I don’t know why, I kept postponing watching this movie. But the positive feedback from my friends still made me look at this picture. And I don't regret it.
First, what the cast itself is worth! Tobey Maguire is amazing. He got used to the role, and perfectly conveyed the character of the hero. For me, this is his best movie to date.
About the favorite of all women in the world, Leonardo DiCaprio, you can write and write. He was as good as ever. I am convinced that Leo is a talented actor.
But Cary Mulligan didn't impress me. Her character Daisy turned out plain. It was not expressive against the backdrop of luxury of the 20s.
As far as the scenery and costumes are concerned, I was very impressed. Throughout the film, there was a rebellious and disconnected spirit of the time. I liked Jay Gatsby's party the most. I was the only one who was upset by the music. The compositions did not fit into the style of the 20s. They had modern notes, so for me the music didn’t match the picture. Everything else was beautiful and rich.
I want to start with the most memorable for me - with music. Music in his films Baz Lurman has a special place. Luxurious soundtracks of all the cream of the modern music industry, such as Beyoncé, Jay Z, Lana Del Rey, Sie, Fergie and the xx (especially them!) were competently selected for each moment of the film. Not for nothing some songs, specifically 'Back To Black' Amy Winehouse, 'Crazy In Love' the Carter family and 'Love Is Blindness' U2 were re-recorded in their own way. And yet, the soundtracks sounded through the chur ' modern' that slightly spoiled the picture of events in the early 20th century.
I'll move on to the plot. You can look at it from many different angles. On the one hand, this is the story of the mad love of a gentleman who did everything to get his beloved. On the other hand, it is the story of a frivolous young lady, blinded by wealth, who accompanied her from birth. As a result of this blindness, she could not see all the things that were done for her as a result of passionate love. All this happens against the background of parties, drunks and gossip. Incidentally, even in this story, we do not abandon the idea of the destruction of morality in all sectors of society.
And I don’t want to say anything about shooting and acting, because it is flawless.
This film is perceived quite hard, I only after the second viewing understood the meaning. Baz Luhrman gave the material competently, but not without misses. There are shortcomings in the plot itself, but for this it is worth contacting the author personally. The film deserves a lot of credit.
The novel “The Great Gatsby” by Francis Scott Fitzgerald is included in the mandatory list of the school curriculum in literature in the United States is not accidental. This work widely demonstrates the medal of the true Western mentality from its two contradictory sides. On one side of this medal is the majestic and noble "American Dream" in the person of Jay Gatsby (a poor guy who achieved heights for love), on the other - the many-faced "Prose of Life" (his unwaited bride, class prejudices, cynicism, time). There is a third party here, the side of watching writer/banker Nick Carrawale, Gatsby’s only friend, who once again discovers the uppermost truth that each side of this coin is never destined to see the other.
The film adaptation of 2014 has a pronounced directorial handwriting Baz Luhrmann. If you are familiar with his other works: Romeo + Juliet, Moulin Rouge! or Australia, you will notice a clear similarity in the colorful picture, dynamic camera, an abundance of emotional music, etc. All these "branded things" very decorated the film adaptation is quite adynomic, in the plot, classics and created a bright feast during the plague, which is fascinating to watch!
The only phenomenon that seemed foreign to me in this film masterpiece is Leonardo DiCaprio. Despite the impeccable acting work, I did not forget for a second that I was an ambitious, charismatic, sharp-eyed Hollywood actor, and not a romantic and sensual lover billionaire ready to build castles in the sand again and again. In my opinion, both externally and internally, Mr. DiCaprio is too tough for this role.
Whatever it is, a great movie!
The Great Gatsby is certainly a film that leaves questions, but it’s not a philosophical question, because it’s very clear. The first question after viewing: Why great, and why for a long time you were forced to watch a very stretched beginning, intended to whip up intrigue, and as a result, killing the interest of further viewing?
I haven’t read the work that this film is based on, and perhaps, like many novels that are being filmed, the book is better than its cinematic interpretation. In general, the adaptation of literary novels, the thing is always complex and ungrateful. No matter how much you do not shoot the “Inspector” and do not put it in the theater, there will be no better literary version, and you do not even want to watch these futile attempts. On the other hand, in my opinion, the works of Stephen King, for the most part, always interesting and successful on the screen. It’s just not that simple.
What is Gatsby's greatness? It is great for the person on whose behalf we hear the voiceover. However, the creators of the picture failed to express it beyond the shell of this character, and to awaken a similar feeling in the viewer. Everything else is a good movie and picture, with, of course, outstanding DiCaprio, who still does not save many shortcomings that arise clearly through no fault of his.
Probably the female part of the audience will not agree with me on the question of the incomprehensibility of the greatness of DiCaprio’s character. I must note that for a long time the first part of the film does not leave the feeling that the picture is just created for the fair sex. But, as I said, later this feeling dispelled and there was some interest.
Indomitable spirit and cynicism, love and betrayal, faith and unscrupulousness, money, and again money.
The movie is definitely worth watching. For the heart and the mind. Nothing new, but as always something useful. And the long denouement and answers to the questions that the picture causes all the long and tedious beginning, will not disappoint, although I would not dare to watch the Great Gatsby a second time.
Thanks to Leonardo and the second part of the film, subjectively and unconditionally:
7 out of 10
A vivid, sad story about how a person destroys himself because of love. Love is a great feeling that can make a beggar rich, and throw the rich to the bottom. The feeling that we invent ourselves, giving the object of our dreams the best qualities, and then, faced with reality, either die in terrible disappointment, or die, still being deceived.
In fact, the plot to the viewer, not far from literature, is already familiar. Suffice it to recall the “Grenade Bracelet” by A. I. Kuprin. “The Great Gatsby” is a film about the same spiritualizing and destructive love, only with a budget of $ 100 million.
“Love must be a tragedy,” Kuprin wrote through one of his characters.
The difference between this picture and the classic work is that in place of the modest Zheltkov was an ambitious Jay Gatsby, who will please the viewer much more than the reader of the Yellows.
Gatsby is a bright, memorable character. He came from the bottom and became rich. A rich man from the bottom is always somehow closer to the viewer than a rich man who does not know what poverty is. Perhaps because 99% of viewers, including the author of the review, can hardly be classified as a rich caste. And so Gatsby is cute and admired for his passion. His character is lively, full of colors, enchanting, as well as those parties that he arranged. But as among all the splendor of the holidays in the huge mansion of Gatsby you can always find a quiet room, where none of those who burn through life has yet made their way, so in the heart of the main culprit of the celebration you can find his weakest place - Love.
Gatsby could have been great had he not met her on his way. The very thing for which he achieved so much, which lived in every thing he acquired, in every action.
And here the viewer is waiting for a big disappointment. If Vera Nikolaevna in the “Grenade Bracelet” deserved admiration and was worthy of such all-consuming love, then Daisy in the picture of Lurman – alas. She is nice, well-bred, not stupid, but weak in character. Her desires are superficial, and that is why so often in the film we hear: “I didn’t wait”, “she needs time”, and through these words we understand that Daisy is full of love, but for herself. She always chooses the easy way.
