Movie Review - The Great Gatsby

Director: Baz Luhrmann
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Tobey Maguire, Carey Mulligan
Year: 2013

I was very surprised when The Great Gatsby got such terrible reviews.  It had just been out for a couple days and already it was getting slammed by audiences and critics alike.  I just couldn't believe it; wasn't this the same film who's trailer had me and everyone I knew wanting to rush to the theatre that day?  What could be so awful that it would get such bad critique across the board?  I assumed it wasn't Baz Luhrmann's style, because people would be expecting that.  After all, if you've seen Romeo + Juliet, Moulin Rouge!, or Australia you know what to expect from his movies; larger than life characters & costumes, contemporary music, brilliant colors, basically a beautifully over the top interpretation of a simple story.  And it couldn't be Leo; everyone loves him and we generally acknowledge that he's a great actor.  No, there must be something about the film that the trailer doesn't hint at, and that must be the problem.  Well, I had to go see the film for myself, and when I did it was glaringly obvious, to me anyway, what that problem was.

Most of you will already know the classic story of Gatsby, but for those of you who may not have read the novel since high school, here's a quick refresher.  'The Great Gatsby' was written by F. Scott Fitzgerald is 1925, and is based on American life in the roaring 20s.  Set in New York City and Long Island, the story is told by Nick Carraway, a Yale graduate and WWI veteran who is trying to make it in the booming stock business.  When he moves next door to the illustrious Jay Gatsby, he enters into the world of the rich and begins to meet the young millionaires who now run society.  Nick's cousin Daisy, her husband Tom, and her golf-pro friend Jordan all join Nick and Gatsby in this crazy new life, setting into motion events that will change all their futures.  A secret is revealed; that Gatsby and Daisy were once star-crossed lovers who are still in love, despite time apart and her new family.  Nick is at the center of this whirlwind romance, he is every one's confidant, and he is powerless to stop the tragedies of life that seem to follow closely behind these beautiful, young, wealthy, passionate people who's every wish is attainable, but at a cost.

First, let's touch on the positives.  Luhrmann's script and directing were excellent.  The story held mostly to the book, the action was exciting, the costumes & sets were brilliant, and overall it was a visually stunning movie.  I know some people don't, but I like his style.  And since I was prepared for it I also liked the pop music and the over the top scenes.  I have recently reread the book, and although it is excellent, it leaves a lot to the imagination.  Fitzgerald talks about the parties, the cars, the women, the times, but he doesn't paint them clearly.  You have to do that yourself, and I think Luhrmann showed them to us very well, albeit through his own vision.  But it was nice to see a vibrant version of the book, because it must have been a vibrant time to live in.  If you've ever seen the 1974 version starring Robert Redford you've seen almost the exact opposite, and I'll take Luhrmann's version any day.

And the acting was terrific.  Leo was spot on as always.  He brought just the right amount of swagger as a young tycoon and just the right amount of uncertainty as a man in love.  He was the highlight of the film, and I believed him every step of the way.  He was surrounded by a pretty good cast as well.  I liked Carey Mulligan as Daisy; she was vulnerable, frightened, and malleable.  She had a hidden strength and intelligence that the book made clear she was keeping locked away on purpose, and that came across clearly.  And the big surprise of the film was Joel Edgerton as Tom, who I really don't know very well, but who did a fantastic job.  He was so insecure and overly abrasive, just like he reads in the novel.  So the cinematography, vision, and acting weren't the problems at all.  The worst part of the movie, by far, was Tobey Maguire.

He's just not a great actor.  He has been fine in many movies (Pleasantville, The Cider House Rules), but in them he was basically just being himself, not the character.  He is a young-looking, naive-seeming man, and when that is called for in a movie he does just fine.  As Nick, he was a fairly good casting, because he is supposed to be along for the ride, a narrator and a witness.  So I didn't have much problem with Maguire being there, but things went down hill when he talked.  And did he ever talk.  For no reason I can fathom his role was extremely prominent.  Not only was he basically the lead, but he also did voice overs and flashbacks.  They had him in a sanatorium telling his story to a doctor as a form of therapy and then writing it all down.  Fine, but you can't have Tobey Maguire as a lead in the movie, the narrator of the movie, and throw in extra scenes that aren't in the book just so you can give him more lines.  It failed horribly.  Leo should have been the lead hands down; after all he is Gatsby.  But Maguire was present way too much, and it ruined the flow, the believability, and the quality of the acting.  It brought the film down from an interested retelling of the book to a cheap Hollywood knockoff.

The Great Gatsby wasn't as bad as some critics are saying it was.  It also wasn't as good as I had imagined it would be.  It was a fine film version of a great book that, of course, won't be as good as the novel.  It could have been so much better than it was if only they had toned down the Maguire.  Not that he's awful, but he can't support that much heavy lifting, and his weakness showed to the point that it hurt the film irreparably.  I just wish they had done away with the unnecessary flashbacks, or the overdone voice overs, or the words of the novel flashing across the screen.  It was too much, and with Luhrmann's style already a lot to handle, we couldn't take so many vibrant pieces all at once.  It hurts me to say that I'm hoping someone will make another version of the novel, one that is more exciting than the old one and more controlled than the new one.  That would be a movie to see.

My rating: ✰ ✰ ✰

Movie Trailer - Kiss of the Damned

Director: Xan Cassavetes
Starring: Josephine de La Baume, Milo Ventimiglia
Release: May, 2013

I'm not huge into vampire movies, but this one looks alright.  At least it seems edgy & sexy, not juvenile & silly.  And I actually like that I don't know the director or the actors; that adds a sense of intrigue because I don't know what I'm getting into.  So, it looks cool, we'll see.

