Not quite...but maybe


I'm an enormous fan of '30s Hollywood/LA - the iconography, the cynicism, the heavy glamour - not least when coupled with a bit of doomed romanticism (this) or just doom (Chinatown, Day of the Locust, They Shoot Horses Don't They?).

So I were very excited when I heard about this, but... Hmmm.

The biggest disappointment here were the extreme clunkiness of the dialogue - all the more so when you think of the beauty of Fitzgerald's prose. Second was the fact it didn't get the essence of '30s LA across, as it were so studio-bound and the exteriors didn't look Californian at all, save a for a few shots outside what were obviously Paramount studios. Where was the sun-drenched stucco and the streets lined with 20-foot palms?

Matt Bomer is handsome as the dawn, no doubt, but what I'd like to say is a uncannily perfect interpretation of a man numb with grief is actually more a case of pretty vacant.

The (flawed) 1976 film has a hushed beauty about it that makes you feel like you're watching a dream, but this version seemed closer to comatose. HOWEVER! I'm going to give the next episode a go on the strength of Lily Collins's performance as Cecilia - what a revelation! I can only assume she got that talent (and most certainly that beauty) from her mother, whoever her mother is.

reply

I loved the sets and the clothes (and Kelsey Grammar as Pat Brady) but was irritated by the changes to the story. Why make Kathleen an Irish village girl? She was an English slum urchin pretending to be an upper class British lady. Why give Minna a suicidal drunken brother? Why introduce the ridiculous Nazi subplot that was inaccurate and absurd? Why make Celia a budding political activist when she was a spoiled sorority girl who's only goal in life was to marry Monroe Stahr?I'll keep watching if they make new ones, but so fat, you are correct - this is not Fitzgerald's Hollywood.

reply