Where can she compare with Vera Nikolaevna, who still found the strength to look at the man who gave her his most intimate gift - a pomegranate bracelet? And where does the frivolous Daisy compare even with the modern heroines of love stories, for example, Rose from the Titanic, ready to go through fire, water and copper pipes for the sake of her beloved? The wife of the Decembrist Daisy is clearly not called - and this becomes even more offensive for Gatsby.
If the first part of the film takes place in celebrations and celebrations, the middle - in the ecstasy of happiness, the finale evokes only one feeling - sympathy. Sympathy for the main character, who made the same mistake as millions of hearts before him, fell in love.
There is another character in the film that is sympathetic, Nick Carraway, played by Tobey Maguire. Kind, often naive, he came to New York to conquer the city, but clearly was not ready for all the realities of such a life. The friendship with Gatsby gave him many vivid impressions and at the same time helped to open his eyes to the rotting upper light. And for the fact that Nick was the only person who fell in love with Gatsby not for his wealth, but for his character, you feel real gratitude.
The soundtrack to the film is very beautiful, the voice of Lana Del Ray fits perfectly into the story itself. “Will you still love me when I’m no longer young and beautiful?” Is it really difficult to love the rich and beautiful? But love no matter what? Gatsby proved he could love so much. Nick proved he could be that kind of friend. And, alas, there were no more characters proving the same.
The story is beautiful, but sad. It looks like a bright gift box, in which a broken heart is hidden.
Recommended to see . Perhaps this story will save you from the main mistake Gatsby.
8 out of 10
Love is not accepted, it is accepted to consume there.
When watching could not get rid of the desire to compare the film adaptation with the story of Fitzgerald.
Longing. Loss of moral values. Indifference or superficial attitude towards others. The desire to profit at the expense of others. This and many other things are seen around him. He is a disinterested person, drawn into the thick of events. Nick Carraway is portrayed in the film as a meek little prick, at the same time contradicting the statutes of the new morality. Due to this, the viewer is not particularly distracted by it and concentrates his attention on the central figure of the story.
Jay Gatsby, in my opinion, leaves much to be desired. DiCaprio has a soft, kind face, even when he is upset or angry. So my vision of what a man like that would actually look like is completely different from what we end up with. This concerns the appearance of Gatsby himself, his nature DiCaprio played, of course, as a person who knows his business well.
The film perfectly captures the atmosphere of the time, it feels already in the trailer. A very debatable topic has been raised: the prevalence of superficial people who do not care about each other, who judge people by their clothes, and for whom others are important as long as they have any benefit. We don’t think of ourselves as they are, but in the end, with the exception of a few (and in the film there are two), all from the same assembly line. “I am kind, but I have done no good to anyone.”
Music series. A non-standard approach, modern processing give us, the audience, a chance to feel the whole atmosphere of pathos, celebration, permissiveness of the 20s of the twentieth century. For the music of those years would have evoked slightly different emotions, and the ultimate goal would not have been achieved. In general, it seems to me that the author himself, Fitzgerald, would approve of most of the peculiar approaches and conveyances in the film. Except one
The film is dedicated to the love of two people who are not destined to be together because of the cowardice of one and the murder of the other. The book tells us what feelings become in the age of production and consumption. Here the ideological components of the story and its adaptation differ significantly.
Based on this, two different stories emerged. After watching the film, I just remembered my impression of the story. The book is deeper, which is not surprising, after reading it, a languid, lazy sadness falls on the body, leaving in the soul the imprint of the culmination of this story and the realization that people have almost become better.
And for the movie itself.
At the heart of this film is not a love story, but a human story. Purposeful to obsession man. From a vague past to a lonely end. He struggles for happiness, so far away from him, but he believes that there can be no obstacles in his way. Rich and generous, optimistic, sociable and seemingly perfect Jay Gatsby, in some scenes we see a child who is afraid, shy and believes in miracles! “You can't change the past? Well, of course you can! he tells us with an inspiring smile.
But most of all, I was pleasantly surprised by the brightness and beauty of the picture: chic parties, extravagant outfits, retro cars and incendiary music, although modern, but, as best as possible, suitable. And the images of the main characters, their words, which you want to quote, make us fall into the early 20th century and watch their lives, full of intrigue. And, at least for the sake of this unique feeling, I want to watch this film more and more.
Many people say that the book is always better. I haven't read it and I don't want to read it. This film is probably in the top five of my favorites, and I do not want to spoil the impression of it.
After the first view, nothing goes into my head except one word - gorgeous!
10 out of 10
I didn't like that movie. Neither the cast, nor the plot, nor the picture on the screen.
So, the first thing that caught my eye is the discrepancy between the era of the 20s. Everything is so hypertrophied, exaggerated that it becomes uncomfortable when viewing. Is it possible to imagine such parties in the 20s, such speeds when driving the first, I emphasize, the first cars, music, sorry, what kind of music is this? Everything is distorted.
Throughout the viewing, I couldn’t help but think that all this was already in another, beloved movie-musical Moulin Rouge with Nicole Kidman and Evan McGregor. However, if in Moulin Rouge all this looked organic, (cabaret still), then in The Great Gatsby it was depressing and perplexing.
The cast. DiCaprio is too much on screen right now. His appearance to fireworks explosions, with a glass of champagne and his signature smile with a slyly raised eyebrow, oh my God, it's already worn and beaten. The main character, played by Tobey Maguire, looks just as exaggerated. I understand, of course, that his task was to play a naive simpleton who got into such a luxurious world of entertainment, money and fame. Toby was overdoing it, in my opinion. Minutes of neck twitching, head twirling, constant clapping with surprised eyes, mouth ajar, God, I don’t believe it!
The story itself did not make a special impression.
Movie for once. You can see if not sorry 2 hours 20 minutes and if you like classics in modern processing.
4 out of 10
The film is impeccable and very, very sophisticated.
It will not like fans of “Avengers”, “Fast and Furious” and so on, as well as people (especially men) under the age of 20 years.
But it's a masterpiece. A film with a huge moral, a film about the ideal man. Perfectionist in all its glory.
It's about perfection. About love. Hope. Faith. Suffering and suffering.
Gatsby put his whole life on the line and lost - but wasn't it worth it? Shouldn't we have tried? At least he tried to make his dream come true.
The movie "The Shawshank Escape" comes first, but I think the movie "The Great Gatsby" has a much more pronounced morality. Ask yourself, are you willing to give your best for someone else? Everything, even death? I doubt it...
It's a movie about the Great Man. A man who doesn't exist. But thanks to Baz Luhrmann and, of course, Leonardo DiCaprio, for making us believe that there are still people on Earth who are ready to die for their desires.
10 out of 10
To my great regret, I watched this beautiful film at home, not in the movies, and I have watched it not once or twice. Plus re-read hundreds of reviews, both laudatory and not so much, repeatedly discussed it with friends, but still can not talk, this film absorbed me completely, I fell in love as a girl, so much that I can not think about anything else.
The film is beautiful, so beautiful that you can turn off the sound, and just watch all this action on the screen - chic views of New York, a riot of colors, unrestrained dancing, magnificent costumes. And even though half of all this beauty is created on a computer, for me it does not matter and does not interfere with enjoying the film.
