Carey Mulligan cast as Daisy in remake of "The Great Gatsby"

[Mickey Caesar]

Its official. According to imdb.com, Carey Mulligan will be playing Daisy in the planned remake of F Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby". I wonder who'll play Gatsby?

 

[Edward]

Who she? Is she new, or would I have seen her in something?

I liked the idea of Tobey Maguire as Gatsby, though he'd be a good Nick Carraway too. Maybe Elijah Wood as one of those two also.

 

[LizzieMaine]

She got her big break in "Pride and Prejudice" a few years ago, got an Oscar nomination this past year for an excellent performance in "An Education," and she's currently on screen in "Never Let Me Go." So far she seems to specialize in big-brown-eyes innocence.

 

[JakeHolman]

Tobey Maguire has bagged the part of Nick, according to the Telegraph, with DiCaprio negotiating for Gatsby.

Ralph Lauren to do the costuming again.... ?? Probably not.

 

[Yeps]

I wish they could find somebody better than Mr. Maguire. I am not a big fan of his acting, it just never convinces me.

 

[Mickey Caesar]

She got her big break in "Pride and Prejudice" a few years ago, got an Oscar nomination this past year for an excellent performance in "An Education," and she's currently on screen in "Never Let Me Go." So far she seems to specialize in big-brown-eyes innocence.

Just like Mia Farrow in the original Gatsby

 

[Edward]

Knowing, faux-innocence was Daisy's central characteristic, of course, so that could work well.

Tobey Maguire has bagged the part of Nick, according to the Telegraph, with DiCaprio negotiating for Gatsby.

I like that. Nice casting. I hope Dicaprio does sign up; he has really grown on my as an actor, now that he's getting roles he can do something with as opposed to the 'pretty teen idol' mould in which he was initially cast (of course, his true talent was obvious from Romeo and Juliet, in my opinion - one of the few screen renditions of that play where all concerned clearly understood R+J's relationship for what it was: teenage infatuation, not love).

 

[Doctor Strange]

Count me as underwhelmed. What will this add to the earlier film adaptations?

And at the risk of alienating folks who love it, I have long believed Gatsby to be the single most insanely overrated novel in all of American literature. As an old English major, I know from experience that it's great for what my creative writing advisor memorably called "that old lit-crit shit", but I prefer several of Fitzgerald's other books. (And frankly, for American writers of that generation, I'll take Sinclair Lewis or Willa Cather over Fitzgerald any day.)

 

[Edward]

Vive la difference, eh? lol I read Gatsby for my A levels at school.... eight times..... reread it again last year and I still consider it to be a serious contender for finest novel in the English language. I'm all for a new screen version, though. Hollywood has, I think, evolved to the point where they might get the period details right for once. Also, the earlier versions were distinctly..... lacking. Not having robert Redford in it will be a major plus for any new version also.

 

[Doctor Strange]

Edward, we agree on many other things, and it's fine to disagree on Gatsby. I know my view is - to put it mildly - unpopular!

So it goes...

 

[skyvue]

Count me as underwhelmed. What will this add to the earlier film adaptations?

Which film adaptation do you recommend? I'm not aware of one that's widely considered a satisfying adaptation (not that there's any guarantee the new one will be any better).

I'd love to see the 1926 version with Warner Baxter, Lois Wilson, and Neil Hamilton, but I think it's no longer extant.

I'm sure there were observers in 1940 asking why John Huston would bother to make another version of The Maltese Falcon, wondering what his picture could add to the earlier film adaptations.

 

[MisterGrey]

Other than Robert Redford being too darn handsome, I think that the original was a very faithful and successful adaptation of the book. There's not terribly much I would change about it, and I'm afraid that any modifications one attempted to make would result in the loss of the things that were correct. I really can't imagine anyone other than Mia Farrow as Daisy-- I do not like her as an actress, but in that particular role in that particular film, she so perfectly embodied the character that she is now Daisy Buchanan for me.

