Thanks for the memories!

Awesome Movie

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

A lot of the failure of this drama about a drug dealing mobster who is cool, is that it relies on the fallacy that it's possible.People who aren't born in the upper class know better. This movie is for the most naive of idiots.A lot of it is due to F Scott himself, but the real blame always goes to the ones making the movie. Coppola could have adapted it in any way, and once written, the director actually has the final say over everything.Even when this movie came out, and I was graduating high school, I thought it was contrived and ridiculous. The Sam Waterson character as narrator of the story, is full of obvious propaganda. His message is sheer hate and lies. We can't possibly believe his "side of the story", because he goes to such extremes to make us think the gangster is nice (thus played by Redford), and the only man against him is a bigot (so he is played by villain star Bruce Dern).The overkill is not possible to believe. There is a credibility problem. If anyone is the bigot, it's obviously the mobster, and the Narrator simply looks for little phrases to back his demonic hatred.It's so obvious, a caveman can see it.Add to this that everything is so predictable that it leaves you flat, with every cliché imaginable, and the fact remains that this is drivel.

This film is okay. Nothing too great, yet nothing too bad. It has one of the best setups for a film I've seen in ages. And the story adaptation is absolutely fantastic, as it almost doesn't miss a thing from the book by F. Scott Fitzgerald. However, when it comes to perks about this film, that's about it. This whole film is extremely flawed otherwise. One example of this is that the actors did sub-par at best when it comes to being believable. Some scenes seem a bit unnecessarily sloppy due to the overly cheesy acting in this film. It just doesn't fit too well with what the movie is about, and can come off as more hilarious than serious. One example is when Robert Redford as Jay Gatsby looks out and clenches his fist as he tries to look mysterious, when in reality, it's just silly, because of the fact that his face is clearly being shown in that scene, which completely kills the mood. And that type of stuff happens a lot in this film. Another example is that, while the casting was okay, it could've been better. I feel like the way that Tom Buchanan was portrayed in this film felt a bit off putting, considering that Tom in this film isn't exactly what you would expect for him to really look like. This film may be very disappointing for those looking for a film with great performances and great casts, as this film doesn't really have either. And because of that, this film can also come off as boring. However, I will be honest and say that the setup and the faithfulness to the book by F. Scott Fitzgerald is enough for me to recommend who are fans of the book, as this film did fantastic with following the book. However, at the end of the day, the version with Leonardo DiCaprio is more recommended than this film, as it's not only better acted, but is just, all around, more fun to watch. As this version doesn't seem to have either of those perks unfortunately.

Starring Robert Redford in the titular role, I wasn't even aware of this films existence until the new film released, and apart from some dated cinematography, this film by Jack Clayton came very close to how I felt the book was told.Seen from the perspective of everyday man Nick Carraway (Sam Waterston) visiting his cousin Daisy Buchanan, we are exposed to a lifestyle of American bliss, riches, ignorance and selfishness. Jay Gatsby, a mysterious man who hates social interaction, hosts parties at his mansion every week for anyone to attend. But he personally invites Nick, seemingly out of the blue, as his confidant and soon Nick discovers that recluse and shadowy Gatsby has feelings for the married Daisy.The book is a quick read; it barrels along because it does one thing only and does it well, it explores the sickness that comes with riches and the often two-faced nature of human beings for both good and ill reasons. Daisy is the embodiment of blissful ignorance; on the surface she is a damsel, she says all women can only be "beautiful little fools", but deep down she has an unpleasantness all her own. Every character has this dark trouble inside of them, apart from Carraway, who behaves here much as he does in the book; as an audience surrogate. The betrayal, misdeeds and affairs that run through the other characters can be clearly shown from the eyes of an outsider.Jack Clayton's film captures the look and feel of the book excellently; from Gatsby's mansion to Wilson's garage, from the cars to the ominous billboard that watches over our characters with unblinking eyes. With a run time of over two hours, everything is explored in detail and the script is the dialogue lifted from the source material. Most of the iconic lines are left intact, and delivered with conviction.However towards the end of the story I wasn't sure if all the characters' darkest motivations were given their fullest attention. I didn't feel Daisy was represented as selfish or as destructive as she could have been, for me the tables radically turn on all of the characters throughout the book. The same goes for Gatsby himself, but his character is more up to personal interpretation (by the end of the book, I didn't care for Gatsby) A final note on Redford's Gatsby, he is good in the role as he pulls off the shady and introverted one moment and the noble soldier in the next with authenticity. He looks like he could have been a soldier a lifetime ago.That is what seems best about this film; its honest appearance and integrity to the book. It just might seem a bit drab, I'm not sure it captures quite how truly weak and corrupted each of the characters truly were.

This version of THE GREAT GATSBY has its share of detractors, and possibly for good reason: the narrative crawls along at a snail's pace, while the period atmosphere, although lovingly evoked by designer John Box, appears strangely false. Everything is just too shiny, even the interior of the Plaza Hotel, where Gatsby (Robert Redford) and Tom (Bruce Dern) have their climactic confrontation. On the other hand Jack Clayton's adaptation offers several visual pleasures - for example his use of symbolism. There are numerous shots of birds flying away, except for one sequence, where Nick (Sam Waterston) discovers a dead seagull on the seashore near his home. This reminds us of how the protagonists - especially Gatsby and Daisy (Mia Farrow) - are imprisoned by their existences. They might have money, but they cannot fly off like the birds into a new life. The film also includes several shots of Gatsby and Daisy reflected in mirrors, or in the water of the outdoor pool at Gatsby's mansion, drawing attention to the doomed nature of their affair. It is as if they cannot endure the idea of face-to-face contact; when they do get close, they seem ill-at-ease, despite their protestations of love. While Gatsby believes that the past can be recreated, Clayton's film proves otherwise. Redford is strangely muted as Gatsby; he certainly looks the past, especially when photographed alone standing on the jetty against the early evening sky, but he seems reluctant to show Gatsby's passionate nature lurking beneath the civilized veneer. Bruce Dern is quite outstanding as Tom - a thoroughly odious person with scant regard for anyone else's feelings, especially those of his wife. Waterston's Nick acts as the narrator for the entire piece; his delivery of the book's final lines in voice-over is incredibly moving, especially when he contrasts Gatsby's naive hope for the future with Daisy and Tom's "carelessness" (Fitzgerald's phrase). This GATSBY is definitely worth watching as an example of Clayton's meticulously precise style of filmmaking.