Leonardo DiCaprio as Jay Gatsby is very convincing, plays magically. Believe him, believe in his dream, and at some point believe he can really change the past. So much work and strength, emotions and experiences he put on the altar of his love, he is very offended by the desire of Daisy to escape, Gatsby deserved his love, so much he did for this woman that he just wants to have no one to share her with, not hide, be happy, and revel in his happiness.
But he loves a woman who, in principle, can not appreciate all this, Daisy is selfish and petty, and I think she is not capable of such love. There are people who love themselves, Daisy is one of them. As Nick succinctly and accurately said of her and her husband, “They were careless creatures, Tom and Daisy, they broke things and people, and then they ran away and hid for their money, their all-consuming carelessness, or whatever, on which their union rested, leaving others to clean up after them.”
Toby McGuire as Nick Caraway didn't convince me. Perhaps my not special love for this actor affected me, but I lacked his emotions, and it seemed that he walked half the film with the face of a fool who does not understand what is what.
There are a lot of good things about music and a lot of bad things. In my opinion, it fits into what is happening on the screen very harmoniously.
Gatsby, the Great Gatsby... The Man Who Loves Daisy 'Sick Love', Manic. He put so much energy into this feeling, but sometimes it seemed to me that Gatsby does not love Daisy, and he loves his goal, the goal will achieve this woman in any way. But this green light, the light of the incredible future of happiness, remained far away.
The Great Gatsby was a film that changed me, changed my perception of life, changed my attitude towards the past, taught me to let go of something that long ago passed, died, but for some reason lived in my heart. This film gives hope and takes it at the same time.
10 out of 10
Although the film The Great Gatsby is rather meaningless and empty, stunning with its luxury and not giving anything real in return (by the way, films of this kind are well described in Ilf and Petrov’s One-Story America), but there is one wonderful thing there that pushes for further reasoning – the background, in Russian speaking.
The story of cardboard characters takes place during the Roaring Twenties: a time of great growth of the American economy. The rise of a large and, as it turned out later, false.
Looking at these brilliant and beastly profiteers, whose excessive greed and craving for luxury, the values that they, the poor, accepted for the daily lives of the privileged, you understand why the economy of the States collapsed in those days. Cargo-cult, speaking again in great and mighty. The savages have gained the power and money of those who have for centuries taught the rules of using these very gifts of heaven. Whether it is fair or not is another matter, there is little justice in the world.
And that's the connection to modernity. All these “millionaire courses”, “you can do anything” and other posts of the public Millionaire of my beloved are just echoes of the time when savages with ambition, lack of morality and a view to the future “made money”. Only this is the same cargo cult: Papuans with stick guns look up to the sky, waiting for God with a propeller.
There is only one great writer, Fitzgerald, with his first major novels.
Federico Fellini: "8 1/2"
A screen adaptation of the masterpiece of American literature by Francis Scott Fitzgerald: impeccable, perfect - "The Great Gatsby" intonationally - as a declaration of love, the only one for an individual, not always taking place in his short life, but the most significant - "I love you."
Technically impeccable in every sentence, the capacity of the dialogues that reduced the original source to the level of script work required by Fitzgerald. And 100% fullness of the frame: the color of the costumes - from pink Oxford dreamy, through the brown neutral color of the future novelist-alcoholic, to the blue uncompromising color of the winner of polo. Three concomitant to the character of their carriers shade against the background of a kaleidoscope of colors, with which the invisible artist painted the familiar and inherently appropriate black and white of the twenties, without losing the magic of the original negative. And the salon gloss of cars – these chariots for the celestial magnates, on which the latter rush in millimeters above their scorched earth, is daughter – as if only for the sake of creating the contrast they need as air. And sung in the original era of jazz, in the context of the director's plan becomes close to understanding those who, after watching the film adaptation, hastened to take the line in the book for the newly born bestseller of the XX century. This is facilitated primarily by Lana Del Rey, Florence & the Machine and Jack White - brilliant within the framework of the timekeeping set by the director.
Difficulty to understand is inherent in both the book and its adaptation. You can talk about this boldly after the tears of a companion - such sincere, synchronized final credits, such indolent in the mass of passing 3D glasses to an indifferent controller. And such inexplicable, more emotional than tears at a wedding, the birth of a child or a funeral, because there you know who to rejoice for and who to regret, but here not immediately.
Hence arises the desire to express exclusively subjective and without claims to uniqueness point of view on the common for the novel and film idea of the author.
The idea is here, the fatal impossibility of compromise between Love, but not marriage, all acceptable with its mutual adultery, concessions on the background of mutual benefits, and Freedom. Inability to integrate them into each other. The impossibility of the original (biblical) happiness of two people in the world of men. And the greatest in the history of literature (American, at least — we have our Gatsby — Myshkin) biblical faith, hope for this possibility.
If you think about it, the only thing the Creator, through Jay Gatsby, demands of us is honesty. His presence, and hence the exclusivity of the situation in the global understanding, is emphasized by the “eyes of God”, watching the potential and in fact impossible triumph of mankind. But the perfection of honesty lies in the need for exceptional, "male" courage. Only one of the two components of Love can have it, regardless of gender. This is a cruel axiom of humanity as a species, to refute which after Fitzgerald sane person will not undertake.
The author wrote a brilliant canvas about the inability of a person to happiness. It is with this genius, even with a possible misunderstanding of the essence of the message, that he penetrates deeply into the souls of the beholders/readers and extracts golden grains of tears from the empty, seemingly elaborated breed of their souls.
The only positive message of Fitzgerald’s novel for all time is his unique offer to make a binding choice, to decide, like Nick Carraway in a quote that, to my great regret, was not included in the film adaptation:
“Everyone is inclined to suspect at least one fundamental virtue; for instance, I consider myself one of the few honest men I know.”
Classics are classics, and when I read Francis Scott Fitzgerald’s book, I honestly forgot about it. And then my eyes fell on this movie... This movie-- Unusual. The impression from him is so unbearably strong that it is impossible to convey words. It shocked me so much that I was impressed for a long time.
The question of the whole picture - what is a person ready for love? The answer is Gatsby himself. This person is such a bright, strong personality, who simply does not want to live a different fate. His faith in love is so strong that it makes him applaud standing.
A separate conversation about music in the film, the tact, style, direction are so qualitatively selected that you merge literally into the atmosphere that the author wanted to convey to us.
Gatsby is not just a man, he is the Great, as his only best friend Nick will write. “They are all nothing. You're the only one worth all of them put together,' Nick says of those Gatsby unconditionally believes in.
Francis Fitzgerald conveyed a good atmosphere that revolves among nerdy people. As long as you are rich, you have money, people will be drawn to you, but if you lose all this, only true friends will remain.
A powerful film with a difficult story about love and faith, and how often we make mistakes in people. I advise everyone.
The trailer is very different than the movie itself. I couldn’t figure out what this movie was about and why everyone loved it. When I looked at it, I knew it. Was I that excited? No, the film itself is not so beautiful.
