Relentless Bombardment - Part III: The Great Gatsby - Superheroes & Explosions

Part III: The Great Gatsby – Superheroes & Explosions

(– ***Spoilers For The Above*** –)

W.B. Preston

     I walked into this film expecting to hate it. Not because I hate the material, I barely remember reading it in high school, and I casually flipped through it during the weeks leading to its theatrical release. No I expected to hate it because it is a Hollywood film based on a beloved American Classic, and this corporate machine has a tendency to screw these kinds of things up. However I must admit I was quite mesmerized by the entire spectacle of the thing. Although I would not begrudge an English professor his particular criticisms on the poor translation of Fitzgerald’s magnum opus, of which there are many liberties taken by the filmmakers with the old master’s work, I must say this is quite the entertaining piece.
   
      It has all of the brightness, calamity and destruction of the rest of these pre-summer releases, yet the driving force behind this film is not superpowers, explosions and gargantuan vulgarity, but rather an exhibition of decadence of style, and emotion. An overindulgence in extravagance, a display of waste and excess of wealth stacked to dizzying heights, a tower whose fall unfortunately is nowhere near as exhilarating as its construction. The parallels between the production of the film, the time period for which the film takes place, and the current socio-economic atmosphere are uncanny. The film itself is said to have cost in the upwards of 200 million dollars, however its producers used some sort of tricky tax credit money switcheroo so they can write it off as only a 120 million dollar film. Basically they spent an ungodly amount of money to make this film, but in order to save face on the films returns, they had their lawyers and banks and governments provide them with the unique opportunity to discount 80 million dollars, because they were so gracious enough to make the film in Australia. In this world of cynicism, duplicity, and sarcasm, does irony even begin to define anything anymore?

     Essentially this is a classic 1930’s ‘talky’, in every sense of the word, but photographed, edited, colorized and costumed as if it were The Avengers. Every penny is up on that screen, and we are in awe of the sheer spectacle. The sheer hedonism at display here is enough to justify capitalism’s current fall from grace, as well as the fall prophetically hinted at in Fitzgerald’s book, but largely ignored in this adaptation. Thinking back on those party scenes, to describe them as lavish would be asinine, I can’t help but deem a future as bleak as Oblivion to be well deserved.
 
   I’m no fan of the voice-over narration technique, especially when that voice is Tobey Maguire, and add to that the unnecessary conceit of changing Fitzgerald’s work to shoehorn in a bewildering plot involving Nick Carraway in an addiction clinic, it’s enough to drive me crazy. However once we get passed the rather odd prologue, I was whisked away into this cinematic treat, the whirling camera and the candy colored costumes, the frenetic editing and Fitzgerald’s words peppered throughout, I half forgot that the voice-over was there.

     This is Baz Luhrmann’s greatest cinematic achievement, surpassing Romeo & Juliet, and a reorganization of the sweeping scope of his Australia, which I found to be an interestingly odd film. I however was far away from any film criticism at the time and went into the movie on DVD without any preconceived notions about it, and quite enjoyed its weird comedic elements and strange mysticism, even if it was a bit gaudy, with it’s emotion hanging on its sleeve and its dialogue being a bit too on the nose. Some of that unsubtleness can be found here as well, however there is a visual focus that exemplifies the emotion on display, which neither of those other two films can boast. These visual cues and technical decisions often contrast with my preconceived notion of the material, yet these decisions were not made arbitrarily, and most serve to reveal subtext and allow the story to bloom colorful images.

     The utter control and the successful execution of a devised plan must be applauded here. There is not a wasted shot, nor a dragging moment to be found in this film. There is no doubt that every moment, every sound, every color, every word and every distortion of time was planned, well thought out, and then applied with a singular vision and voice. Clearly I was stunned by the aesthetic applications only glimpsed in the trailers, I was unprepared for what I witnessed. It was after this film that I began noticing a strand of themes running through this film, from Oblivion to Iron Man to Gatsby. The wealthy, the privileged, the 1%, singular in their narcissistic ambitions, which manifests itself physically in the case of Oblivion’s protagonist Jack, even as the world descends, or has descended into ruin and chaos, they struggle to find a truth, or peace, or love, things which can never be derived from money or power as ideals.

     Perhaps for this reason the American audiences no longer connect with most American films the way we did some forty or fifty years ago. This is well before my time, but I know my history. As the filmmakers made more and more money, the goal of filmmaking became making more and more money. A filmmaker’s goal was always to make money going back to the nickelodeons, but in the time when film was unabashedly adored, there was a code of honor, of artistic integrity that was lost, serendipitously in the mid seventies with Jaws and Star Wars. Even those films had a sense of moral weight, a modest ambition, made unselfishly with money in concert. Now money is the only goal, or fame, or power, and the average American can no longer relate to the filmmakers. Possibly a similar situation presented itself in the late fifties and early sixties. Yet at that time there was an idealistic love of cinema, while today we cinephiles love film cynically, or ironically. We live to bash the lofty ideals that today’s filmmakers work with. They make pessimistic, artistically unambitious films, and we love them for it. Most of their accomplishments can boast merely of dollars and cents but where is the human spirit? Consequently Oscar bait films make so much money now, because the rest of the year is devoid of actual human stories told by actual humans. Resulting in directors like the Coen brothers, David Fincher, and Darren Aronofsky have a devoted fanbase and have enjoyed recent financial success, because their films do not appear to be motivated by monetary goals alone.

     Back to Jay, in his fervor to attain Daisy’s love, and his unbridled attempt to belong to the upper echelon of society, he amasses huge amounts of wealth, fame and seemingly power, all through nefarious means. He is fixated on winning Daisy’s affection, so much so that his achievements mean nothing unless he can share them with her. However her love is not enough, he must possess her, wholly, and this is where the truth comes. He not only wants to take her from her wealth-born husband, he wants to embarrass Tom, he wants to show him up. Gatsby must have Daisy, but she must renounce her love for Tom, she must say that she never loved him. Then and only then can Jay be happy, however this is not love, and this is why he loses her. For Jay it was never about love, it was about showing the rich and privileged that he is better than they are, and this is his downfall.
Some have said that this represents a self-realization, as Jay got what he thought he wanted but really he never wanted it at all. I think this is a false criticism, I believe he fails because his motivations were askew. He was motivated by revenge, not love, and for this he must pay the ultimate price. He gained his power and his wealth through nefarious means; he sacrificed his soul, not for love, but for vengeance. A vengeance he sought in the name of love, and for this betrayal of truth he had to pay with his life. The moral here is be true to thy self and you shall receive all that you truly want. Here I am reminded of a film that many compare this novel to, Citizen Kane:

     “If I hadn’t been very rich, I might have been a really great man.”
    
      Some critics have said that Citizen Kane is the best adaptation of Fitzgerald’s masterpiece that has ever been made, or is likely to ever be made. I’m not sure if that is true, however Orson Welles’ words apply unequivocally to Mr. Gatsby.
    
      If Mr. Lhurmann and co-writer Craig Pearce were going to make any alterations to Fitzgerald’s work, it should have been the ending. The roaring twenties, during which the ratio of wealth was collecting in the hands of the few, while the masses scraped by on nothing, ended with one of the most epic failures in the history of Western society. This was a time of great excess and decadent spending. It was a decade of the amassing of great wealth and simultaneously the fabrication of paper empires. Fitzgerald foresaw the matches lying at the base of these paper skyscrapers. Matches that the wielders of wealth were too busy in their indulgences to notice. They built towers atop these paper foundations, which once were set ablaze they were too high up to smell the smoke. As the towers, the monuments of wealth fell, so did the men as they jumped from their windows. Fitzgerald saw this fall, perhaps not to the extent or nature but he saw men living well beyond their means, lofty and arrogant. The higher the living, the harder the ground.
    
     This should have been juxtaposed with Gatsby’s fall, the film is already over the top and outrageous, why not make the fall doubly so? A movie whose beginning is so audacious and awe-inspiring ends in a whimper, and quietude. They obviously had no problem altering the text; why not go out with a bang? They, rather ham-fistedly, had juxtaposed the wealthy men with the poor throughout the film already, I say take the final plunge; the actual history supports the drama.
    
     Regardless of this odd and fairly obvious omission, the screenplay is well written, and the dialogue expertly delivered by all involved. Perhaps Leonardo DiCaprio’s finest and most nuanced performance. While I loved his portrayal of a slave master in Django Unchained, I found his Jay Gatsby to be more insightful. Candie was a sneering caricature, a character far outside Leo’s perceived range that he nailed perfectly. A comedic villain whom he fully committed to and clearly enjoyed inhabiting. However his work in Gatsby seems more accomplished in my eyes, as it is a character he has played time and time again, yet he still brought something new, something fresh to. I was impressed by the variance from prior roles in a performance of a character that is in many ways similar to many of his prior roles. I enjoyed Carey Mulligan’s performance in this film, which is not always the case. I’ve seen five of her other major releases and she just doesn’t seem to get what being an American actually means. Here she is portraying a character far enough removed from contemporary Americanism to be believable. The always-reliable Joel Edgerton is again reliable. Despite the terrible decision to use voice over, Tobey actually does a fine job as Nick, although it would have been nice to seem him developed a bit more as his own character rather than a glorified cipher, or stand in for the audience.
    
     There are shots in this film that seem like paintings on the giant canvass, the film is quite beautiful to look at, from beginning to end. The 3-D is unnecessary, a word that describes much of this film, but not a distraction and certainly helps to engross the viewer by insulating peripherals.

3.5 out of 5 stars.

Up Next:

Part IV: Star Trek: Into Darkness – Edge of Anger

Related articles

• The Great Gatsby (charlinewton.wordpress.com)
• [Review] The Great Gatsby (2013) (supermarcey.com)
• The Very Great Gatsby. (justonegirl123.wordpress.com)
• THE GREAT GATSBY: The Irony and the Ecstasy (filmgrouch.wordpress.com)
• Gatsby, Baz and Fitzgerald (5fifteenblog.wordpress.com)
• The Great Gatsby (crookedfilmreview.wordpress.com)
• The Great Gatsby (phiaandloathing.wordpress.com)
• The Great Gatsby (2013) (consumedbyfilm.wordpress.com)
• The Pretty Good Gatsby: Because I've Never Seen Such Beautiful Shirts Before (moviefellas.wordpress.com)
• Why I Disagree With Critics Of The New Gatsby Film (101books.net)