Hot Trailer: ‘The Great Gatsby’
Warner Bros today released the first trailer for Baz Lurhmann’s take on The Great Gatsby, the adaptation of the F. Scott Fitzgerald novel that stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Carey Mulligan, Tobey Maguire and Joel Edgerton. Luhrmann’s visual style takes on an extra dimension with 3D — even if you think that was a mistake. At least the format enhances lush colors and period flair rather than CGI aliens shooting laser guns. The film comes out December 25.
What’s the word…. garish!
Well, then Baz got is right because the Jazz Age was all being flashy with the rise of the new money establishment.
Why does Gatsby’s house look like Hogwarts?
Garish sums it up! “Overwrought” is another word that comes to mind. I found myself squinting at the brightness of EVERY scene. Maybe I’ll Netflix it, though.
The book is kind of a “mood piece.” I’m not convinced it’s filmable.
I’m convinced it ISN’T filmable. There’s so much poetry and pretense on the page that the dialogue (and situations) aren’t remotely credible when brought to life. It’s also likely that the thing only works if Nick embodies the excess of empathy that very few actors can convey–if you don’t believe that he’s captivated and blown away by what he’s witnessing, you won’t be be able to care–it takes his awe and infatuation and lonely sensitivity to put it over. I just don’t see Spiderman pulling that off.
Also, jamming your scenery with unlimited amounts CGI invention and filigree is one of the things that ruined Lucas’ second round of Star Wars movies. If the scenery isn’t lived in, what’s happening in the frame won’t ring true.
Um….’The Great Gatsby” (1975) starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow. Directed by Jack Clayton and then re-tooled by Francis Ford Coppola (who wrote the screenplay). Closer in tone and subtlety to the book but ultimately fell short and flopped.
And, yes, it isn’t film-able. Expect the Luhrmann-ization treatment that was handed to “Romeo And Juliet” with, er, DiCaprio……
There should be warnings of “excessive creative license” or “loosely based on a plot and characters by F. Scott Fitzgerald”
That being said – the movie COULD actually be “good” while completely destroying the book. See? It’s just a matter of different mediums. Especially for those who never read it or have no clue it ever was a Great American Novel.
Not filmable? What better plot could you hope for? A tragic love affair, glamorous parties, a billionaire with a mysterious past at it’s centre, friendship and betrayal. Excellent casting btw – Di Caprio is just right as is Tobey Maguire and Carey Mulligan is spot on too. I have high hopes.
This was already made into a great movie with Robert Redford staring.
What was Redford staring at in the movie he starred in?
Bugsy Malone on steroids.
who the hell is that trying to sing? Not even the right song for the period
Have you never seen a Lurhmann film? That’s kind of one of his staples.
I agree that Baz is known for using contrasting music for his movies, but this doesn’t work at all. Sometimes the contrast is nice, but not in this case. Not a good trailer, hope the movie has better music.
Sounds like Jack White from the White Stripes. Great band, but he’s slaughtering those notes. If this music is in the film, it will completely destroy any illusion of it being the jazz age.
Jack Black covering U2′s “Love Is Blindness.”
Spectacular. Lurhmann is genius.
Agreed. A classic novel that wouldn’t seem to lend itself to the frenetic visual cacophony of Baz Lurhmann’s vision nevertheless seems exciting and moving, jazzy and hip. The screeching vocals compliment the emotional beats, Leo is intense as usual, and I can’t wait to see this.
What is that awful screeching U2 cover? Argh! Pretty pictures tho…
Its Jack White singing
Never liked his singing.
Great guitar riffs, awful singing voice.
And true to Luhrmann’s total disregard of other artist’s work, they’ve retooled the song to be just “Blindness” when the title and chorus is “Love is Blindness.”
It’s a brilliant, beautiful song by U2 and Baz has co-opted it and turned it into throwaway atmosphere.
Remember the foppish gentlemen singing “Smells Like Teen Spirit” in Moulin Rouge? Yeah, I’m still trying to hold back the throwup.
Trailer looks great for the most part (outside of the CG driving scenes) but why did they cast Carey Mulligan? She’s totally wrong for the part of Daisy.
I totally agree with you! I heard about the casting for this film shortly after it was announced, and though I like Carey Mulligan, she is definitely not right for Daisy.
I’m not hugely impressed with this trailer overall though…
“Moulin Rouge II: Moulin Rouger!”
You said it!
Agreed, except I’d retitle it “Moulin Rouge II: Suck Harder!”
Another flop by Baz. It is a comedy.
I’m being honest here.. is there really an audience for this film. I’m not excited about it at all. The trailer was boring. sorry.. but I just don’t feel this need to see it.
maybe that will change.
My thoughts exactly.
I so want to want to see this. I’ll root for Baz every time, even if, overall, ‘Australia’ didn’t stick after my initial viewing. This movie looks pretty. The production design looks amazing. We’ve never seen the roaring 20s this vibrant and atmospheric.
I know we’re ALL supposed to know this story because we had to read it in school, but I just didn’t connect with it. At all. I don’t remember what it’s about. And from this trailer, I still have no idea what it’s about. If it’s supposed to be a ‘tone and scale teaser’ like ‘Skyfall’ then cool. I’ll be expecting a trailer with some plot in a few months and fully pass judgement then. But as of now, it looks like lavish hype.