Yes, No, Maybe So: The Great Gatsby
Wednesday, May 23, 2012 at 1:00PM 
Jose here. The summer not only brings us cheesy special effects movies and superhero blockbusters, it also announces the start of something else in movie theaters: the arrival of Oscar season trailers! Yesterday we got our first glimpse at Baz Luhrmann's take on F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby which, no surprise, showed us Baz at his Baziest.
Those of you who were expecting him to show some restraint will be highly disappointed (although didn't you learn your lesson with Australia?) while the rest will rejoice in the way he flashes his unique visual style. Anyway, before you pick a team, let's do our usual Yes, No, Maybe So...
Yes
Carey Mulligan gets a lot of flack for her ubiquitousness but the truth is that unlike other actresses of her generation she can play more than one "type". While some might say that Daisy Buchanan is nothing but a more corrupted ancestor of Jenny from An Education, the truth is that the minute CaMu appears on that trailer, everything else seems to vanish around her. Remember this is the kind of woman you'd literally go to prison for and never before has she looked lovelier and more "movie star" than here.
Everything in the first twenty seconds of that trailer screams Moulin Rouge!
Fitzgerald purists who might be worried that Baz will rape one of the grand American novels, should relax, considering that the trailer proves that Baz and his co-writers captured some of the greatest moments in the largely introspective book. The scene with Jay (Leonardo DiCaprio) throwing his shirts all over Daisy, while she narrates and mentions the "most beautiful shirts" literally sent shivers down my spine. See also, how Baz captures their rainy rendezvous, down to the "white linen suit" worn by Gatsby.
No
The CGI looks slightly tacky. Although Baz usually knows what he's doing and this movie after all will be released in 3D. So let's wait and see, but for the most part everything CGI looked like it was out of Speed Racer.
Maybe So
The time when Leonardo DiCaprio was one of the dreamiest actors onscreen is now long gone. Sure, he's turned into one of the most fascinating actors of our times, but he no longer has that magic he had in movies like Titanic and of course Baz's own Romeo + Juliet.
His Gatsby feels slightly too old and gasp perhaps not handsome enough. After all, in the book he is supposed to be almost ethereal in his overall appeal. I am sure I am not alone in thinking that someone like Armie Hammer would've been more adequate for this part. Remember how he stole Julia's breath in Mirror, Mirror?
Baz tends to overdo his villains. Sometimes it works wonders, the Duke's wickedness highlighted the overall artifice in Moulin Rouge! but when it fails, it's unbearable, think of the ridiculous part David Wenham had to play in Australia. The truth of the matter is that Tom Buchanan is no villain and having Joel Edgerton play him as a mustached screaming lunatic seems to be slightly over the top. As usual, we'll have to wait and see...
For now we're giving it a big YES. You all know how devoted we are to Baz here, right? So now it's your turn, will it be Yes, No or Maybe So for The Great Gatsby?
Reader Comments (36)
Fun fact: my friends and I loved to imitate the "SUCH BEAUTIFUL SHIRTS" scene after being shown the Robert Redford film in high school. It also remains the only thing in that version that I can actually remember.
I'm an unreserved Yes all the way but as of now my anticipated Leo performance of Christmas has become Django Unchained instead of this. I guess that was inevitable...
I think Leo is really well-cast in this part. Robert Redford seemed miscast in the '70s version precisely because he was a little too smooth and ethereally pretty; he didn't seem like someone who had to struggle for much or wont for friends or women. Gatsby is supposed to be someone with a past who doesn't quite have everything going for him (it's an interesting contrast with, say, Don Draper, a character who successfully reinvents himself, despite some agonizing here and there).
Anyway, I'm a yes. I love Baz and think Leo is a great actor.
First time I saw it I thought - DISASTER. Worse than Australia. But it's growing on me. Although Di Caprio looks constipated like he's doing the worst impression of Ralph Fiennes in The English Patient.
YES to seeing a beautiful version of 1920s NYC, those fabulous black couples sipping champagne and dancing in the opening sequence, and to the lush visuals over all.
MEH to DiCaprio...I don't know if I buy him as the romantic hero anymore. He doesn't give off the heat that Gosling does with the ladies.
Yes! I love Baz for making my favorite movie ever (Moulin Rouge) and this looks like it'll be awesome too. I need to reread the book now.
I'm mixed.
It looks gorgeous- aside from the conspicuous CGI and the misspelling of "Ziegfeld".
I adore the Art Deco design for the title, and I think DiCaprio will actually be quite good.
But it looks so, so excessive. The parties in the novel are excessive- but these are elaborate production numbers, which seem to dwarf even Moulin Rouge. Even the modest lunch with Wolfsheim is a massive affair. Everything about it screams "more, more, more!".
I just hope that Luhrman is able to capture the hollowness and the pain with attaining all the "more, more, more" that Fitzgerald wrote.
I know it's just a trailer, and they want to make it look exciting and flashy. But, for all the parties and car crashes and wealthy excess, it's the smaller, human moments that define the novel and make it great.
