Scott Fitzgerald wrote the novel with Real 3-D™ in mind.
I know a lot of people don't want to hear it, but we're dealing in facts.
This movie sounds awful. Just like his rendition of Romeo and Juliet.
An interesting critique, and I am leery of the misinterpretation that could ensue via the movie; however, let's not forget that Gatsby DOES reach for the green light, symbolically AND literally, at the end of chapter 1...."he stretched out his arms toward the dark water in a curious way, and, far as I was from him, I could have sworn he was trembling. Involuntarily I glanced seaward — and distinguished nothing except a single green light, minute and far away..." It would have been a mistake to have kept that iconic moment out of the movie.
I'm just going to leave this here:
Can't wait to see it. This review, while meaning to make me raise an eyebrow at all of the Luhrmann-esque wonderment, has really just made me want to see it that much more. Have a little imagination. Let it be interpreted, and effed with, and enjoy it for what it is: a cinematic adaptation and not the novel itself.
They should have made a live action version of the 80's cartoon, with max gimmicky silliness. That would have been worth watching.
By the way, the above comment does double duty when applied to any Transformers movie too.
no, but the ill-cultured American movie-going public can....
It's the transference of interference that transposes the interpolation of the situation causing your confusion.
Thanks, Richard, now I don't feel so bad about calling you a dick.
I'm in South America and my wife and I just watched this totally disconnected, waste of time film. I've also spent quite a bit of time in Southern Louisiana, and the film showed nothing like anything I have ever seen there. When I mentioned the word "poor," my wife said, "They're not poor. They've got plenty to eat and obviously plenty to drink. They're dirty because they're alcoholics. But they're certainly not poor." If you're poor, you don't have tons of livestock, all the booze you want, fireworks and land. What I despise most about the film is that it glorifies irresponsible drunkenness, with the worst part being giving a 6-year-old booze and thinking it's cute. And having her see over-sized warthogs instead of pink elephants shows total ignorance on the part of a script writer. I agree with Weeks that the film is total trash. Of course the totally clueless awards dips who spend their lives in Holiday Inns would find it astonishing because the bedspreads don't match.
@AlecBaldwin: Is this the real Town Lane/Randy's neighbor Alec or Jack Donaghy? Although I disagree with you on how really bad this movie is, it could really, REALLY suck and still my neighbors here on the east end and NYC, and those in LA would still be in the orgasmic euphoria that they're in simply because of the guilt.
Agreed. This movie is AWFUL. Unwatchable. The acting is AWFUL. I can only attribute its nomination to the guilt-ridden elitist groupthink of Hollywood and the media.
The beginning was not our favorite, but otherwise we liked it!
Just for the record, "Haywire" was not exactly direct-to-video. I caught it in the theater at the Citadel Mall and loved every second of it!
Very nice film, makes everyone smile and giggle. Very inspiring, and teaches lessons. See this film!!!!!! :-)
It doesn't seem that writer of this article understands either Peter Jackson's intentions or Tolkien's. I am not a fan of Jackson's directions, and though I love the Lord of the Rings books, I dislike what he did to the films, for the most part. However, I am really pleased with the Hobbit film so far. (The LoTR films captured the spirit of the book better, but the Hobbit film definitely is more faithful to the actual story and its characters.) The Hobbit is a children's book that wasn't originally intended to fit within the larger mythology he was creating. The elements he included (Elrond, mentions of Gondolin, etc.) were there just to provide a sense of background, since he believed he'd never have his mythology published. After writing The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien made huge, often uncompleted efforts to retroactively fit The Hobbit into The Lord of the Rings. He never rewrote the original children's book, but he wrote lots of content to fit around it and place it in context better. Jackson is adapting the story with these later texts in mind. When considered in this light, Jackson's done an admirable job with The Hobbit, a much better job than he did with the Lord of the Rings.
Orwell? Pishaw. We're living in a brave, new world.
This movie is trash and glamorizes the American atrocity which is the “War on Terror.” Well over a year after Bin Laden’s death and over 10 years since 9/11, American citizens are still blindly allowing their civil liberties to be taken away one piece of legislation at a time in the naming of fighting terrorism. Even our own citizens can be detained and tortured without trial. What difference did it make killing Bin Laden and Hussein if nothing has changed? You can read much more about living in this Orwellian society of fear and see my visual response to these measures on my artist’s blog at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2011/09…
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper