A review by tanty

Written by tanty on 2013-06-28

Baz Luhrmann repeats what he did with Rome + Juliet and creates a horrible moster full of FX and exaggeration. Still, the cast performs well.

A review by anthonyryan1

Written by anthonyryan1 on 2013-08-21

An over the top portrayal of the classic novel, while at times excessive and tasteless, it truly hits home with the novels original critique on the excess of the time. The cast was **excellent**, the movie stayed true to the novel in all the most important ways. I personally feel the modern soundtrack wasn't appropriate in several cases, but a couple flawless executions.

A review by GenerationofSwine

Written by GenerationofSwine on 2023-01-10

See I don't know how to review this because I came into it hating the novel, and it's 2022, it took me over a decade to finally say "fine I'll watch the movie." And unfortunately they didn't improve things. It's still, well, pretentious. It's still a story of someone that is living above his means, and living a very shallow life, that the audience is supposed to relate to enough to either like or dislike him... ... and I just never could. Holden Claufield was pretentious, but the magic of the Catcher in the Rye is that everyone could relate to him in some way, everyone could connect in some way, even if you ultimately didn't like him. Jay Gatsby, you can't really relate to him. The best description for him is a false prophet, at least the most apt description of him is a false prophet... and that isn't a relatable protagonist. That isn't the sort of character that most people can connect with. And it carried over into this film. It's hard to get into the novel when the protagonist is unrelatable, and just as hard to get into the film. But, at the same time, it's done beautifully and Leo did nail the part. In fact, all the acting was pretty great.

A review by Geronimo1967

Written by Geronimo1967 on 2024-04-16

To be fair to Baz Luhrmann, this is actually quite a difficult story to adapt for the big screen. On the face of it, there are many contradictions right from the start (not least that our relatively normal narrator - trader "Nick" (Tobey Maguire) lives next door to the eponymous and enigmatic millionaire (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his Disney-esque castle). The story is told by way of a retrospective during which the now depressed "Nick" regales his psychiatrist with his tales of life in the fast lane that offered him the opportunity to mix with the rich and famous at the very end of the 1920s through his new neighbour. Simultaneously, he must cope with the unhappy marriage between his cousin "Daisy" (Carey Mulligan) and her selfish, womanising, husband - of old wealth - "Tom" (Joel Edgerton). The film starkly contrasts the wealth and profligacy of the "Gatsby" existence with those of the poverty stricken working class reeling, still, from the impact of the Great Depression. The film looks beautiful. The costumes and the dancing, the cars, the jewellery and the houses (fancy and less so) all add richness to the story and the performances - especially from DiCaprio, Edgerton and to a lesser extent Jason Clarke are really quite good. Maguire and Mulligan less so and I found that unlike in many other of his films, the use of a contemporaneous soundtrack whilst all are clad in the Upstate NY finery didn't work so well for me. The book is an interesting character study looking at just about everything from wealth and privilege to prostitution and mental illness - and for the most part this stays on track. Easily the best cinema adaptation of a flawed book - and well worth watching.

A review by kodkuce

Written by kodkuce on 2024-12-31

I thought that movie was some shitty old-school musical, but boy, I was wrong. A gem, must watch.