1. says

    Breathtaking! As an English teacher, I simply adore this!

    @Toto: It’s SUPPOSED TO be gaudy, for three reasons: 1.) It’s the Jazz Age, the Roaring Twenties, the time whose overconsumption and excess led to the Great Depression; 2.) It’s The Great Gatsby, a lasting symbol of the Jazz Age; it’s very high-and-low dramatic; 3.) It’s Baz Luhrmann; his movies ARE gaudy: Simply Ballroom, Romeo and Juliet, and Moulin Rouge.

  2. Bart says

    Looks pretty but stagey. Was it me or did DiCaprio have the same look on his face in every clip they showed of him?

    I love Baz Lurhmann but this preview didn’t look anything but overfilled and arch.

  3. solice says

    It won’t take much to beat the Farrow/Redford version, which wasn’t even well liked in its time. At least this one has a stylish look.

  4. Redebbm says

    A lot of the people are commenting on the music, i think it’s purely for the trailer since these songs have been in many, many, other trailers. I love gaudy films, and since the Roaring 20s was suppose to fit Lurhman’s style this actually looks tame. I can see why some wouldn’t like it for the Romeo & Juliet tale, but hear it’s not just appropriate but required. I like Baz Lurhman’s films. Not everyone’s cup of tea, but i hope it is good. There has just been too many “bad” films lately. Plus there is usually a gay couple in each of them if you look closely.

  5. Derek Pearce says

    Folks– the music is bound to be contemporary in the actual film if Romeo&Juliet and Moulin Rouge are anything to go by. Looks visually stunning, not sure how it will be performance-and-script-wise though.

  6. eric says

    the tone looks wrong. too menacing. the story is from nick’s POV and stays non-judgemental and even a bit naive until the end. Remember his last words to gatsby, the man who lives for love, “you’re worth the whole damn lot of them.” so there should be nothing evil or dark about him, his house or his parties. the tone is wrong.

    BTW, leo doesn’t look gorgeous enough to be gatsby. isla fisher is bound to be fabulous as jordan!

  7. Ricco says

    How many attempts have been, both on stage and on film,to produce F. Scott Fitzgerald’s iconic novel, and have fallen flat?

    Certainly it sounds hopeful with the given cast . . . I assume Toby McGuire has been cast, and quite appropriately I might add, Nick Carraway, and DiCaprio as Jay Gatsby, also great casting . . . but these versions (there has been six I think) have historically fallen flat and the Fitzgerald descendants have become leery, and protective.

    There is a haunting quality to the novel that perhaps defies, at least so far, adequate filmic interpretation. It may be that the attempts have been to literal (even the the more loosely based renditions), tried too hard, as a period piece, to be too authentic, sacrificing the mood and the tone of Fitzgerald’s novel.

    I fear that they may be even more too much on the nose with this new attempt. If they are going to shoot for a character driven piece, and laden it down with dialogue, it might work better to transplant the narrative to the deep south, where Tom and Daisy Buchanan, and Daisy’s friend, Jordan Baker, just a step above trailer trash . . . very rich trailer trash, and infuse the screenplay with all the deep south witticisms and eccentricities they can muster.

    Or get Terrence Malick to streamline the screenplay, and direct it. Anyone who can garner Best Director and Best Film Academy Award nominations for utter stream of consciousness that was “The Tree of Life” would probably have the best chance of capturing the haunting quality of Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby”

    Or not!

  8. gr8guyca says

    Ricco is correct. There are 5 film versions of “The Great Gatsby” – including the silent 1926 version, which no longer exists. The ones that I have seen – 1949, 1974 – don’t get it right. I actually liked Mia Farrow as Daisy and the Ralph Lauren wardrobe in the 1974. Judging from the trailer – which might be premature – I don’t like this. It’s a hard balance to make a movie about a glamourous life that isn’t a glamourous movie. The book is a tragedy and a blistering critique of “the American Dream.” This version looks like it is seduced by the surface, rather than the substance. But we shall see….

  9. JH says

    omg no. just no.

    it’s like Fitzgerald by way of Sin City. what a self-indulgent way to ruin a classic story of innocence lost than by making it completely self-aware and meta. ugh.

  10. sparks says

    Think I’ll stick with the book.

    And yeah I agree with James, the music just doesn’t fit the era or the mood of the movie.

    If they wanted to tell a modernized version of the story, they should have done that. This is obviously set in the original time. Period pieces with non-period music are doomed to feel gimmicky or cheesy. This looks to be no exception.

  11. Matt Lindsay says

    It looks spectacular. And I think Leo cuts a dashing figure. Visually perfect.

    But Luhrmann’s use of a modern soundtrack to tell an old story is laboured. The sound of the narrative’s era is so rich . If they don’t revive it for a new generation, it would be one hell of a wasted opportunity.
    But it has to be an improvement on Australia’s plastic epic . Worst movie ever.

  12. Zlick says

    I’m looking forward to it. I’ve liked all of Lurhman’s films until Australia – so I’m eager to see if he can get his groove back. I’m not so concerned if he commits sacrilege on Fitzgerald’s novel – has there been one success in 6 attempts? No, I’m more concerned with this being a successful take by a visionary artist … and his vision does not have to merge perfectly with Fitzgerald’s (the novel’s still there); it just has to merge nicely.

    You can’t tell too much from a trailer. The look is interesting, if overblown. D’uh. Baz Lurhman, folks. The casting seems great. DiCaprio’s a little past his prime, but might cut a fine Gatsby with the right amount vaseline on the lens. And we can’t tell Anything about a film’s music from its trailer. Stock music is usually used (and someone already pointed out this piece has been heard in many trailers). But yes, Luhrman is fond of using modern music in period pieces. No success at that, you say? May not be your cup of tea, but his biggest hits have done that brilliantly.

    Great cast, fine director – I’m giving this all benefit of doubt.

  13. Lulu says

    I was so excited about this…now i’m really desappointed.
    The music is awful and it doesn’t fit the era at all,actually it would be awful even for a contemporary era movie.
    More than stylish it looks trashy.

  14. MrJ says

    As a real fan of the book Im looking forward to any new cool looking version. I think it will capture the decadence of the decade before the fall beautifully. I cnt wait to see it.

  15. MichaelJ says

    I fully recognize the talent and craft behind Luhrman’s work, and he has a distinctive style. That said, I don’t particularly like that style, particularly his use of contemporary music and, especially, that constant cutting from one shot to another. I can’t recall any shots in Moulin Rouge that lasted more than 3-4 seconds, and watching an hour-plus of it is exhausting. His work is all spectacle and not much substance, kind of like the same feeling of cheapness I get from most music videos.
    That said, I will probably see the movie. Luhrman does create a stunning spectical, and does get good performances out of his actors. And the three leads — Leonardo DiCaprio, Tobey Maguire, and Carey Mulligan, two of whom I’ve always had a crush on — are among the best working today.

Leave A Reply