New Film "G" - Gatsby

[scotrace]

This film seems to be running under the radar. Just ran across it (via Lileks).
The Great Gatsby (novel, not film) is so beautifully crafted. It's an absolute favorite of mine. I read very slowly, and when reading Fitzgerald I slow down even more, sometimes reading a paragraph several times before moving on. It's a bit like standing before a David painting. So much to take in, you need time to appreciate it fully.

So this? Feels like watching someone take a hatchet to a David painting.

http://www.gthemovie.com/

Can a story that is completely and solidly rooted in its place and time be moved to another successfully? Yes, I suppose there are examples. But Gatsby is 1925. The story is as much about that generation floating in a new rarified world of prosperity, fashion and changing social attitudes, before the crush of the Great Depression and war, as it is about the great love of a man named Gatsby. Moving the tale to the 21st century just seems... a bad idea.

Am I hopeless? Stodgy? Slab-sided? Hide-bound?

 

[Flitcraft]

"G"= "Gatsby"?

Hmm.. Suppose it could be done.
Gatsby, for better or worse, is the Twenties. Social mores, expectations, beliefs- you name it- have changed so much that I'm not sure that most of the things that motivated Jay Gatsby, and the other characters, are still relevant in today's world.
If the film makers are trying to tell a "Gangsta" story, man that genre's been beat to death.
Still might check it out. I always try to keep an open mind.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Do you really want to be depressed? I read somewhere that the very talented Ms. Paris Hilton is being considered for the part of Daisy (what would my roomie say?)! Though I suppose, if you're tryng to cast vapid, you would be hard pressed to find someone who expresses it better.

Updating Gatsby has always been a temptation. Remember, there are strange paralles with "Jay Gatsby" and "Holly Golightly," so this sort of thing has been done before. Could you imagine an Tech millionaire as a modern day Gatsby? Sure, but do we need that?

A period piece can speak to the modern condition without changing the time period.

 

[Feraud]

Jeeze Louise! What is with the single letter title? Is this a trick to fool us into not thinking this is not original material?
I would have bet a couple of bucks that 'G' was being made by the same folks who did 'O' in 2001. Alas, the lack of creativity displayed on that project has not continued, but is merely copied by this group of filmmakers! [huh] Did you say Paris Hilton H.J.?? Stop it, you are scaring me...

Only by seeing the film can we really judge how good it is. Being told a classic has been "updated" does not attract me at all. I have no problem reading a novel or watching a film that takes place in the past!
I am of the mind that projects like these get made because of the lack of creativity and conservative nature of the film business. Because I think this, films like this interest me. I would watch it on cable tho'..

O.k. I will stop now. I am starting to sound like some old curmudgeon.

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

I have mentioned in other threads about the threat of Paris Hilton on THe Great Gatsby, I guess HJ is right, if vapid is needed, then who better to go for.
As for this seemingly awful rendition. This is not my Gatsby. Gatsby takes place in the 20's and has all of the mystery and intrigue that that era comes with. I guess the Hamptons could be considered East or West Egg, but other than that, this movie looks attrocious (sp??). Gatsby can't be modernized, it's era is what makes it a classic. It's a book I pick up a few times a year just to read for fun. I have seen a few movies related to it, and they have been OK, but this "G" thing (sorry to quote Dr. Dre and snoop) looks horrendous! But then again didn't someone make a movie called "O" based on Othello, it starred that lolly pop headed chick, Julia Styles, I think. So if they can turn that into a movie about love and rap I guess anything is possible.

 

[jake_fink]

If only a small handful of people find their way to the book through this movie, and if only one loves it then "G" is a worhtwhile thing.

English teachers will be able to use the film as a way in to the tougher sell and more distant material that the novel represents to students today. Kids are kids and they always were.

The book is still on the shelves - no-one is taking that away from you. There have been two movies that treated the material as written (more or less), so again, get over it. Good material will live on in lives and half-lives that neither we nor the artists themselves can control.

