"Because I know I'll get nothing accomplished until I can get these thoughts out of my head and out into the world, I'm taking a break from studying for calculus and writing my personal review of Luhrmann's adaptation of The Great Gatsby. Brace yourselves.
I didn't expect to love the movie. Going into it, I knew the anachronistic soundtrack would throw me. I knew what kinds of movies Luhrmann liked to make. I knew the story. I knew the actors. In fact, there isn't much over the course of the movie that actually surprised me (except maybe when Izzo started playing on the bridge). I was neither overwhelmed nor underwhelmed. I was just... whelmed. I was submerged in what Luhrmann presented as the 1920's for 143 minutes and on the other end, I had a lot to say.
Fitzgerald wrote The Great Gatsby with the endgame of an audience disillusioned of the 20's . . ."
I wrote that segment on Friday, having seen the movie the night before. The problem was, I got stuck. I didn't know how to process what I was feeling about the movie. I'm not sure I even knew how to feel about the movie, to be quite honest.
It's been what seems a long time since then, and I've finally come to terms with my reaction to the film. I've refrained from discussing it too much (with the exception of my immediate viewing party), just to make sure the opinions I post here are purely my own. I have not read any other reviews but one, and have glossed over any status update that could even remotely resemble a Gatsby response.
I do not, however, live under a rock; I have opinionated friends who know how I love to spout opinions on such matters as literature and its many adaptations. These friends like to remind me that Gatsby tanked in the box office and that the overall reception has been poor. I know that. I may be socially odd, but I'm not socially incompetent. That being said, I will now ask you to accompany me through the thought process that is my reaction to The Great Gatsby.
In terms of craftsmanship, the movie was excellent. I appreciate the thought that went into every cinematic decision, and for that I applaud Mr. Luhrmann. If you saw this movie without the knowledge that he directed Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge, I think you might be able to guess it. His fingerprints are distinct, his point of view unique, and in some ways well-suited to the great undertaking that is The Great Gatsby. The novel itself is arguably the most widely read and recognizable pieces of American literature, and therein lies Luhrmann's curse.
By and large, people are possessive of Gatsby. It's a story that is easy to interpret and even easier to connect to. But as each reader has a different mindset, each reader has a different interpretation. I know people who interpret Nick to be gay or Gatsby to be black. Even in re-reading it myself, I find that I am interpreting it differently than I did three years ago, and Luhrmann presented an interpretation vastly different from either of mine, and from what I can extrapolate, from everyone else's too.
The movie's theme was clearly altered from that in the book. It was heavy on the visuals and obvious motifs, but much lighter on the nuances and substance that make the novel so interesting. The book is an experience that coaxes scholarly thought out of the hardest of sophomore heads. While the novel was meant to express Fitzgerald's disillusionment of the 1920's, the movie was made to market. It spoon feeds the verbiage that was so intricate and insightful in text, which makes all the profundities inane. To me, it seemed to rely on the obvious, the well known, and the recognizable. I can't be the only one who feels that the screen adapters read the book a la Sparknotes.
With this, the studio's purpose, in mind, I tried to remove myself entirely from my feelings for the novel and focus strictly on my viewing experience, and that lowered my hackles.
The movie as a movie was not terrible. There were some brilliant moments that stuck with me. Tobey Maguire's "I bought cakes!" still makes me smile. Leo's struggle with the clock was painfully relatable (*1). Most significantly, though, Luhrmann's signatures were actually pretty exciting. The grand cinematography of the parties, the eccentric use of cars, the contrasted stylizing of the Valley and the Eggs, the artistic incorporation of music, even the floating words on the screen- it all had appeal to the deepest recess of the artistic portion of my mind. He found a medium that he could use to express his craft well. The fact that he compromised the integrity of the medium itself seems to be all that people can talk about.
The story itself, though, after removing Nick's rectitude as a character and making him solely Gatsby's golden retriever (*2), was relatively vapid. It became a love story that we've seen before. Let's draw parallels, Jeopardy! style.
A: In this movie, Leonardo DiCaprio plays a character who falls in love with someone else's girl and ultimately dies.
Q: What is Titanic?
Maybe a little refinement.
A: In this Baz Luhrmann movie, Leonardo DiCaprio plays a character who falls in love with someone else's girl and ultimately dies.
Q: What is Romeo + Juliet?
Maybe a different approach.
A: In this movie, Leonardo DiCaprio plays the lead role of a man whose lifelong obsession causes him to die alone, except for the one special friend who likes to watch his obsession play out.
Q: What is J. Edgar?
Not quite...
A: In this movie, Leonardo DiCaprio plays a man who makes a lot of money illegitimately in order to bolster his appearance and make up for his tumultuous relationship with wealth (or lack thereof) in is youth. He eventually uses the money to throw some notable parties. Along the way, he falls in love with a girl from the south, but cannot bring himself to marry her because of his financial situation.
Q: What is Catch Me If You Can?
That last one is a stretch, I'll admit, but I get carried away with games like that. It's like 6 Degrees of Bacon, but with DiCaprio movies. Brownie points to whoever can make Gatsby sound like Inception. Double points if you can do it with Shutter Island (*3).
Now that I feel good about giving the movie its dues independent of its inspiration, I would like to say a few words about the compromised integrity of the aforementioned medium.
As I said a while back, this book is incredibly recognizable, but more than that, it is well loved. No matter what the producers did, they were doomed to fail miserably in the eyes of the academic community. If they had played it classically and strictly by the book, everyone would have been bored. "We know," we would have said, "we've read the book, there was nothing all that great about Gatsby." Nothing could incite in us the same thrill as piecing together Fitzgerald's meaning for the first time.
Instead, the movie's purpose became marketability. Jay-Z produced the soundtrack so our ears would be entertained. Baz Luhrmann directed the movie so the grandeur and fantasy of the 1920's would dazzle our eyes. They simplified the story to Daisy and Gatsby in the frame of Nick's therapy journal, with the intent of playing to our emotions. But in the end, even after all this stimulus, our brains were left wanting more: more substance, more of what we felt while reading the novel.
Gatsby is a beautiful story, but the movie itself was damned from the start. Yet despite my very best efforts to remain true to what I feel while reading the story, there's a part of me that can't help but wonder what right I have to criticize their interpretation against mine. Maybe just being exposed to that perspective has me disenchanted of the entire story of Gatsby. Maybe Luhrmann maintained Fitzgerald's theme (perhaps inadvertently) in the end.
Before I leave off, some quick notes.
1) Chrome does not like it when I use the word relatable. Will someone please tell me who is the dummy in this situation, me or the computer?
2) Golden retriever is the perfect analogy for Nick in the movie.
Gatsby: "Let me lure that cute girl over with my new puppy, bitches love puppies."
Gatsby: "I'm stressed out, Imma go vent to my dog."
Nick: "I love my master! He let's me stay in the small house in the yard and feeds me and takes me on walks(drives)!"
Nick: "My master died so I'm gonna sleep on the stairs in his house because I don't know what to do with myself."
3) I couldn't find a way to integrate this into the post, but this will always and forever be my favorite of Baz Luhrmann's works. If you can find a way to play Draw Parallels with this, I will be forever grateful. -> Click Here