After seeing that trailer I am such a yes that I have decided to re-read the book for the first time since high school instead of moving on the actual next book on my list, with the sole intention of getting myself EVEN MORE EXCITED for this.
From what I remember of the book, I think Leo is pretty perfectly cast. Yes, Ryan Gosling would have been great, but to tell the truth he probably looks a bit too much like Redford in the previous (HORRIBLE) film version that it might have been a problem for me.
But the misspelling of Ziegfeld made me weep a bit.
Looks great to me. DiCaprio doesn't bother me. I'm way more worried about Tobey Maguire, but even that concern has been pretty well tamped down based on the trailer.
I don't doubt I'll see it, but I didn't love the trailer and I'll be seeing it with some reservations. The music felt way off and just a bit desperate ("Hey kids, Jay-Z and Kanye!"). There's an awful lot going on in these two minutes and none of it seemed authentic. Which may be the point, but it's disappointing because I was certain that Luhrmann announced the end of his "red curtain" films. Where the purposeful artificiality of Moulin Rouge! was still beautifully lush, and Australia had an old-school sweep I enjoyed, this just looks garish. Which, again, may be the point, but could end up making this one a difficult sit. Especially since it appears (based on solely on this trailer) that the actors may not be inhabiting characters, but merely playing dress up. Everyone, save DiCaprio, looks and sounds wrong. I hope these initial reactions are proven wrong though. I'm definitely a fan of Baz, but it might be nice to see him rein it in just a bit moving forward.
I think this looks awful. I am a hugE Moulin Rouge! fan, but it appears as though Baz has decided to make a story serve his style rather than the other way around and that spells disaster. This just looks exactly like Moulin Rouge! but instead of bright reds it's yellow and purple and everyone keeps insisting to me that its 1920's New York and not Luhrmannland.
I totally accept that to make a good movie from this book the adaptation would need significant alterations and a heavily stylistic directorial signature in order to gather its own voice and not be an illustration of Fitzgerald's prose, but this is so loud and busy that I have a very difficult time believing it can capture such internalized, wounded characterizations as would be needed to tell this story in any sense that would work. It would seem to me that Baz is celebrating the superficiality of the era, when the entire book is about the hollow soullessness of the "Jazz age" and Gatsby's massive disappointment bred in Daisy's superficiality.
Speaking of Daisy, I have to disagree with nearly everything you said on the matter, Jose. I agree that Carey Mulligan is a wonderful actress but I've thought right from the beginning that she was miscast in this, and based on this trailer I think I might have been right. I think she looks really awkward and tragically out of place here. Not to mention she doesn't pass for her own age, as she looks 22, and Leo doesn't pass for Gatsby's age, as he looks like he's closing in on 40. I also think Tobey Maguire is just lackluster casting. I suppose this role is a good fit considering what sort of persona he is known for, but I just find him boring. I like Leo as Gatsby actually, but I would've preferred his 2004 self. It's one of those rare stories where the ages of the characters are very important and shouldn't stray much from the source, because Gatsby is supposed to be a young man still recovering from the trauma he experienced in the war... 4 years prior. The only 40 year olds who fought in WWI were career military men who wouldn't have experienced the war as Jay did.
I hate to be a downer, and as a regular reader I know this site is populated with many Baz fanatics, but I am shocked that I'm seem to be the only dissenting voice. I really want to be proven wrong here, but this smells of bomb to me.
Give me DiCaprio anytime of the day. He has aged extremely well, and I will definitely jump his bones.
excuse me for saying that.
Anyway, the film looks okay, but Luhrmann does fine and DiCaprio does great always, so I'm still in.
No. That looked awful.
I am an American Lit teacher ... Fitzgerald and Steinbeck... and to a lesser extent Hemingway are my favorite authors of all time ... The Great Gatsby being my favorite novel ....
Truly the novel cannot and will not ever be put on the screen successfully ( to capture the real Fitzgerald ) ... so I am a definite NO... saying that, If it was called something totally different and not related to the novel .. it looks very good!!!!!!
Yes. I'm always down for Baz, even the misfires. Having read The Great Gatsby recently, I think the shallow glitz referred to in the book is perfect for his explosions of excess. So now it will be a question of pulling off that central dynamic. Mulligan will hold up her end - DiCaprio will need to provide the right touch of self-doubt and desperation, so we'll see. I always thought Buchanan was an SOB so we'll see how he plays out. Australia was a (fascinating) disaster though, so I will cross my fingers and hope.
MAYBE. Visuals look fantastic but the music in the trailer is gawd awful. Is this modern day with folks playing dress-up from from 1920's, or what? I couldn't get a sense of the era. DiCaprio will be fine; not convinced about Mulligan. Hopefully they'll be better than Redford and Farrow.
But once again, was it really necessary to remake this? Surely there are other classic stories floating around that have NOT been made into films.