I like DiCaprio as an actor-- I think he's done incredibly well since he got past the teenybopper phase-- but again the powers-that-be are falling into the trap of making Gatsby into a super stud. Remember that he does not stand out in a crowd-- not only does nobody recognize him at his own parties, but he is so average looking as to simply blend into the crowd with all of the revelers. Unless they make DiCaprio look less movie-star, it doesn't befit the character to make him so conventionally attractive.

That being said I hope they get a better Tom. God bless him, Bruce Dern did a bang-up job, but he was just not the beefy picture of all-star masculinity that Tom is made out to be. There was something too... vermin-like... about his characterization. There was no way to believe that Daisy would stick with him.

 

[skyvue]

Other than Robert Redford being too darn handsome, I think that the original was a very faithful and successful adaptation of the book.

It's admittedly nitpicking, but , in fact, the 1974 movie is not the original. It too was a remake.

There was a 1949 version with Alan Ladd as Gatsby and a 1926 version with Warner Baxter in the role.

The Redford movie was just as much a remake as the new version.

 

[Doctor Strange]

Thanks, I was going to point out that there were indeed earlier film adapations - but you beat me to it!

 

[Edward]

Edward, we agree on many other things, and it's fine to disagree on Gatsby. I know my view is - to put it mildly - unpopular!

So it goes...

I don't imagine my view on Robert Redford would be especially popular within the confines of the Powder Room either.... lol

I like DiCaprio as an actor-- I think he's done incredibly well since he got past the teenybopper phase-- but again the powers-that-be are falling into the trap of making Gatsby into a super stud. Remember that he does not stand out in a crowd-- not only does nobody recognize him at his own parties, but he is so average looking as to simply blend into the crowd with all of the revelers. Unless they make DiCaprio look less movie-star, it doesn't befit the character to make him so conventionally attractive.

I don't see looks as being a problem for Dicaprio - sure, he had that young, pretty boy thing at a time, but as he has aged and gained a little weight, I think he has become more rugged in a good way... I don't think he would be too 'stand out' though. My reading of Gatsby was never that it was a physical thing that he managed to blend in at the parties, more that he simpyl never fully settled into his new world. He was, after all, the last word in noveau riche; in many respects he belonged in the world of the monied as little as those regular folks who gatecrashed his parties, so it seems to me to follow naturally that he would no more look like the host / owner of the whole shebang than any of them.

That being said I hope they get a better Tom. God bless him, Bruce Dern did a bang-up job, but he was just not the beefy picture of all-star masculinity that Tom is made out to be. There was something too... vermin-like... about his characterization. There was no way to believe that Daisy would stick with him.

In some ways, I think Tom is a harder part to cast. I think Brad Pitt would make a good fist of it, but he's too old, if we're being picky. I really hope they do make him true to the book, though - a great brute of a man, disgusting white supremacism and all. The biggest danger, it seems to me, is that they will tone down Daisy to make her a more sympathetic character instead of the vain, shallow, selfish and ultimately rather vile young woman whom she actually was in the book.

 

[MisterGrey]

Damn... You know, you see one version of a movie and to you, it's always "the original." I wasn't aware there were so many adaptations of Gatsby, but I did know there were others... But I saw the 1974 version first (well, it's the only one I've seen), and so to me, it's "the original." But, yeah, I totally got owned on that. Anywho.

)
In some ways, I think Tom is a harder part to cast. I think Brad Pitt would make a good fist of it, but he's too old, if we're being picky. I really hope they do make him true to the book, though - a great brute of a man, disgusting white supremacism and all. The biggest danger, it seems to me, is that they will tone down Daisy to make her a more sympathetic character instead of the vain, shallow, selfish and ultimately rather vile young woman whom she actually was in the book.

I don't think Pitt is thuggish enough. Even in Fight Club, where 75% of his entire point of even being in the movie was to beat people up, there seemed to be something strangely effeminate about him. I think he's a good actor, but "brute" is not a trait I'd ever assign to him.

I, too (now that you mention it) am worried about what they may do with Daisy- try to turn her into a tragic character trapped in her marriage to Tom, rather then willfully staying in it. I'm reminded of the adaptation of "Vanity Fair" back in '04 wherein they turned the anti-heroine of the novel into the main character and tried to spin her manipulativeness and shallowness as being "proto feminist" rather than... well... manipulativeness and shallowness.

