what a dissapointment!
Added 7/1/2009
One of the greatest pieces of American literature, but a soul
less film.
Mia Farrow is great for what she is doing for Darfur! But I
wish I hadn't seen this.
Glad I read the book first.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
They just don't make movies like this any more!
Added 3/25/2009
Frankly, I am amazed that the reviews for this exceptional movie version of F. Scott Fitzergerald's masterpiece novel didn't receive 5 stars across the board. The movie depicted his story so well, not like so many where I've had to say: "The book was a lot better than the movie." In this case, however, the movie actually enhanced the book's greatness. Robert Redford, Mia Farrow, Lois Chiles, Bruce Dern, Karen Black & Scott Wilson were at their best acting performance and Sam Waterson was ideal as narrator. What more can I say? Perfect casting! Perfect settings! Perfect musical score! The costumes & dress were especially appropriate for the time period making me feel like I was right there among those reveling in the glory of the glamorous roaring 20s. Oh, to have another great movie like this come out in today's world where unfortunately, explicit sex and gross language are the norm.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Forsaking substance for style, resulting in a rather hollow attempt at Fitzgerald...
Added 3/23/2009
A lavish cast, impeccable landscape, flawless costumes, a classic novel, Frances Ford Coppola (at the writer's desk); recipe for success, right? Well, I thought so too, but when all was said and done, `The Great Gatsby' appeared as nothing more than a pretty picture. It is void of any real character development, casting aside the heart of the films central cast for the likes of pretty dresses, snazzy suits and beautiful music. Sure, `The Great Gatsby' isn't all bad, but it surely isn't `great'.
The story is your classic love triangle. Daisy is married to Tom. Tom is unfaithful, giving the majority of his love to Myrtle, who is the unhappy housewife of the poor George. Daisy at one time was in love with Jay, who also happened to be poor, and so when he went off to the war she married Tom, who is not poor. Now Jay is back, and he is rather wealthy, and so Daisy begins her affair with him. All of this is seen and observed by Nick, Daisy's cousin and Jay's neighbor, who just so happens to narrate the story for us; the audience.
What is sad about this adaptation is that the story really doesn't unveil itself to be anything deeper than what I just typed in the above paragraph. There is little more that is embellished in regards to the core of these relationships. Everything appears as mere surface. It's there simply to justify having a film made, the focus being more on the flashy costumes and splendid musical arrangements.
One aspect of the film that does work in it's favor is the acting, especially by the supporting cast. Robert Redford and Mia Farrow are nice to look at, and Farrow does have some nicely crafted moments, but for the most part they are the least interesting characters and the least impressive actors. Redford is always someone who bores me (except in a few films, like `The Sting') and so I wasn't surprised at the fact that he left me cold and distant here. Farrow has her moments, but she also has a lot of stiff scenes. Bruce Dern, Karen Black, Scott Wilson, Sam Waterston and the ravishing Lois Chiles are a different story though. Dern is amazing as Tom, the coldhearted husband to Daisy; and Black just ignites as his lover. Chiles is probably my favorite here, her distilled sensuality just entices me to keep watching her. Sam Waterston was the perfect choice for Nick, for he has this almost chilled demeanor that makes for a worthy observer. You can see him judging, if only from a distance, and thus he allows us to grasp what he sees without manipulating our own feelings.
So, I'd recommend this for the stellar performances and crisp visuals alone, but if you are looking for a film that will stimulate you mentally as well as visually then you might want to look elsewhere. It is a truly tragic and moving story, but this film adaptation doesn't capture that as well as it should have.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Romance Lives !!
Added 3/20/2009
My husband and I enjoy romance movies. We have a collection that we feel are the best of the best. I remembered at Valentines Day this year that we had talked about trying to find "The Great Gatsby".
We weren't disappointed- enjoyed every moment.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Yes! The soundtrack is back!
Added 3/19/2009
Years ago, in the VHS days, I rented this movie and was extremely disappointed that all of the music had been altered. Indeed, best musical score and best costume design were the two Academy Awards given for this film. The music simply made the movie in my opinion.
