see the new one. It is the most stunning film ever. Visually you will be blown away.
shareI totally agree. The original is such a bore and Mia Farrow's portrayal of Daisy was so annoying. The remake was brilliant. Thumbs up to Baz!!
shareI agree. I know that this board must be frequented by fans of 1974 version, and I'm not here to annoy them by saying that this one was terrible, but...
I urge everyone to see the 2013 one while you can. It's just... lightyears ahead of this one in every regard.
I completely disagree. Mediocre acting and hip hop do not make for a good adaptation of the book. I'm not saying the '74 version didn't have its flaws, but even with them, it was a much better film in every way.
Hi samnitebc,
Everyone has a right to their opinion but I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the new version. I'd seen the '74 adaptation years ago, just watched it again on YouTube and simply can't agree with you that it is a better adaptation of the novel. The '74 is very much a film of its time with an overly restrained Redford and a strident, melodramatic Farrow. I found the acting in the new version superior, the visuals breathtaking, the use of CGI excellent. Though the current adaptation takes liberties with some of the novel's plot points, I found it more faithful to the spirit of the novel's prose. The hip hop is used sparing in the party and speakeasy scenes and is layered over music of the era.
By the way, the 2000 version is also on YouTube. Rather flat but worth a look if you have a block of time to spare.
I should've said the 2000 version was better than the '74 and '13. More faithful to the book without the bad music and tasteless CGI. You can see the semi-romantic bond between Nick and Jordan which was absent in the horrid '13 film. Frankly, I think there are more deserving examples of literature that should be made into films than another Gatsby.
You know, even Fitzgerald hated the silent version so I can only imagine what he would've thought of the last four adaptations.
This just goes to show you how the dumbing down of America continues.
I saw the 2013 remake and yes it is dazzling, but it lacks depth.
It just shows you that many of today's movie audience can't follow a plot without special effects to satisfy their short attention spans.
Haven't seen 2013 yet; however, hoping Leo does give Redford a run for his money. They are both excellent actors.
share[deleted]
Stunning is a good description for it, just not in a good way.
shareI agree! The 2013 version inspired me to read the book. The acting was very good and seemed to capture the energy of the times. This version was so stiff, boring, and seemed to drag. The acting was amature as if the actors phoned in their scenes or just read them directly off the script.
The 2013 version captured the book pretty well and kept you entertained. I was very invested in the characters.