 

[Cricket]

I think so far the actor selections will work well. I share the opinion of many on the FL that DiCaprio has really transformed over the past decade. If you would have asked me what I thought about him taking on the Gatsby role ten years ago, I would have beeen excited but maybe a little in the air. At this point, I feel like he will do it justice.

My question is how do you think the story will be captured with Baz Luhrmann who I read is the director? I am a fan of his work but I am curious and excited to see how this will go.

2012 is a long time away, but I am already anxious for this film.

 

[Doublegun]

DeCaprio would not be a bad choice but I think there are so many other young actors that could pull off the roll. How about Joseph Gordon Levitt? Younger and he seem to have more of an air of vulnerability.

 

[Doctor Strange]

Cricket... Baz is uneven as a director. He's got tremendous visual style, to be sure, but isn't necessarily so great with story and actors. Obviously, we don't want to see Gatsby tarted up to wacky Moulin Rouge! or Romeo+Juliet levels... but if his idea of a more "serious" picture is Australia, that doesn't exactly bode well.

Of course, I've already gone on record as not being particularly interested in this flick, so I don't even know why I'm responding...

 

[Edward]

Luhrman made a wonderful work with Romeo & Juliet. A modernisation that worked and worked well (I loved the 'Sword' branding on the guns - a touch they were able to use because of the film medium). The one glaring fault, for me, was Mercutio. Best character in the play (it is believed Shakespeare decided to kill him off out of fear that he would dominate it at the expense of the intended chief protagonists). I feel casting him as a gay crossdresser was a misinterpretation: I have always viewed him as something much more ethereal - not identifiably one sexuality or the other ('gay or European?' springs to mind here!). Something that might be considered sexually ambiguous, though very much manly in the 1930s/40s sense.... what would, I suppose, be considered within the range of metrosexual today. I loathed Moulin Rouge, but everyone's entitled to a stinker.... At least they're not looking at Spielberg (on the whole, his oeuvre is overly mawkish and saccharine) or - horrors - Joel Schumacher (probably the worst film director in recorded history - next to George Lucas).

I don't think Pitt is thuggish enough. Even in Fight Club, where 75% of his entire point of even being in the movie was to beat people up, there seemed to be something strangely effeminate about him. I think he's a good actor, but "brute" is not a trait I'd ever assign to him.

I believe he could pull it off - were he ten years younger. I've seen him do a very wide range of roles, from Tyler Durden, through Louis the vampire and even his turn in Burn After Reading - he is actually a wonderfully skilled actor who has finally as he ages begun to be given roles that allow him to display his ability rather than being cast as a pretty boy.

As to who would be right..... if Colin Farrell bulked up a bit and could do the accent (I've only ever seen films in which he had, by design, his own accent) I think he could pull off Tom Buchanan's vital rage.

I, too (now that you mention it) am worried about what they may do with Daisy- try to turn her into a tragic character trapped in her marriage to Tom, rather then willfully staying in it. I'm reminded of the adaptation of "Vanity Fair" back in '04 wherein they turned the anti-heroine of the novel into the main character and tried to spin her manipulativeness and shallowness as being "proto feminist" rather than... well... manipulativeness and shallowness.

That's how they ruined Chicago, reinterpreting the character of Roxy to make her sympathetic, and thus losing the whole point of the show. A crying shame (that and casting Richard Gere, the second slimiest man in Hollywood, as Billy Flynn), as what the film did do well was the overall look of the piece: the stage show, with its bland and timeless (by design) costumes completely wastes so much of what is truly great about a 1920s setting.

DeCaprio would not be a bad choice but I think there are so many other young actors that could pull off the roll. How about Joseph Gordon Levitt? Younger and he seem to have more of an air of vulnerability.

I'm not familiar with him.... DiCaprio is just about the right age - they're all early thirties in the book (the New York hotel suite showdown between Gatsby and Tom over Daisy which takes place on the afternoon preceding Myrtle's death takes place on what Nick realises is his thirtieth birthday; Daisy is his age and, of memory serves, by implication Tom and Gatsby just a little older).