Although there are no extras on this DVD, the visual quality is good, and I'm just glad that the dispute over the musical score was resolved. Nelson Riddle's musical masterpieces are back and a pleasure to listen to. I remember that the soundtrack was released back in the 1970's on 8-track tape. Now, if we could just get a CD of the soundtrack released, all would be well regarding this wonderful movie.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
what a dissapointment!
Added 7/1/2009
One of the greatest pieces of American literature, but a soul
less film.
Mia Farrow is great for what she is doing for Darfur! But I
wish I hadn't seen this.
Glad I read the book first.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
They just don't make movies like this any more!
Added 3/25/2009
Frankly, I am amazed that the reviews for this exceptional movie version of F. Scott Fitzergerald's masterpiece novel didn't receive 5 stars across the board. The movie depicted his story so well, not like so many where I've had to say: "The book was a lot better than the movie." In this case, however, the movie actually enhanced the book's greatness. Robert Redford, Mia Farrow, Lois Chiles, Bruce Dern, Karen Black & Scott Wilson were at their best acting performance and Sam Waterson was ideal as narrator. What more can I say? Perfect casting! Perfect settings! Perfect musical score! The costumes & dress were especially appropriate for the time period making me feel like I was right there among those reveling in the glory of the glamorous roaring 20s. Oh, to have another great movie like this come out in today's world where unfortunately, explicit sex and gross language are the norm.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Forsaking substance for style, resulting in a rather hollow attempt at Fitzgerald...
Added 3/23/2009
A lavish cast, impeccable landscape, flawless costumes, a classic novel, Frances Ford Coppola (at the writer's desk); recipe for success, right? Well, I thought so too, but when all was said and done, `The Great Gatsby' appeared as nothing more than a pretty picture. It is void of any real character development, casting aside the heart of the films central cast for the likes of pretty dresses, snazzy suits and beautiful music. Sure, `The Great Gatsby' isn't all bad, but it surely isn't `great'.
The story is your classic love triangle. Daisy is married to Tom. Tom is unfaithful, giving the majority of his love to Myrtle, who is the unhappy housewife of the poor George. Daisy at one time was in love with Jay, who also happened to be poor, and so when he went off to the war she married Tom, who is not poor. Now Jay is back, and he is rather wealthy, and so Daisy begins her affair with him. All of this is seen and observed by Nick, Daisy's cousin and Jay's neighbor, who just so happens to narrate the story for us; the audience.
What is sad about this adaptation is that the story really doesn't unveil itself to be anything deeper than what I just typed in the above paragraph. There is little more that is embellished in regards to the core of these relationships. Everything appears as mere surface. It's there simply to justify having a film made, the focus being more on the flashy costumes and splendid musical arrangements.
One aspect of the film that does work in it's favor is the acting, especially by the supporting cast. Robert Redford and Mia Farrow are nice to look at, and Farrow does have some nicely crafted moments, but for the most part they are the least interesting characters and the least impressive actors. Redford is always someone who bores me (except in a few films, like `The Sting') and so I wasn't surprised at the fact that he left me cold and distant here. Farrow has her moments, but she also has a lot of stiff scenes. Bruce Dern, Karen Black, Scott Wilson, Sam Waterston and the ravishing Lois Chiles are a different story though. Dern is amazing as Tom, the coldhearted husband to Daisy; and Black just ignites as his lover. Chiles is probably my favorite here, her distilled sensuality just entices me to keep watching her. Sam Waterston was the perfect choice for Nick, for he has this almost chilled demeanor that makes for a worthy observer. You can see him judging, if only from a distance, and thus he allows us to grasp what he sees without manipulating our own feelings.
So, I'd recommend this for the stellar performances and crisp visuals alone, but if you are looking for a film that will stimulate you mentally as well as visually then you might want to look elsewhere. It is a truly tragic and moving story, but this film adaptation doesn't capture that as well as it should have.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