DVD Review - Stand Off

Director: Terry George
Starring: Brendan Fraser, Colm Meaney, Martin McCann
Year: 2011

I'm a strong believer that there is a difference between a "film" and a "movie".  A film is artistic, it's a statement, it relies heavily on great acting and great directing.  A film has deeper meaning than what you see on screen, and it's tailor made to be discussed and picked apart.  A movie is entertaining, it's a fun time, it relies on mostly action, either comedic or intense.  A movie can be taken at face value, and the less you critique it the more enjoyable it is.  Now, some actors can switch back and forth between films and movies with little effort; Tom Hanks, for example, can move from funny to dramatic, heavy to lighthearted.  Others seem to be married to the film category; Daniel Day-Lewis comes to mind, as serious of an actor as you will ever see.  But on the other side of the coin there's Brendan Fraser.  He's attempted some serious acting, but his filmography is heavy with "movies": Encino Man, Airheads, George of the Jungle, Bedazzled, Monkeybone, and now Stand Off.  So the question isn't whether this picture is a film or a movie, but whether it's as entertaining as The Mummy or as awful as Dudley Do-Right.

The Movie

Set in Ireland, this crime caper comedy is a fast-paced story of a number of plans gone wrong.  The trouble starts with Jimbo, a luckless and penniless new father who is in way over his head.  He owes a ton of money to a man you really don't want to be indebted to, Mad Dog Flynn.  Mad Dog is a known criminal, and when Jimbo can't pay his debt the stakes are raised; Flynn now wants his son.  With the help of his friend, his friend's grandpa, and his friend's grandpa's car, Jimbo decides that he has no choice but to rob a fish market, pay off his debt, and save his family.  Little does he know that the burglary will not be a simple grab & dash, or that his problems are about to increase.  When he attempts to hide out in a local shop until the heat has passed, his troubles become enmeshed with Joe's, an American who's life is just as complicated as Jim's.

Joe Maguire is on the run from problems of his own.  He has left a crazy situation back in the States; a wife who wants to and nearly did kill him.  Taking refuge in Ireland at his cousin's shop, all he wants is to lay low, enjoy the country, and move on from a life that had been spinning out of control.  At first, things seem to be going swimmingly when he meets a beautiful woman named Sophie and they hit it off so well.  But when Irish Gypsies begin to bother him, when Mad Dog Flynn stops by his shop, and when Jimbo enters into his life, his vacation in Ireland quickly turns into anything but.  Add in a veteran detective, his rookie-cop son, an angry Irish mother, and a bunch of thugs with a bazooka, and you're in for a wild ride.

This movie is almost three for the price of one.  The first half an hour is a fast-paced Irish crime comedy with awesome characters, entertaining accents, and story lines that are too ridiculous to be made up.  If you liked Snatch you'll enjoy the first third of this movie; it's similar enough to be considered a ripoff, down to the Pikeys.  It's fun, silly, surprising, and quite enjoyable.  The second half an hour is one step down, but still pleasant in its own right.  It's more of a drama, where we start to get to the know the story, the driving force behind the plot, and more emotions are brought to the surface.  I actually started to connect with the characters and to care about what would happen to them when the dust settled.  But then the last third of the movie began, and everything went downhill.

The last half an hour of the movie was basically a bad action flick.  The comedy of the first third fizzled out, the pace faltered, and all the fun just disappeared.  The drama of the second part was left behind, the story was hurried through, and any emotions I was beginning to feel were ended.  And the blame for all this I sadly lay at Brendan Fraser's feet.  He dominated the end of the movie, and when he was called upon to step up his acting he was unable to do so.  And when he wasn't showing the world how not to act, the rest of the cast didn't do much to help.  They all fell flat, the momentum that had been build collapsed, and what we were left with was a shell of a movie that was too predictable to be acceptable.

Adding the three parts together we are left with a pretty confusing movie.  What started out as a cool crime caper turned into a mildly touching drama which then turned into a typical action flop.  So while I enjoyed the first hour of the film, I was left with a bad taste in my mouth, and it's Fraser-flavored.  I like the guy, but he's less an actor and more a person who sometimes appears in movies.  And speaking of, Stand Off turned out to be a fairly typical "movie".  It wasn't wonderful, but it was entertaining for the most part and taken at face value it had it's good points.  As long as you don't pick it apart too much it ended up being good but not great.  So I guess it falls somewhere in between The Mummy and Dudley Do-Right, wherever that strange place might be.

The DVD

Video - Shot in standard HD widescreen, the video quality was what you would expect, and that was good.  However, for an action movie there was actually very little action, so there were very few opportunities to show off a high quality picture.  And late in the movie when the special effects were finally called upon they looked quite cheap.

Audio - Sound quality was high and well balanced.  There are two options on the DVD: English 5.1 Dolby Digital or English 2.0 Dolby Digital.  There are no language selection options and no subtitles available.

Extras - There is only one extra on the disc, and that is a trailer for the film itself.  Dull.

Final Thoughts

Rent it.  Stand Off was a fairly typical Brendan Fraser movie.  It had its moments and there were times when I enjoyed myself, but overall it was just as good as his acting ability, and that's not what you want.  The video was fine, the audio was good, and the extras were nonexistent.  And while I liked the beginning, the end brought me down, and I was left feeling a little disappointed.  So if you're willing to give a "movie" a partial pass, then you could do worse.

✰ ✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ - Extras
✰ ✰ ✰ - Replay