Nothing happens in the plot. The whole movie goes to the end. Slowly and gradually the story unfolds. Why Gatsby is great, I didn't understand either. I don’t know what to say without a spoiler. Without this incredible ending, no one would love this movie. Wherever you want to cry, you forget everything. This situation can be described as follows: “I want to cry, so the film is good, I will give a high rating.”
Leonardo DiCaprio is an incredible actor. Emotions on his face, a brilliant smile, Leo added an extra atmosphere to this film. Actress Carey Mulligan, who got the role of Daisy Buchanan. I think I should have chosen a brighter and more beautiful actress for this role. Blake Lively, Rachel McAdams and Amanda Seifred, I think these three actresses were more suited to this role than Carey Mulligan.
The film itself is beautiful, it is pleasant to watch. You'll have fun until the end. I just want to say that there is nothing masterpiece in this film, but the picture itself is good.
The film was one of the most anticipated for me in 2013, but it was one of the biggest disappointments of my life.
To begin with, many years ago I read Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, and I had my own opinion about the characters in the book. I’ve never seen a movie before. In February 2013, the trailer for this film caught my eye. I was absolutely delighted with everything from music to pictures. And of course, I was very interested in watching one of my favorite movies.
After watching the movie, I was very disappointed. Let’s start with the “plus”. I really liked the picture. Bright, lively, intense. The music is really cool. It was great to hear your favorite artists. I also liked the atmosphere of the film. Yeah, the parties were hurried. Very beautiful costumes. Leo DiCaprio's acting. I guess that’s all the pluses.
Now, the downsides. First of all, I don't know why, but when I see Tobey Maguire, I see Peter Parker. Yeah, and watching Gatsby, I saw Peter Parker get in a time machine and end up next door to Gatsby. Second, it was hard for me to watch the movie. I was always waiting for the end. Third, the film put Gatsby’s love for Daisy first. The main thing in the film is love. In the first place in the book is not love. I didn’t like that the director turned the story into a melodrama.
I can say that it is a rare case that I have no desire to revisit this film. I can't say he's bad - he's not. He's average. Not bad, not very good. I don't understand why it has become so mainstream. Probably because of Leonardo DiCaprio. Not the best version of the classic.
If the hype surrounding the modern interpretation of Fitzgerald’s iconic work was quite predictable and obvious, then in my personal understanding, numerous enthusiastic reviews about the final product remained controversial. This is in many ways the original presentation of the famous classics, with its own style and artistic charm, but do not expect from the film an all-consuming story.
Undoubted advantages immediately want to include the original visual style. Colorful shades, modern techniques of visual riot, imposed on the revived era of the United States of 1920s. In addition, unlike historical paintings, the filmmakers managed to bring to the happening certainty of unreality, emphasizing the literary original. In some moments, especially in the heat of the dance scenes, it feels like watching a well-staged musical. The extra pomp and theatricality is very much suited to Jay Gatsby's lifestyle.
In general, the picture quite clearly conveys the gulf between the world of Gatsby and our modern reality. Separately, it is worth noting excellent scenery and simply an incredible amount of props. In particular, the cars that appeared in the frame, it is possible to bring in a separate collection dedicated to the events of the book and the film adaptation. When dozens of extras appear in the frame at the same time, you will surely pay attention to the carefully done work of costumers and its volume.
With obvious merits, the film to a certain extent crosses out the style and cast of the inevitable tension of the story told. For the first thirty minutes, one observes events with breath and anticipation, without missing a single important phrase. After a few more scenes, it becomes frankly boring and this is the disadvantage of both the original work in its middle part and the people who took up the adaptation. Total timekeeping can be safely reduced by a quarter only useful for perception, because in the form in which the film was released, it is unlikely to keep you at the screen for more than two hours. Another rather controversial and ambiguous point can be considered the use of modern musical compositions in the entourage of the history of Gatsby. This certainly attracts attention and brings diversity, but also causes bewilderment.
After reviewing the film directed by Moulin Rouge! by Baz Luhrmann based on the novel of the classic of world literature Francis Scott Fitzgerald, I was again convinced that the Great Gatsby makes a weak impression. The film itself is shot at a high level, although I believe that the musical accompaniment does not correlate with the atmosphere of the film. Its action takes place at a time of disappointment that came after the world war, the collapse of many hopes, during the “lost generation”.
The actors did a great job with their roles. In particular, the character of Gatsby perfectly played the brilliant actor of our time, who deserves several Oscars in his biography, Leonardo DiCaprio. Powerfully played his role, who played in “Pleasantville” and “Spider-Man” – Tobey Maguire.
Nick Carraway is a storyteller, a weak protagonist. Faded in the background of other heroes. What is it, what is it? But it also has an important positive quality – loyalty. After watching the film to the end, the viewer can make sure of this.
Tom Buchanan is the strongest and brightest character in my opinion. Tom, of course, has many shortcomings, in particular, he is unfaithful to his wife, aggressive. But as a businessman, including at that time in America, he can't be soft. Buchanan’s motto is “Manage your life.” He knows what he wants. He is open, does not wear a mask, does not try to be an angel, does not play in public, is not afraid to say anything to his face, is smart. He quickly found out who was hiding behind the face of a respectable Gatsby.
Daisy Buchanan is Tom's wife. She represents what Jay Gatsby lives for. She's his dream, his breath. Daisy is stupid and frivolous. She believes that the best thing for a woman in our world is to be a “good fool.” I think the whole movie proves she doesn't deserve to be with Gatsby.
And finally, Jay Gatsby. He squanders himself in pursuit of a dream, Daisy's beloved. Jay throws unnecessary balls in the hope that maybe they will come his love, hovering in his dreams. He is indecisive and timid on his own, although what this person is doing should have made him a tough and courageous person. This is one of the paradoxes, in my opinion, of a painting and an immortal work.
What surprises me the most is that Gatsby is great. What is the significance of this rich man with a mysterious reputation? That he is great in the power of his feeling, in his devotion to his dream, in his “rare gift of hope,” in his belief in cloudless happiness, in his humanity? I think not. He's not great at anything. Gatsby seems to me, I am not afraid of the word, two-faced! He wears the mask of a generous and decent person, remaining in captivity of illusions. In fact, his story about becoming, about the origins of money, about studying at Oxford, etc., is false. Gatsby is a bootlegger, a lawbreaker. He is friends with the underworld, with corrupt senators, police chiefs who come to his parties. This character achieved everything not through hard work, but through crime. That is, Gatsby was neither an outstanding actor, nor a director, nor a scientist, nor an artist, nor a writer, nor a Nobel Prize winner, which can speak of his greatness! At the end of the film, of course, he is humanly sorry.
The film shows how the illusions that give the world its brightness are wasted. It expresses the tragedy of that time and its painful beauty with a touch of sadness.
“Gatsby believed in the green light, the light of an incredible future of happiness, which is pushed back every year. Let it slip away today, no problem - tomorrow we will run even faster, even further stretch our arms..."
I read The Great Gatsby long before the 2013 film came out and it made a lasting impression on me. It had a lot of philosophy, a lot of deep life meaning, it was both touching, sad and very romantic. It was one of those books that changed my life.
