MovieChat Forums > The Great Gatsby (1974) Discussion > A different perspective on this movie

A different perspective on this movie

posted 15 years ago by justlev
5 replies | jump to latest

A major review of this movie criticizes it for having a lavish budget, but being too faithful to the book thus causing its message to be lost in translation. I did not get this impression when I watched the movie. I was simply in awe of the grand scale of spending portrayed in the movie. Do you realize the size of a polo field? --10 acres and it's in East Egg! Or the herringbone hardwood floors, an elevator in a house, the expensive cars, an army of servants, or the silver tea service. I was fascinated by the extravagant lifestyle of a lost time and in that sense, I thought the movie conveyed the roaring twenties perfectly. Maybe I should reread the book to see what I am missing (haven't read it since high school), but this movie definitely nailed the extravagance to a tee.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] blairsylvester 13 years ago

I thought the movie wasn't bad . But the book is less about extravagance and more about the sense that the way of life for Tom and Daisy is falling off. They were raised in a world of distinctions. A world where having money wasn't enough you had to be born into a respectable and moneyed family. But now there is a sense that anybody can climb not only the financial ladder but the social ladder as well (i.e. all the new money people actors / directors/ jewish people / bootleggers). See also Goodard's "Rise of the Colored Empires" that Tom is fixated on. He is scared *beep* that his way of living will disappear and he will become irrelevant. One of the most striking elements of The Great Gatsby for me is this prevailing sense of unease. The superficial elements of life are good but the people are lost and scared out of their minds. This sense of deep unease didnt so much come across in the movie for me.

[–] BB-15 13 years ago

I liked the movie. A script by Francis Ford Coppola I don't think can simply be dismissed. I felt there was some unease with Daisy's (Farrow's) character from the beginning. But this was based on here husband's mistresses.

There was some discussion in the film about the place for the Nordic race. But the story was relationship driven and I was fine with that.

The movie was slow but still contained a mystery and ended with a commentary about irresponsibility combined with the privilege of wealth. That message is still relevant today.

BB ;-)

it's just in my opinion - imo -

[–] shepardjessica-1 10 years ago

It was badly cast, except for Scott Wilson as Wilson. Great sets and cars, though. Badly directed. Script was no great shakes, either.

[–] JumeirahSun 10 years ago

Not to say that polo isn't one of the most expensive sports on earth, but a polo field isn't 10 acres. It's 300 yards by 160 yards.