Rating: 
Summary: The Book Is Better
Review: When I saw this I wanted to gag. Literally gag. The acting is some of the worst I have ever seen. With the exception of Scott Wilson's portrayal of the garage owner Mr. Wilson. In this film version it is impossible to feel sympathy towards in any of the characters, it is also impossible to like any of the characters. Sadly, it gets worse. The score (from what I have heard, in this VHS edition was not the one in movie) was way overdone and overblown. With the back acting and score combined I half expected Jay and Daisy to run towards each other across open fields of wild flowers with open arms. Jack Clayton uses the eyes of Dr. Eckleberg too much, and in doing so the movie loses some of the meaning that the book held. The only reason I gave this movie two stars was because the costumes and sets were wonderfully done.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a Bad Effort....Not Perfect, but Passable
Review: Mia Farrow gets slammed a lot for sinking this film, but I don't think the criticism is deserved. Her Daisy is charming, flighty, playful, irresponsible and probably a little stupid. But she epitomizes the upper class that Gatsby is so desperately trying to fit into, which display all these features. "The best thing a girl can be in this world, " Daisy philosophizes to Nick, "is a beautiful little fool." Lovely to look at, charming to be around but undemanding and demanding nothing. Everything must be given to her, for by herself she is worth nothing. Daisy is an ornament, and very little more. Mia Farrow plays her that way. Gatsby does not love her because he is enchanted by her character or admires her mind....he is obsessed with her because she represents a prize for which he can never really compete. For upper class men, the woman one marries is of vital importance because she completes the "set" of things you must have in order to play the upper class "game." Gatsby knows that, and he knows that Daisy would secure his entrance into the "game" because she has the look, the attitude, the very *smell* and *sound* of money. She was born to it and bred with it surrounding her all the time. Moreover, she has all the right physical qualities: beautiful, charming, and not too bright. I think where Redford makes a mistake is in trying to play Gatsby as a man who loves Daisy for the person she is rather than the class she represents. Bruce Dern is almost perfect as Daisy's husband Tom. Tom is completely secure in the knowledge that money can buy literally anything, and he has more than enough to get him everything he could ever want. Money will solve all of his problems for him, because money is the one thing that hardly anyone ever has quite enough of. And many, many people don't have enough to buy what they need to survive. This gives an enormous amount of power to someone who has more than he will ever need or, for that matter, more than he would want. He says at the end that he and Daisy have had times together that Gatsby could never understand, and he's right. Daisy knows her place and her role, and Tom is both happy and grateful that she can fulfill and play both so well; the times together he refers to are when they are playing their stereotypical roles together perfectly, artlessly and without any thought-- the product of a lifetime of training and practice. Jay Gatsby does not understand either the upper class "game," or the "roles" nor have any inkling of its final "goal." In the end, this is because he is at heart a decent human being and cannot be anything else. To be so rich that you need be held responsible for nothing is almost identical to absolute power corrupting absolutely, for it boils down to the same thing. Gatsby pays the price; rich people never pay. Sam Waterston is an excellent Nick Carroway. The rest of the supporting cast also is outstanding. And of course the music is wonderful, the sets are fabulous and the art direction first-rate.
Rating:
Summary: Lavish But Superficial
Review: Although she was greatly criticized, the ultimate failure of this adaptation does not rest upon actress Mia Farrow; it rests instead upon the on-going failure of film makers to successfully adapt Fitzgerald's sharp statement about American social classes, materialism, and hypocrisy for the screen. This failure should not be entirely entirely unexpected: the famous story of an ill-fated love affair between a social-climbing bootlegger and a high society woman is not so much the core of Fitzgerald's novel as it is the platform from which makes his statement. These literary effects simply do not translate well into film, and so once again (as in both other film versions of the novel) we are left with only the plot itself--and shorn of its broader implications the plot emerges as pretty thin stuff indeed.Farrow is actually quite good in the thankless role of Daisy Bucchannan, but since much of the novel's effect is based upon the other characters' opinions of Daisy's character, both script and over-all film fail her efforts. To a certain extent, much the same can be said for the entire cast, but at least Robert Redford--then at the peak of his golden physical appeal--truly looks the part of the high-style bootlegger Jay Gatsby, and the primary supporting cast (Waterston, Black, and Dern) are plausibly cast. But in spite of an interesting cast and first rate production values that effectively recreate the hard-edged glamour of the 1920s, the movie never seems to actually start: instead, it feels like one long exposition. The viewer keeps waiting for the action to begin--and it never really does. To say the film lacks excitement would be a profound understatement. I hesitate to actually give this film three stars; it really deserves but two. Still, the art design is remarkable, and the overall look of the film is right, and the cast does the best they can with it, so I'll be generous. Watch this version of THE GREAT GATSBY for its visuals alone and you'll enjoy it--but if you expect interest from any other quarter, you'll very disappointed indeed.
Rating: 
Summary: What are you looking for?
Review: This film is certainly dreamy. What are you looking for? Depending on what you wish to find in this film, you may love it or not. As stated in the main review, the costumes, and sets are breathtaking. Loaded with soft focus shots, the film did a great job of relaying the story- in good detail. By then end of the movie, I am always baffled by the careless nature of the wealthy characters. My only complaint with this film in its present form is the music. Please note that the VHS copy available in stores now does not contain the original score by Nelson Riddle. It has been overdubbed with creepy soap opera like music. This is very disappointing, because the score is FABULOUS! It is one of my favorite records-yes, vinyl. It is only available now used on vinyl. So, if you buy this movie, the soundtrack you will get [is bad].