I didn't want to see the movie. Very rarely modern directors manage to adequately film a particular book, and this time it was not about any novel, but about a very significant work for me. However, after reading the positive reviews, I forgot about my skepticism, decided to watch. I have to admit that the film really surprised me.
In an incredible way, Baz Luhrmann’s film evokes exactly the same emotions that the book evoked. This is just the perfect screen adaptation. The actors play flawlessly, the costumes, scenery and cars look great, and the music ... even in the first half of the film, where modern songs play, it does not cause irritation, and closer to the denouement, the music becomes tender, barely audible, completely and completely corresponding to the events of the picture.
In my opinion, this film is worth watching for everyone. If you have a little romance in your heart, The Great Gatsby You'll definitely like it.
What did the director want to say with this film? What's his idea?
These are the questions that come up after watching this movie. Just watched “The Great Gatsby”, and a couple of days ago “The Wolf of Wall Street” and noted that these 2 films have something in common: both of these films with a huge budget and fees (both of these parameters are almost the same for both films), and the plot is slurred, “empty”, uninteresting, after watching this film you get up the same as you sat down, no impressions, the film goes like sand. In this case, I usually call such paintings “video sequence”, but here it is more a theatrical production: a lot of dances, music and musicians, corresponding to the scenery and scenery. I can’t say that it’s bad, rather it’s a lover of “theater in the cinema”, I do not belong to such and believe that everything should be more or less clearly divided by genre: theatrical elements can be present, but in a light, small dose, in order to decorate the film and make it somewhat more refined and elegant.
Regarding the cast, I want to say the following: Tobey Maguire did not fit the role at all, he was too inconspicuous in the film. Perhaps this was the idea: to play a kind of shy poor provincial, contrasting with Gatsby, a man of influence, rich and being the center of attention, but Nick turned out too inconspicuous and in general, in my opinion, did not fit this role, his face does not fit with it at all, honestly, sometimes some stupid feeling arose in the scenes with him. I had to have someone else play Nick.
The same can be said about Daisy. Actress Carey Mulligan even at the preview of the photo on Kinopoisk does not dispose of herself, it is surprising how she was approved for the role of a charming beauty. Naturally, she failed, despite close-ups and romantic scenes with innocent clapping eyelashes.
What can you say about DiCaprio... Of course, he is a great actor, but there is nothing special in terms of his acting, Gatsby turned out to be a simple polite guy. Admittedly, recently noted to himself that the films with the participation of Leonardo DiCaprio all with a fabulous budget, high sales and ratings, as well as rave reviews. With all due respect to this actor, he can not be called great, he has excellent, key films in his career, forever inscribed him in the history of cinema, but there are few of them, as it should be, much less the abundance of films that rivet under DiCaprio or simply invite to play any role in the film, thereby significantly increasing the budget of the picture. Leonardo DiCaprio is not the key to success, not an idol or the engine of the picture, he also needs special roles that suit him. The role of Gatsby in principle is universal, it would be possible to choose a man more representative and more interesting. Leo, with his somewhat "refined" and still young face, doesn't fit in a bit here, especially given the latest tendency to shoot him almost everywhere. This is a profitable way for the actor, but also dangerous: there is a risk of getting tired, annoying the viewer, no one will want such a fate.
Summing up, we can say that the film is well shot, a lot of beautiful scenes and scenery, beautiful music are the advantages of this picture. Unfortunately, the indistinct plot negates them, leaving after viewing a neutral feeling, like this review. What Baz Luhrman wanted to say with this film is unclear. Unfortunately, the “lame” director spoiled the film “The Great Gatsby”.
6 out of 10
Baz Luhrman is a director who shoots with a majestic sweep, using pomposity, chic, shine and gloss. This is how he was in his past famous works, such as Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge, and remained in the new, based on Francis Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby.
Cinema did not surpass the book, which is better characterized by more complete disclosure of characters, greater depth and symbolism, but this was hardly his task, as was hardly possible in this case. And yet it took place both as an integral work out of touch with a strong original, and as a film adaptation.
Screenwriters Baz Luhrman and Craig Pearce skillfully preserved the spirit of Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby”, not imagining themselves smarter than the classic, leaving many book quotes, after all, you can’t tell, carefully following the described images and avoiding what is called “fuck”.
The action takes us to the America of the "turbulent" twenties of the last century, at a time when the goal was the pursuit of pleasures and pleasures, and the desire - the effort to try everything and experience. The story is based on Jay Gatsby’s closest neighbor, Nick Carraway. People flocked to lush parties with a Gatsby. Not knowing anything about the owner, they invented fables, believed all sorts of gossip, and, in fact, did not want to get to the truth as much as to have fun and have fun at someone else's expense. But Jay did not pay much attention to them, because he did not start all this for them, but in order to attract the attention of Daisy Buchanan, with whom he has secrets. The only person who shows a genuine human interest in Gatsby is Carraway, who saw that the dreamer hero made himself, rose from the bottom, turned from a barefoot into a rich man, who wastes money, allows himself expensive things, fashionable clothes and so on, and all because he purposefully goes to the return of the long gone. Jay Gatsby's dreams of the past make him helpless, preventing him from taking off his rose-colored glasses and facing the present. The past consumed him. But this dreamer was many times superior to the surrounding society that did not accept him, which got the state easily, where luxury became something ordinary, and in life selfishness and carelessness prevailed. They know nothing of Jay’s supreme sophistication and dignity, have long been fed up, unlike Gatsby, who could still be admired, and they have never wanted anything as passionately and strongly as he did.
But if the overall tone of the narrative is preserved, then the era of jazz sung by Fitzgerald is replaced by modern heterogeneous styles of music. The soundtrack includes melancholy-gentle, already heard by me to the holes the song of Lana Del Rey “Young and Beautiful”, well covered by Jack White “Love Is Blindness” of the rock group “U2”, as well as compositions of such famous artists as Jay Z, Beyonce, Fergie, musical groups “Florence and the Machine”, “The xx” and many others. Such a bold substitution, a combination of the seemingly incompatible brought events even closer to today's viewer.
The brightest star in the actor’s constellation was Leonardo DiCaprio in the role of Jay Gatsby. His ability to choose roles and get used to them is amazing! The versatility of this actor is complemented by the audience’s love for him, faith in the image embodied on the screen and hope for the cherished deserved statuette for his favorite. Next comes Cary Mulligan. Sweet puppet face makes her Daisy charming, and empty eyes in which you can not see a single drop of love - Daisy, not worthy of adoration. The wife of Mrs. Buchanan Toma played as if descended from the pages of the book Joel Edgerton. His extravagant friend Myrtle Wilson was charismatically embodied by Isla Fisher, and her husband George’s klutz, in turn, was perfectly performed by Jason Clark. A pleasant discovery for me was the Australian Elizabeth Debicki, who acted as Jordan Baker. As an observer and storyteller, Nick Carraway was invited Tobey Maguire - an extremely successful, close to the source, like all others, choice.
