, since the first time I heard about another Gatsby movie, I have been having withdrawal syndrome.

It has been a known disappointment preemption to not expect too much from a movie based on the classic novel, especially a novel that is considered by many one of the most beautifully written books of all time. F. Scott Fitzgerald writes the grandest sequences of words that eloquently elaborate emotions and desires. And to be fair to Baz Lurhmann, he seemed to have been aiming to be the F. Scott Fitzgerald of films. It is the only good excuse I can find for this somewhat unsatisfactory film.

Let’s discuss the positive points of this movie first. Nick Carraway narrates the story and writes the book, giving Fitzgerald’s own voice to be heard, or in Nick’s word’s, “he is within but he is without”. Unlike previous adaptations, that relied on the script being entirely taken from the book, Luhrmann’s version bridges Nick Carraway and F. Scott Fitzgerald’s almost similar persona. Surprisingly, Tobey Maguire proves to be a better actor than Leonardo Di Caprio, or the role fits him better. Carey Mulligan is also stunning and frustrating as Daisy Buchanan. And probably the whole redeeming factor of the film is the ending, where Nick walks on the dock, imagining seeing Gatsby by its end trying to grasp the symbolic green light while the mist tries to hide it from him, and the last lines from the book literally floats on, it is perfectly what I have imagined the last part of the book would be.

One of the low points of the film is probably the whole exaggeration of the imagery that book subtlety conveys. Luhrmann tries hard to emphasize elements thus making the whole thing saturated and scattered with representations of what Gatsby has stood for and his underlying search for Daisy’s love. He told so little by telling too much. Di Caprio’s interpretation of Gatsby is less mysterious than what he seemed to be. The movie does not give the audience a peek at the other side of Gatsby, they focus too much on him being a grand gentleman, and almost no dubious activities are hinted. At some scenes where he’s being charming, he transforms into Leonardo di Caprio circa 1997, my childhood crush. The ending where Gatsby dies in the pool and he muttered Daisy’s name is probably the cheesiest scene I have seen in movies. The script does not help at all. Being a beautifully written novel, although they could not outwrite Fitzgerald, they could have at least thrown in words worthy of The Great Gatsby. The writers also overkilled the expression “old sport”. Unexpectedly, the music turns out to be less of a factor for such a story set in a period defined by music.

Overall, The Great Gatsby is visually grand compared to previous films. It is completely different from the book yet you have to read the book to fully understand the whole lavish parties, Gatsby’s love for Daisy and Nick being a real bro thing. We remember the last Gatsby movie we saw as the version that is truest to the book; we will remember this one as the most colorful one.
6/10: For Tobey Maguire.

Bonus Anecdote:
I was running five minutes late for the screening, the cashier hurriedly gave me my pass and my receipt, I walked into the cinema, five minutes after, I saw the opening scene of Star Trek Into Darkness which I watched 24 hours ago. Imagine my frustration. Fortunately, the manager was kind enough to trust my “I watched this last night! I called you guys earlier so that I can catch this screening and now your cashier gave me the wrong ticket” alibi. I love The Great Gatsby like Gatsby loves Daisy.

Book vs Film

Hollywood continues to recycle ideas, 2012 has been a year of movies that aren’t in themselves original, most of them are based from comic books, memoirs and novels. How the movie makers lost their creative abilities to create a movie from a screenplay entirely created from scratch is inside the confines of the cage commercialism has imposed on films.

Basking on the trend is the young adult novel, Perks of Being a Wallflower. Written by Steven Chobsky, in 1994, Perks has reached an almost cult status to young adults of the nineties. It chronicles the friendship young Charlie has created with two seniors. The novel is written in a series of letters sent by Charlie about his family and his friends to an unknown friend, thus making the readers feel that they are the friend the protagonist is writing too. In a sense it is a participatory way of reading a novel. It’s like Catcher in the Rye written like the Diary of A Girl.

To the delight of young adult novel fans, the novel has made the genre a little more open to acceptance of people. Young adult novels has been viewed as insensible and nothing but glorification of teen rebellion. And much to the dismay of the fans who loved the book, Warner Bros has made it in into a film threatening the sacred story to be pushed on the brink of selling out.

The film starred Logan Lerman. It’s hard to look at the boy without remembering the toddler that once was Drew Barrymore’s baby in Riding in Cars with Boys. Logan Lerman wasnt given more acting job beyond that, being Percy Jackson means making cute faces at the camera and swaying stuff and hanging on ropes. But with Perks of Being a Wallflower he actually has to show emotions. And emotions he portrayed were almost real. His curiosity and cluelessness were genuine. Charlie in the book, is all questions, he found the answer in the end but barely the essence of those answers meanwhile the Charlie in the film, his discovery of himself has depth. In the end the audience felt infinite along with him. Still, the book is better than the movie, the honesty of the book wins over the fancy cinematography and the grand orchestration of The Smiths song on the film. All the same, you’ll thank both because it gave you the opportunity to once again peek at the beautifully tragic series of moments that was your teenage years.

Another young adult novel that has moved from the pages to the screen is Haruki Murakami’s Norwegian Wood. Provided that it is based from Japanese literature it has volumes of sadness hundred folds of its pages. It is a story of death, love found in death, friendship broken by that love and love that ended with death. Solve the barely bearable emotional equation. Colored by Murakami’s use of music in his works, the novel is almost based from one line of a Beatles song of the same title, “I once had a girl or shall I say she once had me.” While the pages themselves bleed with loss, longing and love, the literary depiction of this young love still could be considered beautiful as the song’s first five notes.

