I was
genuinely excited when I heard this film was being made. Especially since it
was starring Leonardo Di Caprio AND Tobey Maguire… They are two of my favourite
actors and The Great Gatsby is one of my favourite books. I was a little unsure
of what I thought of Baz Lhurman directing it…
I mean don’t get me wrong, Moulin Rouge (the film he is the most
remembered for as far as I can see) was beautiful but… Well it that was it
really. It was beautiful. A film needs to be beautiful but in an ideal world it
needs to have a bit more meat than that on its bones. And I have to say, the
film (The Great Gatsby) has been lambasted quite badly by the critics, in some circles at least. I
was eager to see what it was about – and have decidedly been stricken by the
film – but I can’t say I blame the critics either…
Ok for
those of you who aren’t big into literature, a brief summary. Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) is a budding
author who has left his artistic aspirations to one side to sell bonds on Wall
street. It is the 1920’s, the golden age of Wall Street and Nick is quickly
swept up into a world of fast living and boozey parties (all this despite
Prohibition of course). Nick’s head is turned by the glamour and glory that
assails him for all sides but he is unaware – at least at first – that the true
“place to be” in New York of the 1920’s is on his very doorstep. His neighbour,
an elusive man called James Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio) who has seemingly
never-ending financial means that he uses to throw the most spectacular parties
New York has ever seen, week after week. Nick is drawn into these parties… But
he is treated to something a little more than the usual guests: the confidences
of Gatsby himself… Because although it may seem to the untrained eye that
Gatsby is simply living a carefree and privileged life the way so many are, but
in actual fact, Gatsby is a man with a plan…
Now first
up: There is a reason this film was nominated for Oscars for Costume and
Production Design. It is hands down one of the most beautiful films I have seen
in a very, very, VERY long time. Now
don’t tut or dismiss this as “make-up” because it really isn’t as simple as all
that. Gatsby’s whole mentality and whole struggle with society is based on that
beautiful exterior. The fanfare, the trappings and, according to Tom Buchanan
(the husband of the ill-fated Daisy)
marks him out clearly as a “nouveau riche”. The whole point is that, at
the end of the day, Gatsby is “different” from all his party guests and all
those stunning trappings are shams. Tom Buchanan sees this as a bad thing – the
trappings hide a simple bootlegger and a crass man according to him… We
however, through the eyes of Nick Carraway and Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan)
see that while there is indeed, a different Gatsby under the trappings and
fanfare – it is not as simple a matter as Tom paints it…
Or at least
we should. I hate to say this, I really do. But this particular film does a
STUNNING rendition of what Gatsby’s trappings looked like… And gets tangled up
in them. I could plainly see the efforts to put that depth across but it’s just
not working. What annoyed me the most about the whole thing was the way he got
Nick Carraway to narrate over plot points that are made supremely clear through
the actor’s performances. I mean I know that modern Hollywood does, from time
to time, feel the need to take a neon sign and point at what we are “meant to
be feeling” but the way Lhurman does it almost harks back to the “chorus” in
Greek tragedies of yore. I fully realise that this is, in the end, entertainment
and we don’t necessarily want the film to pose us mental puzzles that we work
out over 3 or 4 viewings but come on… Leave something to the audience. I mean
heck, leave something to the actors! Between the pomp and circumstance and the
rather forced narration, in the 2 hours and 20 minutes of film there is
surprisingly little room left to show the depth of character Gatsby truly
possessed. I mean ok, we are shown clips
from his childhood where he is shown (literally) reaching for the stars; a cute
if rather stock image, but is it really sufficient proof he had vision and
ambition? It’s the same problem – a beautiful picture: a blond blue eyes
scallywag reaching up into a beautiful starry sky – but it doesn’t really tell
the story does it? I feel it happens to a lot of key scenes in the film. In so
many places, all the emotions are put across in the most cliché way possible…
Executed with grace and beauty but still, not one iota of originality; and that
is such a strange thing to say about a film that has as stunning visuals as The
Great Gatsby… I guess the fact that the
film is based on a book as emotionally “filling” as Fitsgerald’s classic just
makes things worse. I wonder if that was why the narration bit was added? You
know, a desperate attempt to capture that atmosphere of the book by actually
reading sections from it.
I’m
especially disappointed because the film was SO visually striking, I was
actually under the influence of the atmos a day or two after I watched it… If
it was only half as striking emotionally as it was visually we’d have a
masterpiece on our hands. As such, it breaks my heart to say this, but it’s the
victory of style over content…
Kayıtlar
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder