|
Title: The Great Gatsby Post by: K9 on May 23, 2012, 03:39:26 AM Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=G7DonhNflsw)
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Fabricated on May 23, 2012, 04:45:35 AM I still remember the book report I had to write on this piece of shit in high school. What a boring book.
It looks like they got the symbolism of the glasses-billboard whose name I forgot at least. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Teleku on May 23, 2012, 11:12:50 AM For some odd reason I actually didn't mind the book back when I read it in High School. Didn't think it was mind blowing or anything, but I got through it fine without ever being bored, and liked the story.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Surlyboi on May 23, 2012, 11:17:47 AM I read it every other summer. It's a goddamn Amurkan Classic.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Chimpy on May 23, 2012, 11:57:45 AM This has two strikes against it: DiCaprio and Baz Luhrman. I just don't like the movies either of them make.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Ingmar on May 23, 2012, 12:03:20 PM Here's hoping Luhrman actually uses period music for once. The feel of the era is so completely tied up in the music that if he doesn't he's going to ruin the whole thing entirely.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: sickrubik on May 23, 2012, 12:13:42 PM Here's hoping Luhrman actually uses period music for once. The feel of the era is so completely tied up in the music that if he doesn't he's going to ruin the whole thing entirely. He's not. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Ingmar on May 23, 2012, 12:21:17 PM :mob:
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Evildrider on May 23, 2012, 12:22:55 PM I remember liking the Great Gatsby, but that trailer didn't do a thing for me. :(
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Thrawn on May 23, 2012, 12:24:04 PM :mob: I'm going to fan this flame - http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1685668/great-gatsby-trailer-music.jhtml (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1685668/great-gatsby-trailer-music.jhtml) "'Great Gatsby' Trailer: Why Jay-Z, Kanye, Jack White Set The Tone" I know the first thing I thought seeing a Great Gatsby movie exists was "I sure hope they use Kanye West music." Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: sickrubik on May 23, 2012, 12:30:19 PM I actually don't hate the idea of using modern music as a soundtrack. (In a general sense.) That Jay-Z/Kanye album is good, too.
However, in the case of a movie set in the 20s, having the music not be part of it will definitely feel wrong. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Nevermore on May 23, 2012, 01:01:31 PM When it started with that Tobey Maguire narration, I expected him to at some point shoot web into DiCaprio's face.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: HaemishM on May 23, 2012, 01:05:34 PM Meh. I've hated Luhrman since Romeo & Juliet. He's a fantastic visual guy, but his attempts to shoehorn all sorts of ill-fitting square pegs into round holes that didn't ask for square pegs is ANNOYING. The music in that trailer is jarring. I'm afraid I don't really remember much about the book - I only read it a few years ago, but it didn't make much of an impression.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: sickrubik on May 23, 2012, 01:20:09 PM I'm not a fan of Luhrman, for those reasons. The only movie I enjoyed of his was Romeo & Juliet.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: naum on May 23, 2012, 01:24:20 PM Jeez alou, this is like the 4th or 5th film incantation for this book -- I don't remember much about the story either, but I had to read it in 9th grade English IIRC.
No, actually, the 2012 version will be the 6th (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gatsby): Quote 1. The Great Gatsby, in 1926 by Herbert Brenon – a silent movie of a stage adaptation, starring Warner Baxter, Lois Wilson, and William Powell. It is a famous example of a lost film. Reviews suggest that it may have been the most faithful adaptation of the novel, but a trailer of the film at National Archives is all that is known to exist.[21] 2. The Great Gatsby, in 1949 by Elliott Nugent – starring Alan Ladd, Betty Field, and Shelley Winters; for copyright reasons, this film is not readily available.[21] 3. The Great Gatsby, in 1974, by Jack Clayton – the most famous screen version, starring Sam Waterston as narrator Nick Carraway, with Mia Farrow as Daisy Buchanan and Robert Redford as Gatsby, with a script by Francis Ford Coppola.[21] 4. The Great Gatsby, in 2000 by Robert Markowitz – a made-for-TV movie starring Toby Stephens, Paul Rudd and Mira Sorvino. 5. G, in 2002 by Christopher Scott Cherot – a modernized, loosely based adaptation starring Richard T. Jones, Blair Underwood, and Chenoa Maxwell. 6. The Great Gatsby, directed by Baz Luhrmann and starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Amitabh Bachchan, Carey Mulligan, Tobey Maguire, Callan McAuliffe, Isla Fisher, Elizabeth Debicki, and Joel Edgerton. To be released in 2012. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Ingmar on May 23, 2012, 02:09:34 PM The list of names that worked on the '74 version's script is pretty amazing: Truman Capote, Coppola, Philip Roth, Thomas Pynchon, Vladimir Nabokov.
For all that ultimately it is kind of disappointing - I'm not sure the casting is really very good (other than Waterston who I recall as quite good.) Redford and Farrow seemed really washed-out to me somehow. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Rendakor on June 08, 2012, 07:53:01 PM Music aside, that trailer captured my memory of the book almost perfectly. It looked fucking awful.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Numtini on June 09, 2012, 08:49:26 AM It's a combination of all sorts of things I like that looks absolutely terrible.
Gatsby is one of my favorite books. I like Baz Lurhman. I like DiCaprio. (I'm sure I'm racking up points with people here.) But this just looks terrible. If you told me Luhrman was making a different movie set in the 20s, some kind of Harlem Moulin Rouge sort of thing, I'd think the first third of the trailer looked great, but it doesn't look like Gatsby to me at all. It looks like an overdone Lurhman romp. DiCaprio looks terrible in particular. The scene where he's meeting Daisy is like some kind of a sketch. DiCaprio isn't playing Gatsby, instead DiCaprio is playing his decaying Howard Hughes or J. Edgar playing Gatsby. Gatsby is a handsome 32 year old, not a decaying sweaty 45-50 year old. I love the "see it in Real 3d" because I've always thought that thoughtful stories about loss and the impossibility of recapturing your past really really need 3d. I'll stick to the 74 version. I thought it was perfect. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Nebu on June 14, 2012, 07:06:35 AM I'll stick to the 74 version. I thought it was perfect. Me too. I also enjoyed the book and have read it multiple times. The trailer for this one left me cold. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Paelos on June 14, 2012, 07:11:16 AM The music decision alone will sink this movie.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Numtini on December 20, 2012, 06:22:56 AM There's a new trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HJCz3lMa4Xw) out and a release date in May. I wasn't real optimistic on the first one, but this one I liked. The "sweaty face" Gatsby turns out to be "just in from the rain" Gatsby. Still not sure why the movie needs 3d.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: pxib on May 10, 2013, 08:39:42 PM Luhrmann at his best, which is to say jaw-dropping production work marred by frenetic editing and bizarre, melodramatic intensity devoid of authentic feeling. This is a man who can get a terrible performance out of absolutely anybody... and then choose to put it on the big screen rather than the cutting room floor. It's a gorgeous film, mind you, with a clear and shocking vision, and I ended up loving the music, but ultimately it feels like a very long movie that jogs casually behind its fleeing source material while throwing fireworks.
A visual review: Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Samwise on May 11, 2013, 08:21:54 PM Luhrmann at his best, which is to say jaw-dropping production work marred by frenetic editing and bizarre, melodramatic intensity devoid of authentic feeling. This is a man who can get a terrible performance out of absolutely anybody... and then choose to put it on the big screen rather than the cutting room floor. It's a gorgeous film, mind you, with a clear and shocking vision, and I ended up loving the music, but ultimately it feels like a very long movie that jogs casually behind its fleeing source material while throwing fireworks. (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40386/Macros/orson_clapping.gif) Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Ghambit on May 11, 2013, 11:54:32 PM I'm fairly certain pxib does this shit professionally. Fess up you.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: 01101010 on May 12, 2013, 04:52:02 AM Sally Sparrow is still a hottie... :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Margalis on May 12, 2013, 10:00:43 PM I still can't believe this is real.
Why would you make a 3D Blockbuster out of the Great Gatsby? "Hollywood releasing 3D Blockbuster Great Gatsby film" could be an Onion headline. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: MahrinSkel on May 12, 2013, 10:05:34 PM Hollywood desperately wants 3D to be the new thing everybody has to have, and there's a big investment in hardware that will never pay off if it is confined to a handfull of SFX blockbusters per year.