It would be cunning to deny that I, as a spectator, bought the beauty of the picture shown, for which production artists Catherine Martin, by the way, the director’s wife, who accompanied him in all the films, and Beverly Dunn, rightfully received the Oscar. The costumes also featured in this film award. And most importantly, the story has fascinated and left in the soul the same hurtful feeling as reading the book, which I am very pleased with.
9 out of 10
I have no complaints about the story itself, but the way it is presented is terrifying. “The Great Gatsby” is one of those cases when a bad script, coupled with a director’s vision of the plot, can spoil all the efforts of actors, costume creators and artists on the scenery and special effects for the film. Baz Luhrmann’s long-suffering “Australia” was not a “gift” either. Diligent squeezing of tears from the viewer in the presence of flat characters, and as a result, the absence of any sincerity and touching. Then I thought, Baz Luhrman, everyone has flops, especially since the movie is not the worst (in my life). It turned out that his career just began to slide downhill.
The mix of luxury in The Great Gatsby is incredibly disgusting. The soundtrack is not in the theme of the 20s, too artificial sugary colorful scenery, posturing of the film in every frame. All this literally puts pressure on the viewer and is deprived of the very atmosphere of melancholy, poetry, dreamy romanticism, which is so necessary for this love story. If the film can be compared with a drink, then “The Great Gatsby” is a cup of tea with a pleasant smell of lilac, maybe lilies, in which they stuffed such twenty spoons of sugar.
The cast is very good, friends since school years DiCaprio and Tobey Maguire for the first time together on the screen, but their characters, like everyone else in the film, match the scenery of beautiful pacifiers. Even in the key scene of the plot, where Gatsby and Daisy are alone in their castle, they behave so infantilely and at the same time insensitively it causes shame because it looks obscenely bad. The film sounds very good words and phrases from the characters, really smart words, but as they represent the film Luhrmann it makes almost no sense, maybe as an exception two or three scenes.
“The Great Gatsby” is without exaggeration one of the worst adaptations of books that, God damn it, I have seen in my entire life. The most expensive film of 2013.
I just watched the movie, the credits are on, and I’m sitting in my headphones and I don’t want to turn the music off – to prolong the feeling of the era I just believed in a little bit more. This is such a rarity when filmed touches the soul and does not let go, leaving roots in your consciousness, grows like a tree, and then blooms with fruits - imperceptibly changing the worldview, actions, attitude to life takes on a different shade. I wanted to love, to feel, deeply, truly. I don’t care about actors and scenery – you can disassemble this picture as Belinsky, digging into the details, disproving every dialogue and reasoning about the unreality of the course of the events described. But what is important is the sensation that remains from what you see - the aftertaste that envelopes you with a light haze of magic, freeing you from the usual view of the world.
Thank you.
I read Fitzgerald’s book in two days, and I watched the film on the second day. I wanted to see what I read on the screen. And I like Leonardo DiCaprio after the Departed. The film left mixed impressions.
I'll start corny. Visually. Everything looks very bright. I think it's too bright for those years. And clothes and manners and interiors. But in general, the deliberate brightness did not interfere with me. For me it was ... a frame of emptiness and frivolity, which the author displayed in the novel. The director showed this emptiness and frivolity in the square. It was a fun thing to do. Why not? Even Gatsby’s partying at home didn’t provoke a wild rejection, because the noise, the hum, the brightness and the ever-changing pictures were for me a reflection of spirituality, the lack of real emotions and the pursuit of empty pleasures.
Music. Many people object to soundtracks. And it seems to me that at times they fit into rapidly changing and clearly modernized pictures. Sometimes it's even -- well, yeah, cool. Of course, there is a lack of jazz and atmosphere. But the visual series somehow ... does not plunge into the 20s. This confused selection is somehow strangely combined with the picture, if not with the overall meaning of the film.
Actors. I liked Tobey Maguire after Pleasantville. Even in Spider-Man, he was nice. But here he is... No place, no time. Didn't make an impression. And the beginning of a movie with alcoholism and insomnia seems like a cheap trick. Daisy. I can't say anything about her appearance. Blonde with big eyes. The figure is slim. Character... Well, I didn't find it bright, bitchy, or anything special in the book. A weak-willed girl who used to live cloudlessly and richly and married a man who provided her with her usual lifestyle. So the actress fit into the image normally. I really liked her husband, Tom. Well played such a determined male. Not a book Tom, not an aristocrat Tom, but Tom is macho. Myrtle wasn't impressed. There was no vitality, no covetousness in consequence. Just a vulgar prostitute. And I'm not even talking about the actress. This is about the image that the director came up with. Myrtle's husband... He was good at the end of the movie. Golfer... She played well in coldness and detachment. But the image isn't exposed. And finally Gatsby... Well... I couldn’t forget that it was Leonardo DiCaprio. I couldn't pass out and forget. I didn’t feel like it was an indescribable image of a man who could make money but had nothing to talk to, even though he had read books to broaden his horizons and cherished a dream for several years. The only moment that impressed, and this, despite the director's cut-off, is his breakdown in the room. Very bright and revealing.
Yeah, I've seen reviews of black people with white chauffeurs. And that surprised me, too. Not in the movie, but in the book. It was in the book itself. Which is weird for those years. But. This is no longer the director's fault.
And the general impressions? What's the weirdest thing... Most of all, I liked the exaggerated pictures of wild fun to modern music. Inserts from the book often seemed inappropriate. The tightness is often just ... annoying. Most of the time, it’s a very heavy movie.
In the best traditions of an uncompromising master
Director Baz Luhrman, once gave us a stunning modern "Romeo + Juliet", impressive "Moulin Rouge", spectacular "Australia", and now no less grandiose new adaptation "The Great Gatsby", without any doubt one of the best representatives of modern cinema. With his absolutely unique author's handwriting, he can safely be attributed to the galaxy of such original personalities as Hitchcock, Tarantino, Fellini, Kusturica and the like. Of course, you will not find any of them like this. And let in the filmography Lurman there are not as many works as the above names, so it is not the number of things. His paintings are real treasures, full of beauty, grace, mysteries, but also devoid of pretentiousness, dirt and vulgarity. Whichever one you don't take, it's a celebration, a celebration, a masquerade. This film is no exception, which is already clear, judging by the trailer. The appearance of this work caused a furore among film fans, again awakened interest in the original source (i.e., the book), and the first adaptation of the novel by Francis Scott Fitzgerald.
When you start watching Lurmanovsky "Gatsby", the beginning is fascinating. You begin to watch the incomparable picture changing from frame to frame, and at the same time try to listen carefully to every detail from the speech of the narrator Nick Carraway (Toby Maguire), so as not to miss anything. The action, unfolding during the first twenty minutes, is exciting, overwhelming, causes the pupils to expand more and more. Meanwhile, all this can be accompanied by the question: "Where is Leo, our Gatsby?"?" After these twenty minutes, the endless series of grandiose visual effects loses all meaning for you, affects your nerves, viewing is slightly boring, and sudden sleep is not excluded. It is understandable: in the frame still did not appear Leo. Here impatient fans of the actor will surely throw the viewing. Calm down, girls! Where are you going? Here it is, your Leo, in all its glory! You can’t imagine a better Gatsby: all this in a frock, with perfectly slick hair and a set of noble grimaces for all occasions. “It’s not real,” you might think. You're right. It’s one of two things: either it’s Leo, or it’s his character. However, as soon as your acquaintance with the real Gatsby still takes place, and the narrator will help in this, it will become clear that only the character is replaying. His mask suddenly falls off, and then all the interesting things begin.
The first half of the film will seem to you almost the most pretentious in the history of cinema: eternal drunkenness, music, tinsel, pompous fun. The second one will destroy everything that the first one tells. It will expose the senselessness and absurdity of this fun, as well as add a considerable amount of drama inherent in all paintings. The ending of the story is uncompromising. After that, we will find an unambiguous answer to the question: "Can I bring back the past?", and understand why the name of the tape includes the word "Great".
The film is shot in the best traditions of the master of his craft. The musical background sets the right tone for the actors and the entire timekeeping. And the camera work, installation and visual effects, by the way, are perfectly aesthetic. It is incredible how much philosophy and subtext can hide behind such a seemingly brilliant picture.
9 out of 10
The Great Gatsby: cinema in the best traditions of the tabloid press
Yesterday we skated to watch a movie in the only and first in Omsk movie theater.
Showed 'The Great Gatsby' with DiCaprio. For all 2.5 hours, I was ready to applaud the people who did not give this actor an Oscar, because only the girl of the main character in Transformers can argue with the expressiveness of his play. Pattern suffering, a template smile, a cardboard person who does not play to noir, and for a participant of the image of the era clearly overplays.
Movies, read out aloud morality is clearly for those who do not know how to think, a worn-out image of a green lantern, so obvious that you do not need to chew, and weep about it - for sure. And the heroes: simple as a leaf of lettuce, cowardly, self-centered, pathetic and tragic so much that you unwittingly wait in every frame for the appearance of deus ex machina, who will punish the guilty, and give the innocent a candy.
Gatsby, licked with the Count of Monte Cristo, who would blush for his casual counterpart, is exhibited in the film so thoughtless that he completely succumbs to one emotion, not being able to experience any other feelings at the same time. Love, pathosity, self-admiration, outrageousness, dedication, sinfulness - flip over before the viewer, leaving bewilderment and longing. The filmmakers clearly saved on writers and editors. The sobs of the narrator of the story of how Mr. Gatsby looks like the one who killed a man are ridiculous and ridiculous.
Even in Vicki it is written in black and white:
'In the 1920s, following the chaos of the First World War, American society entered an unprecedented period of prosperity: in the “roaring 20s” the US economy developed rapidly. At the same time, Prohibition made many bootleggers millionaires and gave a significant impetus to the development of organized crime. Admiring the rich and their charm, Fitzgerald at the same time denounces the unlimited materialism and lack of morality of America at the time.[39]
What the hell is suffering because of human life? For the downed woman paid off in the police with a fair coin, blacks were killed with impunity, most of the rich and powerful had behind their backs a list of dark things - fit mafiosi middle hand.
In the new film, all this is twisted beyond recognition, put upside down and shuffled from the light hand of the chef Shaurmyna. These times were the era of the lost generation, the era of the birth of a new society, NEP and other values of capitalism. And we see how in cardboard decorations variety 'The Great' Gatsby dances on the strings of a puppeteer.
But the apogee of all was a billboard with eyes in glasses, the comments to which were left behind the scenes, more precisely, in the film of 1974, if I remember correctly.
The story goes: 'The artwork was entrusted to a little-known artist, Francis Cugat, when Fitzgerald was not yet finished. The artwork was completed before the novel was written, and Fitzgerald was so fascinated by it that, he wrote to the publisher, he “wrote” the cover in his book. It in Art Deco style depicts eyes hanging over the lights of the amusement park. The depicted woman has no nose, but has sensual lips. A green tear flows from the right eye.'
If you do not believe the author, ask the philologists:
'The world of the valley of ashes contrasts sharply with the worlds of Gatsby and Daisy. The valley of slag is described in gray scale, like its inhabitants. Gray color is associated with old age, boredom, lack of life. Here find expression the second meaning of the word "grey" in English, denoting something boring, uninteresting and has no distinctive features. The same goes for the slag valley resident, Mr. Wilson. It seems to merge with the color of the wall, in it, as in this very place, there is no life. The only attraction of the place is the billboard, which depicts the giant blue eyes of Dr. Ecklberg, but this shield has long faded and faded. When describing this place and its inhabitants, the author uses such words and phrases as ash-grey man, leaden, the cement color, white ashen dust. They all represent shades of gray. The monotony of color epithets describes the psychological state of the characters. '
As a result, in the film, the image became a kind of deep unknown meaning of fate with the spirit of Stephen King, which does not fit in the general style and absolutely accurately with the work itself.
“Like boats, we all try to make our way through the present, but we are ruthlessly carried into the past.”
For a long time she postponed watching the film because of a certain rule: first the book - then the film. No, I don’t always do that, of course, but with promising stories like the Gatsby story, I try to do that.
And so, after reading the book, still in a somewhat incomprehensible state, but with even greater anticipation, I sat down to watch the film. What did I feel in the first ten minutes? A terrible disappointment! Yeah. In some ways, even disgust... I watched and could not understand how such a story to remove such horror!
I couldn’t figure out what was so annoying at the time, but now that I’ve rethinked everything, I can say with complete certainty that this disgusting music was to blame. Yes, it was this modern club music, which was so ridiculously tried to tie to the elegant, sophisticated times, that baffled me. Gatsby's nights made me want to watch a movie. I thought everything was terribly vulgar. But I decided not to turn it off, at least for Leo's sake. And my computer did it for me, suddenly hovering in the 50th minute. Honestly, as you know, not upset, on the contrary, it was the reason for me to suspend the viewing. I thought I'd be back when, let's just say... enough strength to watch.
I decided. A few days later. I decided that, after all, it is not necessary so picky and strict to immediately put a verdict on the film just because what I saw is completely different from the story in my head. At first, the book didn’t seem very interesting.
Everything changed. That must have been the milestone, Gatsby and Daisy meeting. Where I suddenly began to see what I wanted to see. What I imagined. A deep and serious film with an incredible game! Guess who. Of course, the unsurpassed Leo in the first place! This is Leo, for whom it is worth watching any movie. Leo, who suddenly ceases to be Leo, and disappears into Jack, into Arnie, into Romeo. And now Jay Gatsby. I suddenly saw this strong, purposeful and courageous man, desperately making his way through the thorns to his dream, who showed his timidity and defenselessness only when he came close to it. Perhaps that was the greatness of Gatsby. Thanks to Leo, I felt the same way he did. Amazingly, after that moment, I didn’t care what I didn’t like at first. That was the movie I wanted to see.
Of course, I’m not going to talk about Leo, the other actors have done well. But here's the problem: when it comes to DiCaprio, all the other actors become just "different" often, just good. Of course, if they played poorly, it would catch your eye right away, and it would spoil the impression. But I'm happy. Maguire did great. His character impressed me, too. Penetrating.