Norwegian Wood will make seventies babies giddy, nostalgic and melancholic at the same time. The film adaptation executed the idealism on a surface where the audience can easily transcend it. Whereas Murakami’s book is covered with symbolism veiled in the protagonists interest in music, literature and the mundane. For someone who listens to The Beatles, Watanabe is Jude, Naoko is Eleonor Rigby and Midori is Penny Lane. The relation is almost a giveaway. The film stretched the story and dragged it ti an end where the emotions invested by the viewer are not wasted, as oppose to the book.

In the end every book you’ve read is better than it’s film adaptation. Firstly, after reading or while reading, you create your own little film inside your head and chances are it sticks there in your subconscious as the ideal cinematic counterpart of the book, thus making other version a lesser form. And secondly, Hollywood sucks with film adaptations. Don’t say “why read the book when I can watch it, a year or so after” because chances are you are missing one half of the whole point of the story. So if you have time, go curl up with a good book, sip a cup of coffee while doing it, you can even play a John Williams’ score to it. And yes, it will make you an authority in dissing the movies.

What’s on a Misfit’s Weekend Watch List?

Another long weekend is upon us and what other better thing to do than curl up on your bed, watch movies while guiltily eating bars and bars of chocolates? I’m having another Bridgett Jones moment, and I need cinematic intervention.

 

I have been hooked to this British TV series “Misfits” for the past weeks. It is my own unique way of dealing with emotions I can’t handle. The characters are way interesting and when I looked up for the casts on the internet, they are way interesting than the characters they play. And so because of my endless pursuit of movie nerdiness I feel I must watch the casts other works.

Joe Gilgun

 

For a guy who’s been through emotional struggle (in real life) it looks pretty easy for him to play Rudy Wade whose power is having another self, splitting off of his chest every time his conscience is bugging him off. Well, in fact his other self is actually his conscience.

This is England
This is England 86 (TV Spinoff)
This is England 88 (TV Spinoff)

“A story about a troubled boy growing up in England, set in 1983. He comes across a few skinheads on his way home from school, after a fight. They become his new best friends even like family. Based on experiences of director Shane Meadows. “

Lockout

“A man wrongly convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage against the U.S. is offered his freedom if he can rescue the president’s daughter from an outer space prison taken over by violent inmates.”

Also, I have a secret love for Luc Besson movies.

Matthew McNulty

 

He plays a love-lorn power dealer, Seth.  His character is intriguing because he keeps you guessing what his motives are.  Is he a bad guy or a good guy?  In real life though, he is a really good-looking guy. Also, his neck tattoo is very sexy, I almost thought that it is part of his power.

Little Ashes

“In 1922, Madrid is wavering on the edge of change as traditional values are challenged by the dangerous new influences of Jazz, Freud and the avant-garde. Salvador Dali arrives at the university; 18 years old and determined to become a great artist. His bizarre blend of shyness and rampant exhibitionism attracts the attention of two of the university’s social elite – Federico Garcia Lorca and Luis Bunel. Salvador is absorbed into their youthfully decadent group and for a time Salvador, Luis and Federico become a formidable trio, the most ultra-modern group in Madrid. However as time passes, Salvador feels and increasingly strong pull towards the charismatic Federico – who is himself oblivious of the attentions he is getting from his beautiful writer friend, Magdalena. In the face of his friends’ preoccupations – and Federico’s growing renown as a poet – Luis sets off for Paris in search of his own artistic success.”

As a pretentious art fan, it is a shame I havent watched this movie yet.

Control

“A profile of Ian Curtis, the enigmatic singer of Joy Division whose personal, professional, and romantic troubles led him to commit suicide at the age of 23.”

Ian Curtis’s poignant life is made even more poignant by Sm Riley’s accurate depiction. I need to mention that I love Joy Division.

Robert Sheehan

 

Alright, I have a huge crush on this guys charming Irish accent , his messy brown curls and his goofy sense of humor. Although I can’t tell if it’s his character Nathan Young or his real self that I’m crushing on. Robert Sheehan looks more like a European Jay Baruchel. And he is just fun to look at. Sorry, my inner fan girl can’t be restrained.

Killing Bono

“Two brothers attempt to become global rock stars but can only look on as old school friends U2 become the biggest band in the world. “

If I have to draw a pie chart of movies that I love, films with music references will surely take up half of the chart.

Cherry Bomb

“Cherry Bomb follows teenagers Luke, Malachy, and Michelle as they embark on a wild weekend of drink, drugs, shop-lifting and stealing cars. But what starts out as a game turns deadly serious when the three discover that they can’t get off the wild ride they’ve set in motion.”

Rupert Grint and Robert Sheehan in one film, too much adorkableness.

Iwan Rheon

 

He made his character Simon Bellamy appear as if it was written for him. Or maybe it was, I did not really research it. His big blue eyes and deep baritone voice makes him more interesting as Iwan than as Simon.  And the fact that he was in Game of Thrones makes him even more awesome.

Wild Bill

“Out on parole after 8 years inside Bill Hayward returns home to find his now 11 and 15-year-old sons abandoned by their mother and fending for themselves. Unwilling to play Dad, an uncaring Bill is determined to move on. Although Dean the older boy has found a job and is doing his best to be a father to his younger brother Jimmy, the arrival of Bill has brought them to the attention of social services. With the danger of being put into care looming, Dean forces his feckless Dad to stay by threatening to grass him up for dealing. If there’s one thing Bill doesn’t want its to go back to prison. He reluctantly agrees to stay for a week o help fool social services that the boys are being cared for. Having never really grown up himself Bill quickly connects with Jimmy and through this new bond starts to realize what he’s been missing. He has a family, a place in the world.”

All these films and maybe more for the Labor Day weekend.  I might spend a night at the beach after I’m done with this, or maybe watch a gig, or maybe just stare at cat photos online. Who knows?

Have a great weekend, you.