--Dave Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: HaemishM on May 13, 2013, 09:36:56 AM Why would you make a 3D Blockbuster out of the Great Gatsby? "Hollywood releasing 3D Blockbuster Great Gatsby film" could be an Onion headline. You could also ask why anyone in Hollywood would want Baz Luhrmann to do more than set direct a big budget movie, but people still keep giving him money. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Merusk on May 13, 2013, 09:43:59 AM Hollywood desperately wants 3D to be the new thing everybody has to have, and there's a big investment in hardware that will never pay off if it is confined to a handfull of SFX blockbusters per year. --Dave Yep, because they also believe it's the only way to get bodies in the theaters again. There's only so much you can do with the medium to even attempt to compete with home theaters. Better sound is rolled in to homes in time, better seats can't compete with home, so you're left with 3d. Too bad even if it were to do so it would only be a stopgap because even that would migrate to home in time. The best thing they could do to put more butts in seats vs. waiting until DVD release is lower ticket prices, but that's never going to happen. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: naum on May 13, 2013, 10:16:35 AM 3D only works for a small subset of movies -- like Avatar (which without 3D would be just another average cheesy flick), or The Hobbit or other movies where SX are ramped up.
Tacking it on to drama movies is overkill and furthermore, the Onion headline apropos, not suited to the moviegoer market that comes out for these types of pictures. I haven't seen this new adaptation of The Great Gatsby, so maybe Luhrmann rolled in enough dazzle to merit 3D. From watching his Colbert interview, it seemed that what he was aiming for (told Colbert he fell asleep listening to the book on tape on a train ride) -- people not interested in (re)?reading the classic book, but just taking in a glitzy show rendition of the story. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Salamok on May 13, 2013, 01:30:33 PM The best thing they could do to put more butts in seats vs. waiting until DVD release is lower ticket prices, but that's never going to happen. Less 3d - Moar Alamo Drafthouse I have yet to see a 3d movie where I haven't spent most of the time wishing I had gone to the 2d version. I have never regretted opting for a bucket of beer and having tons of legroom with no dude sitting in front of me blocking the bottom quarter of my screen. Plus the newish ticket reservation system is teh bestest (if you use it, if you don't you just get hosed). Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: WayAbvPar on May 16, 2013, 11:42:55 AM I am gratified to see that I am not the only one left completely cold by the trailer/thought/execution of this movie. It just looks like a 3 hour Hollywood masturbatory piece. I hope it doesn't make me hate DiCaprio for a decade the way Titanic did.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: HaemishM on May 16, 2013, 01:13:00 PM It just looks like a 3 hour Hollywood masturbatory piece Or to put it more succintly - "Baz Luhrmann." They really are the same thing. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Merusk on May 17, 2013, 07:26:43 AM I hope it doesn't make me hate DiCaprio for a decade the way Titanic did. I'm with you on this. I started to have real respect for him after the 3-4 years of films. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: UnSub on May 19, 2013, 10:06:21 PM You could also ask why anyone in Hollywood would want Baz Luhrmann to do more than set direct a big budget movie, but people still keep giving him money. He had to fight to get his budget on this one. If this flops, it's likely he'll have a really hard time getting investors again for a big movie. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Teleku on May 20, 2013, 12:00:30 AM Box office Mojo says its made $90 million domestic already, and $42 million globally. With a $105 million budget, looks like it will be profitable.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: eldaec on May 20, 2013, 02:48:18 AM Though apparently doing much better in 2d than 3d.
The studio blurb explains this as the audience skews female, and female viewers are more "discerning" customers. Which is an interesting way to admit that 3d is a worthless gimmick and a stain on the artform I guess. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Brofellos on June 07, 2013, 08:54:01 AM Probably going to see this tonight; pretty dismayed at the mixed reviews since I'm a massive Fitzgerald fan. Then again I suppose any adaptation that didn't jive with my internal vision of the story would be disappointing. I do love me some Carey Mulligan though.
Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: ghost on June 12, 2013, 06:38:48 AM Which is an interesting way to admit that 3d is a worthless gimmick and a stain on the artform I guess. 3D has its places. Scifi/action movies are definitely improved by it. My problem is that watching a whole 2.5 hour movie in 3D is really taxing on the eyes and is almost exhausting. I can't imagine a drama or comedy would benefit from 3D in the slightest. Title: Re: The Great Gatsby Post by: Brofellos on June 12, 2013, 12:57:59 PM So I saw it (2D) and thought that it was better than the reviews gave it credit for but there were a lot of things Baz did to really make the production seem cheap. Mediocre CGI, text on the screen, etc.
|