Baz worked magic with Strictly Ballroom and Moulin Rouge, but his Australia was beyond dreadful. Will have to wait and see.
at least knowing where the costume oscar is going will make our tipping a little easier
Not being mean, just realistic- carey is not pretty enough to Be daisy and looks awkward, unconfortable and miscast (daisy was not a blonde by the way).
It looks like a lot of Style and lots of fuss over little substance.
HORRIBLE MUSIC.
Remember Dark Shadows, which is the result of type of conservative director which lead to nowhere but good-look-appearance. The great gatsby is supposed to be great, not to be full of music.
I am all about this. I can't wait! I get it, but I can almost forgive Baz for everything else... because he delivers the visuals. Sumptuous! Glam! Almost camp!
It's a rare Baz Luhrmann film so it's not even a YES I wanna see it but an OF COURSE DUH.
I don't wanna speculate anything about the film because I wanna be optimistic it works out for our Baz and beyond the design and look for the film (gorgeous) we didn't seem to get very much context footage anyways. The only single thing I'm not looking forward to is Tobey Maguire but we'll cross that bridge when we get there, won't we?
Otherwise, I know how I'm spending the 25th of December! /singsong voice
I'm still trying to understand why this is in 3D.
I'm a yes only because I've been waiting for Joel Edgerton to break out in Hollywood for a good ten years. After Warrior and The Thing not doing too great, I'm worried another flop will ruin his chances for good.
I can't take Tobey Maguire seriously as an actor; his face looks like a penis.
I am a Yes. I think this will be probably be crucified by critics when it comes out. But at the very least Baz is not doing the traditional "prestige book into prestige movie' approach like the 1974 version. This is a very difficult book to adapt and when it's done too by the book, the result will be boring as the 1974 version proved. So, at the very least I am sure it won't be boring and God bless Baz to have the courage to Baz-ified everything including this!
Baz? Yes. Always...
Maybe. Casey and Pam took the words out of my mouth - maybe it's just the way the trailer is cut, but I doubt it. They made it look as much like MR as possible, with Tom Buchanan standing in for the Duke. And - modern music? Really? I get that he doesn't want to be "traditional" but contemporary music? Really? He did that TEN years ago with MR. I loved MR - TEN years ago.
"Zeigfield" - now that's just plain lazy. No excuse for that at all.
That looked like pure CGI nonsense. Oh, Baz.
NO to this trailer.
before this trailer it was one of my most anticipated movies... now i'm DYING to see it ♥
What makes me lean towards NO is all the posts on facebook from possibly illiterate people who endorse this gaudy looking mess with "Amaze-balls!"
"the truth is that the minute CaMu appears on that trailer, everything else seems to vanish around her."
LOL really? That's my exact problem - she wasn't striking at all, she wasn't the center of my attention. She doesn't have the magnetism, the mystery, the allure, or the beauty to play Daisy. All I saw was (once again) teary eyes. :/ She is a good actress, but Daisy Buchanan she is not. I think she'll give a very natural performance and her voice work is great... but why is she crying in nearly every frame? I also don't know if she can convincingly play someone who's supposed to be superficial.
But even worse than her is the horrid Tobey Maguire. He is all wrong for Nick. Too boyish and not nearly cynical enough. That's a disaster waiting to happen.
I worry for DiCaprio because I thought this would be a "fun" role for him but the trailer showed a lot of his more "serious" moments - I don't see the Gatsby charm outside of that shirt scene.
The movie looks like a train wreck, tbh. The casting is all wrong and the director hasn't set the right tone for the material.
This shit is MADE out of YES.
Shit I'm still reeling from Australia and Nicole Kidman's hissyfit and stammering performance, ol' Baz had better have his act together with this one.
BTW - what the HELL ever happened to Leo's charisma and charm? The lightness that balanced the drama. Where the hell did that actor go?
A Maybe reeling towards a Yes. I will probably watch this because it looks to be a good old time, although I can't help but feel that your comment about Luhrmann being faithful to the book's themes will be dead wrong. Let's face it - he doesn't make movies for the introspective drama. Romeo + Juliet was not a subtly rendered interpretation of Shakespeare by any means. He makes movies for the spectacle, the shameless extravaganza and razzle-dazzle. I'm going into this one with the full expectation that one of my favorite novels' themes, tone, characterizations, etc. will be totally disregarded and/or flattened. I'll probs end up having the same ambivalence towards this as I did towards Joe Wright's Pride and Prejudice.
"It would seem to me that Baz is celebrating the superficiality of the era, when the entire book is about the hollow soullessness of the "Jazz age" and Gatsby's massive disappointment bred in Daisy's superficiality."
THIS
This just looks horrible. Ugly, loud, cheap. And why 3D? What special effects are needed in a film of The Great Gatsby? Does Luhrman even know what the novel is about?!
This trailer makes me feel such an old grouch. Jesus....
It looks art directed within an inch of it's life, but I'm a "yes" because of the book and Leo.
Then I saw the 3D version before "Men in Black 3" and became a "YES YES YES". It really looks stunning and gorgeous in 3D on the big screen.