Geez, were there baldrick wearing Chaucer fans circa 1597 who dismissed Romeo & Juliet when it came out because it was a updating Tristan and Isolde. Actually there probably was.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

If only a small handful of people find their way to the book through this movie, and if only one loves it then "G" is a worhtwhile thing.

English teachers will be able to use the film as a way in to the tougher sell and more distant material that the novel represents to students today. Kids are kids and they always were.

The book is still on the shelves - no-one is taking that away from you. There have been two movies that treated the material as written (more or less), so again, get over it. Good material will live on in lives and half-lives that neither we nor the artists themselves can control.

Geez, were there baldrick wearing Chaucer fans circa 1597 who dismissed Romeo & Juliet when it came out because it was a updating Tristan and Isolde. Actually there probably was.

Respectfully Jake, I disagree. Dumbing down art to make it accessible does not make us more civilized, it makes us less so. It cheapens our culture and it surrenders us to low expectations. If there is one thing that is a problem in our culture, it is the gradual disintegration of our standards, especially in high culture and education.

But then, I don't want to start one of those "America-in-decline" threads! Suffice it to say, that I think we should be expect more from our children, and if we did, they would deliver, as they have done for previous generations.

EDIT: I wanted to add that I think that you are correct, that it will lead some kids to the source material and that is a good thing, but at a terrible price.

How would we feel if some one decided to remake "The Maltese Falcon?" And, yeah, don't anyone post that "The Mlatese Falcon" is itself a remake because I haven't the patience for that! ;-)

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

Respectfully Jake, I disagree. Dumbing down art to make it accessible does not make us more civilized, it makes us less so. It cheapens our culture and it surrenders us to low expectations. If there is one thing that is a problem in our culture, it is the gradual disintegration of our standards, especially in high culture and education.

But then, I don't want to start one of those "America-in-decline" threads! Suffice it to say, that I think we should be expect more from our children, and if we did, they would deliver, as they have done for previous generations.

EDIT: I wanted to add that I think that you are correct, that it will lead some kids to the source material and that is a good thing, but at a terrible price.

How would we feel if some one decided to remake "The Maltese Falcon?" And, yeah, don't anyone post that "The Mlatese Falcon" is itself a remake because I haven't the patience for that! ;-)

I know I am the greatest friend Hemingway Jones has, so this might come across as biased, but I have to respectfully agree with what he has written. It is a shame that kids today relate more to bad re-makes; and most can quote them; than they do to the great literature that lead to the re-makes. It would be interesting to know the english requirements in the 8th grade. I know that I was required to memorize Shakespeare, and reading the Iliad and the Odyssey was a requirement as well.
Well, if a token few go out and by Gatsby, which I honestly doubt will happen, then that's great. But the main issue is that Hollywood is once again dumbing down America. Now please, I don't want to start a huge debate about this, I'm just stating an opinion. :cheers1:

 

[DanielJones]

Personally I'm just not too sure about this one. But hey, that's just me.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[jake_fink]

I hope this doesn't constitute starting a debate, nevermind a huge one (though I think debates are good, they clear the air and open the door for consensus). But I do want to clarify part of what I had to say, just because I don't want it to be misconstrued.

I'm not at all talking about the dumbing down of America or of any place else, and for the record, I absolutely agree with what you have to say, HJ, about the need not to pander to the crowd in a work of art. However, we know Great Gatsby by it's current title and not by its original and much less crowd-pleasing title of "Trimalchio." It's even been written, though I don't believe it myself, that Ftizgerlad went and added those great big eyes on the billboard after seeing the jacket art for the novel.

Clearly, artistic vision is fluid enough to allow for some changes, some of which may be calculated to find an audience. That's fine. If the work survives and touches a chord in the cultural imagination we call that work a classic... and if not, it falls away and disappears.

Gatsby is a classic, no argument. G will probably not be a classic. But so what. It will disappear and Gatsby will remain, just as Casablanca remains and the Casablance television series is largely forgotten. Just maybe, though, G, will get someone who might not otherwise be inclined to do so to read the book. I see no down side there, especially since faithful film versions already exist. In other words, YOUR Gatsby is not hurt by this at all... so why not share? That one person who might find his or her way into the original material may be tranformed by it, they may go on to make great art themsleves.