I will try to make the conclusion brief. I can write everything separately, according to each parameter, but should I? I will give a rating for the impression I have after watching. That's 10. Only 10
The film shows us deep philosophical thoughts, which are often based on spruce noticeable branches of the plot.
The picture wants to tell us: do not lose hope and faith, it is a huge gift! Only hoping, believing and dreaming, Jay Gatsby was able to achieve such results and did not intend to stop there! He believed that he did not belong to the family in which he was born, he believed that he would achieve a better life. And with this faith he went to the heights he intended. But the belief that he would be able to bring back the past unfortunately never materialized.
This man has come a long way, a great job on himself. As Nick Carraway said, 'Nothing on nothingness, that's who they are. You alone are worth all of them put together.' and it really was! Even if he was a bandit, how else was it to break out from a poor family into people? Especially in those days. I don't think Gatsby was ashamed of being a poor man. Look at people ' blue blood' - one solid dirt! What did they do when Jay was gone? Daisy didn't even dare call him and tell him it was over. She just went out with someone she didn't love anymore just because he'd beg for her sins. Oh, I doubt Jay Gatsby would have done the same. Oh, I doubt that. . .
The Great Gatsby has no one left but Nick. He alone cared about the late Jay. And there were none who boasted of their pedigree, nor those who enjoyed his hospitality, there was only one who understood, one who never left in trouble, one who was a true friend, a kindred spirit.
Aspire to your dreams, believe in yourself, rely only on yourself! Remember, faith and hope are a gift that will lead you to your goal!
10 out of 10
Nothingness in nothingness, that's who they are. You alone are worth all of them put together.
Films are divided into two groups: those that bring new thoughts and feelings into my life, and those that bring nothing into my life. This film is one of the first. If I hadn’t read the book before, I might not have had the same experience.
I believed the actors, I believed the story, I cried over every word Daisy and Jay said. Their first meeting after a long breakup was exactly what I wanted to see in the film adaptation.
In general, the film was amazing.
The only thing that bothered me was the music. When I heard some tracks in the film, based on a novel by my beloved Fitzgerald, I was puzzled for more than a minute. But that doesn’t change how I feel about this wonderful story.
The hero’s extraordinary gift of hope impressed me. A very rare person is just as committed to his dream as he believes in himself. He was great and had known this since childhood. The only thing left for him was to understand where he could become in what activity he could prove himself. He met Daisy and from the moment they kissed, he dedicated his great destiny to her. Did he make the right choice? This is another question, as long as the main question remains whether it is possible to return the past.
After hearing so many positive reviews about this film, I finally got back together (a year later) and watched this acclaimed film. The review will be written based on the feedback I have repeatedly heard about the film and the actors who played in it.
I can tell you right away - I didn't like it.
I'm not talking about the film adaptation itself - about the essence of the transmitted plot and so on. It is quite possible - I have not read the book - the plot is well conveyed. But the performance for me as a spectator is at zero. Why? Just because it felt like Baz Luhrmann had been handed a handbook on modern special effects and 3D animations, he decided to do a second Moulin Rouge with a new blackjack and... so on. Why do you have to do every detail on your computer? Couldn't the lawn just be filmed? I really, really didn't like the picture. This feeling as if I was on a computer, although they show the 20s, was very nervous.
Next, the movie is very long. I couldn't wait for it to end. The whole story could be reduced by half an hour at least.
Actors are not convincing, but rather the main character. For me, Leonardo DiCaprio played well, but not in such a way that everyone around shouted “Oscar for him, Oscar!” What for? How fans of the film were killed that he was not given an Oscar! They didn't give it right, there's nothing to give it for. The most sincere moment was when he freaked out at the end - at least some real emotions.
Too many bright colors. Well, I understand that the director wanted to make this film in a different way - hence the computer graphics everywhere, bright, too bright colors to show how hypocritical and fake the city, the idea with modern compositions and Jay Z in almost every song. However, for me as a spectator, this idea failed. The film did not become less protracted, the brightness of the eyes cut. The actors weren't happy. Tobey Maguire with his eternally miserable face, hiding the secret that he is not Peter Parker, and Spider-Man only saved this situation a little.
However, I agree that perhaps it is not only the production, but also the plot - it did not touch me. However, the abundance of computer graphics also left much to be desired.
No, no and no again. This is far from a masterpiece.
4 out of 10
And I can not even give recommendations, because you can watch the film only 1 time and then if you want to kill time. I killed mine.
Perhaps, except for those who have read the book, and who like it, I can advise you to watch the original adaptation.
Her God! The headline may give the impression that this is written by a 12-year-old schoolgirl. However, I assure you, I am an absolutely adequate person who learns to become a journalist and I hope that I have mastered the word, although not yet in perfection, I am 19 years old.
As a rule, I judge films clearly, concisely and calmly, perhaps this is the only exception.
And now in a human way, as befits the people of my future profession.
Speaking of this film, first of all, I want to quote one of the American critics: “DiCaprio has never been so good!” It’s absolutely true, in my opinion, this is the best film in the entire career of this wonderful actor.
He fully conveys the character and feelings of the main character, literally breathing them. He makes you believe in Gatsby’s story and you believe, forgetting the boy from Titanic. You sympathize with Gatsby, admire him, care about his fate and all this thanks to Leonardo DiCaprio, who, in my opinion, made the character more interesting and expressive than Fitzgerald presents in the book.
As for the director's work, it is necessary to mark Baz Luhrmann as a great director. The film is very appropriately used various screen “moves”, (for the quality of shooting is also worth thanking the operator), brightly and disparately shows panoramas of New York, Long Island and the West Ega, shot mainly in Central Park Sydney, or simply qualitatively simulated on a computer. When you watch a frenzied race on the Queensboro Bridge, you have no doubt – everything is really happening, although, most likely, during the filming of this scene, the actors were just sitting in cars.
The most vivid and memorable scenes I would call the climax and the set, where fleetingly you conclude that Leonardo DiCaprio would have come out a good comedy actor, and of course the party scene at Gatsby, which the author describes in the book with special zeal. This episode in the film is very dynamic and memorable. Here Luhrman more than fully conveyed the spirit of the legendary era of jazz despite the fact that the film uses more than a modern set of soundtracks, it does not spoil the picture, but on the contrary is a good addition - its unique highlight. However, we can safely say: “Lurman remained true to himself.” It is worth recalling his previous works, such as “Moulin Rouge” and “Romeo+Gelette”, where everything blows shocking, brilliance and extravagance to understand what to expect from this film. However, such scenes were more appropriate than ever. In addition, they do not eclipse the main idea of the film.
As for the acting (with the exception of Leonardo DiCaprio) – there was not without a spoon of tar. Tobey Maguire, known for his role as Spider-Man, in contrast to his colleagues in the film did not look very organic, it is clear that this is a man from the twenty-first century and to hide it did not help the appropriate costume, not well adapted script. It is also worth noting that Maguire pales significantly against the background of all the other leading actors who perfectly coped with their task.
Separate praise can be addressed to the costume artist, who also worked for fame.
So, summing up, we can safely conclude that “The Great Gatsby” two thousand thirteenth year, this is one of the best adaptations of the legendary novel by Fitzgerald.
10 out of 10