Rating:
Summary: Not at all impressed by this adaptation
Review: I am a high school student and just finished reading and discussing F. Scott Fitzgerald's 'The Great Gatsby'. The book is wonderful. This movie is not. First, the movie does NOT stick to the book well, at times, extra scenes were added which did not add to the overall plot at all. In fact, it just made the movie seem frightfully dull. The actors, as well, were not well picked. I especially was displeased with Mia Farrow as Daisy. Robert Redford did possess Gatsby's good looks, but lacked the charm and mystique that was so important to his character. Why the two stars instead of one? Howard da Silva's very short appearence as Meyer Wolfsheim. At least they got something right.
Rating: 
Summary: Bad
Review: I'll admit I think the novel is over-rated, but Fitzgerald deserved better than this tired, awkward adaptation.
Rating:
Summary: Fitzgerald would not be pleased! OR Watch the 1949 film!
Review: I am one of several million people who is an ardent fan of the F. Scott Fitzgerald novel this movie is based on, and though it can be argued no novelist (especially a great one like he) can ever be satisfied by a film version of their masterpiece, I think I can say in all honesty that Fitzgerald would not be pleased! "The Great Gatsby" as a novel was at once mystical, magical, haunting, magnificent, and darkly disturbing under the superficial and bright facade of the characters' opulent world. Sadly, this movie doesn't even come close to capturing the mythical quality of Gatsby and the book. Although the detailed attention paid to 1920's costume and set designs are magnificently flawless, the actors are sadly lacking. The pleasant exceptions are Sam Waterson, superb as the sympathetic, principled Nick who is part of this dazzling universe yet wisely keeps his distance; Karen Black as Myrtle, the driven and ultimately doomed woman from the "wrong side of the tracks"; and Scott Wilson as Myrtle's husband, a desperate and lovesick loser. I did not find Robert Redford in the title part very satisfactory; but in all fairness he did portray some of Gatsby's wonder, awe, and sense of possibility, although of course he wasn't able to capture Gatsby's godlike, mythical stature. Bruce Dern certainly captured the brute-like nature of his character Tom, Daisy's husband, but I was hard pressed even in my wildest dreams to imagine him as being from the upper classes; one of the reviewers is right--he seems more like a tawdry, vulgar used car salesman than a wealthy, callous playboy. The BIGGEST problem I had was Mia Farrow as Daisy. Her character is one of the most famous females in literary masterpieces, and although blandly pretty, Farrow hardly possesses the grand beauty and untouchable aura needed to make us believe that Gatsby would spend five years obsessed with her. Too bad this wasn't made in the early forties, or Vivien Leigh wasn't a young actress in the 70's, because she possessed the breathtaking ethereal beauty, a dulcet voice "full of money," has a proven ability to play Southern belles--Scarlett O'Hara and Blanche DuBois--and also the never cold-yet unattainable quality required (forget her somewhat over-the-top performance in "Gone With the Wind"; watch "Waterloo Bridge" or "That Hamilton Woman" and you'll see what I mean). The wholesome yet sensual Jennifer Jones would be a second choice and the dreamy and introspective persona of Montgomery Clift woulda made a perfect Gatsby. However, in this case I'll cut some slack because when you think about it, what other famous 70's American actress was there that could even come close to playing Daisy? Raquel Welch? Faye Dunaway? No way. So Farrow it was, inappropriate as she is. The only actress I can think of who might have played her well would be the French star, the sublimely beautiful and alluringly aloof Isabel Adjani. Other than that, they would have been better off picking a promising unknown. Better yet--if you're displeased with this film watch the solid 1949 Alan Ladd version if you can manage to find it.
Rating:
Summary: Just what I needed
Review: Didn't read the book, had a test the next day. Thank god I bought the movie.
Rating:
Summary: Gatsby video is altered
Review: I had not seen the film in many years and recently rented this video. I was shocked to find that the muscial score had been changed. It also appeared to me that the car crash scene had been altered. When I returned to the video store, I looked on the box. In fine print at the bottom it said something to the effect "Not original music"! I don't know what happened to this picture when it was transferred to video but it's not the same. I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else noticed this and if they know what happened to this movie.
Rating:
Summary: Boring dialog, weak script, irritating sound track ...
Review: What a disappointment! This video doesn't even get on the playing field when compared with the book. All the nuances are gone as well as the very interesting characters. I kept dosing off because of the boring dialog. And, at 144 minutes, the video seemed to go on forever. Robert Redford and Mia Farrow's performances are weak. He sounds like he's reciting memorized lines and her voice comes across as squeaky. The screenwriter has created too many scenes to be acted out; they were much more effective when described by a narrator. Sam Waterston, cast as Nick, does an admirable job. And so does Bruce Dern as the nasty Tom Buchanan. But in spite of a great novel, they had a weak script to work with. The focus of the video seems to be on the period costumes and elaborate sets. But so what? I wanted to care about the same characters that I loved so much in the book. But that was impossible, especially since the musical score played throughout was melancholy and irritating. I understand there are other video versions of The Great Gatsby around. I plan to check them out. But take my advice and stay away from this one.
|
