The Great Gatsby

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by nukes_da_bass, Mar 22, 2014.


  1. nukes_da_bass

    nukes_da_bass Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Location:
    west suburban boston
    Has anyone watched the Dicaprio version? I'm about halfway through right now.
    Decent acting, cinematography, fairly accurate dialog.
    The hip-hop and dubstep are completely inappropriate to a story set in 1922 however. It almost ruins the experience for me.
    Get off my lawn!
  2. i_got_a_mohawk

    i_got_a_mohawk

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Location:
    Edinburgh & Dundee, Scotland
    My brother has done some work on one of the Rolls Royce's that was used in an earlier version of the film

    [/random side note]
  3. Boom762

    Boom762 Hartke Whore - I AM the one who Booms! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2013
    Location:
    Lubbock, TX
    Thats everywhere these days. People aren't interested an accurate historical portrayal anymore. Can't watch many movies without being disappointed in casting due to whats "trending". I noticed in comic books they were changing a lot of their characters' races and sexuality for the sake of making it current with today's youth. I HATE seeing movies and documentaries on "the bible" where they have british accented actors with white skin, white teeth, and soft features parading around as Jesus of Nazareth or Noah. It doesnt make any sense for someone to be born in Israel roughly 2000 years ago to have clean white perfect teeth and light skin. There are biblical characters that have been said to be redheaded but youll also never see that.

    I saw Pompeii last night and GAWD it was terrible. It was less historically accurate that TITANIC with DiCaprio.
  4. Gorn Captain

    Gorn Captain Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2011
    Location:
    Queens NY
    I haven't read the book. Is it worth watching as a standalone movie?
  5. ErebusBass

    ErebusBass

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    I thought it was long and relatively uninteresting but YMMV.
  6. HaphAsSard

    HaphAsSard

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2013
    Location:
    Italia
    :eyebrow:
    Not many Assyrian actors around who can pull off decent Aramaic? To be fair, Hebrew is more widespread so yeah, at least the Old Testament stories could be more realistic... Oh, and Greek of course: we demand Koiné Greek for stories from Acts! ;)
  7. nukes_da_bass

    nukes_da_bass Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Location:
    west suburban boston
    The 1970s version of Gatsby was flawed. I think Robert Redford played nick but I haven't seen it in 25 years.
  8. matante

    matante

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    I haven't read the book and have only seen the di Caprio version. It's a chick flick. And based on the story in the movie it's also a chick novel. I have no idea how it could be considered a classic.

    My understanding is that the novel had bad reviews when it came out and I'm not surprised.
  9. nukes_da_bass

    nukes_da_bass Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Location:
    west suburban boston
    Ya- chick novel.
    Try that on your American Lit professor in a paper.
    "It is my belief that Gatsby, thought since after the 2nd world.war to be an iconic American novel dealing with wealth and Decadence, although told from the narrative perspective of the male protagonist, was a Chick Novel".
    That made my day!
  10. ArtGuy9516

    ArtGuy9516

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    Nope. Redford played Gatsby and Nick was played by Sam Waterston.

    I've seen both versions and IMOO feel that both films were somewhat lacking. Fitzgerald spent so much time describing the color of things in the book (like Gatsby's cream/yellow car and the blue/gray eyes of the T.J. Eckleburg sign and the color of light and the hue of many more objects within the story) change. In both versions of the film I've felt that this has been handled poorly. The color in the new version seemed to me to be over saturated in general and my memory of the color in the '74 version was not manipulated to any degree.

    In the new version DiCaprio's accent kept changing and I felt that the actress who played Daisy performance was flat. In the '74 version I felt that Waterston's performance was unremarkable.
  11. P. Aaron

    P. Aaron Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Location:
    Below Ground, Detroit area
    Find the MAD Magazine version.

    Better than the novel or either movie.

    An early '70's issue.
  12. nukes_da_bass

    nukes_da_bass Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Location:
    west suburban boston
    You can't beat the satire.of MAD.
  13. Bloodhammer

    Bloodhammer Twinkle Twinkle Black Star Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Location:
    Shreveport, Louisiana
    I haven't read it or seen either film, but I applaud this post. :D

    I think I'm going to watch Once Upon A Time In America again. All four hours in one go. :bassist:
  14. nukes_da_bass

    nukes_da_bass Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Location:
    west suburban boston
    Well spoke Bloodhammer! The 4 hour Sergio Leone edit is a masterpiece- the 3 hour American edit is a Butcher job of "once upon a time in america" and should be destroyed
  15. Bloodhammer

    Bloodhammer Twinkle Twinkle Black Star Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Location:
    Shreveport, Louisiana
    My copy clocks at 229 minutes. Almost four whole hours. I hope that's the one you mean because I've read there's even more footage than that, but it hasn't ever been released.

    I always fret over whether or not I'm seeing as much of the movie as possible, as far as releases go.
  16. paste

    paste Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan
    The 229 minute one is the one I watched as well. Great flick. Even though its 4 hours long, the pacing is nice and the story is interesting so it feels like your typical 3 hour movie. I had gone in watching the movie thinking it was a sequel for Once upon a time in the west (another great Leone film) which threw me off at first.
  17. nukes_da_bass

    nukes_da_bass Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Location:
    west suburban boston
    Yeah the 229 minute is Leone's definitive cut.
    The American cut was about an hour shorter and placed all scenes in chronological order, instead of Noodles opium dream which keeps bouncing around in a pleasant yet disorienting manner.
    The American cut becomes unrecognizable as noodles vision. It's a travesty.
  18. zontar

    zontar

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2014
    Media:
    3
    Albums:
    1
    Location:
    J-5
    I read the book in high school, I found it dreadfully boring, and I didn't care about any of the characters.

    So I have no desire to see any movie version.
  19. fraublugher

    fraublugher

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Location:
    ottawa, ontario, canada
    A real page turner, always movie before book in my book.
    Unless you enjoy disappointment. Exceptions being exceptional.
  20. jmattbassplaya

    jmattbassplaya

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Location:
    Just south of Atlanta!
    Same. I didn't get the book or the purpose behind its narrative.

Share This Page