Until we've seen "G" we can't really say that it represents a dumbimg down. It is a transformation, but that's not uncommon. Do you discredit Apocalypse Now for not being faithful to Heart of Darkness? Is Taxi Driver any less potent for being a reworking of The Searchers? One day I'll tell you about my greatest book to movie disappointment... your heart will break. But art has always borrowed liberally from itself... and bad art has always borrowed most liberally. As well, some people think Gatsby is terribly over-rated, that it is a pulp romance that was once very popular but offers little of lasting literary value. Those critics probably won't think much of "G" either, but to their eyes it may be a crab-shuffle rather than a vertiginous decline. Art can be very subjective.

That's all I'll say on the subject. I will probably not go see this film (though it can't be too much worse than the Redford/Farrow kick at the cat, though the cars and costumes won't be as cool), but neither will I be gnashing my teeth over it. Frankly I'd rather see more movies based on great works of literature and fewer based on old television series. Just MHO

PS I like that suit, HJ. Is it new or vinatge?

 

[Hemingway Jones]

PS I like that suit, HJ. Is it new or vinatge?

Don't worry, Jake, no debate from me. I think are opinions are closer than they originally appeared. The bottom line to my argument is: if you want to make a bad movie, there is plenty of inspiration out there. Please leave my culture alone.

I am sure we both see a huge chasm of difference between Coppola borrowing from Conrad and Helen Fielding stealing from Jane Austen. I also think it is a safe assumption that "G" is a dumbing-down of "The Great Gatsby;" they've already simplified the title.

But alas, the dogs bark and the caravan moves on!

Honestly though, I would really like to see films held to a higher standard. Kenneth Branagh elevated "Henry V" to an emotional realism; he didn't set his movie in a high school.

I think the debate is healthy and an ocassion like this is cause for reflection. What does our choice of entertainment say about us??? It will be a good topic of conversation over a beer sometime.

BTW, thanks for the compliment on the suit. It is not vintage, but it has a very nice pinstripe.

 

[Flitcraft]

Trimalchio?....

However, we know Great Gatsby by it's current title and not by its original and much less crowd-pleasing title of "Trimalchio."

"Trimalchio" as in Petronius' Satyricon Trimalchio?

 

[scotrace]

Until we've seen "G" we can't really say that it represents a dumbimg down.

Go back and watch the trailer. "So y'alls knows ich udder areddy den?"

And this film is in release, not production.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Go back and watch the trailer. "So y'alls knows ich udder areddy den?"

And this film is in release, not production.

Do you have a link for that trailer, Old Sport?

 

[jake_fink]

"Trimalchio" as in Petronius' Satyricon Trimalchio?

None other.

Go back and watch the trailer. "So y'alls knows ich udder areddy den?"

I saw it a while ago. It went, as you said, under my radar. Not my cup of tea, but it didn't send sharp bolts of hurt into my brain. I'll reserve judgement until when and if I see it.

 

[The Wolf]

Hemingway, I suppose the new Maltese Falcon would be called "M.F.".


The Wolf

 

[Novella]

I would have bet a couple of bucks that 'G' was being made by the same folks who did 'O' in 2001.

Exactly my first thought!

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Hemingway, I suppose the new Maltese Falcon would be called "M.F.".

The Wolf

Exactly! Which would have an entire other meaning inherent!

 

[Feraud]

Hemingway, I suppose the new Maltese Falcon would be called "M.F.".


The Wolf

Exactly! Which would have an entire other meaning inherent!

Which is not a bad idea to appeal to the youth.... I joke! I joke!!

 

[scotrace]

Yes...

Do you have a link for that trailer, Old Sport?

It's at the main page linked above, My dear East Egger. You may find it a good time to go get a sandwich while all the flash nonsense loads, even on a fast connection. Once you are permitted to enter the site (saw no skip-out), there's a link at top for the trailer.