Okay. I'll start-

first of all, Tobey Maguire is 36? Second, Tobey Maguire is an awful choice for Nick Carroway.

With Baz Luhrmann directing, I expect it will be a movie that people either love or hate, there will be very little "meh" middle ground.

I had to read and watch it in high school.. didn't care for either version.

Over-the-top seems to be Baz Luhrmann's default setting. I can't really see how this story that requires some appreciation for subtlety and nuance will do anything besides suck. I admire Subby's optimism, but I'm not sure where it's coming from.

Did they remake it as a metaphor for America?

Sally Sparrow? Sweet.

meh, mediocre novel

Just stick with making movie adaptations of comic books. That seems to be what movie producers are best at.

Daisy Buchannan makes me stabby.

I'm serious. When I read the book, I wanted to reach into the pages and throttle her.

But, I s'pose that's a sign of great literature that it got such a reaction out of me.

gunga galunga: Daisy Buchannan makes me stabby.

I'm serious. When I read the book, I wanted to reach into the pages and throttle her.

But, I s'pose that's a sign of great literature that it got such a reaction out of me.

I felt the same way about Bella Swan..........

Why the hell does Great Gatsby need to be in 3D?

Nothing NEEDS to be in 3D. Directors' version of intellectual masturbation.

I always think of that as The Great Gaspy and picture him wheezing in a mansion.

kellynoel: gunga galunga: Daisy Buchannan makes me stabby.

I'm serious. When I read the book, I wanted to reach into the pages and throttle her.

But, I s'pose that's a sign of great literature that it got such a reaction out of me.

I felt the same way about Bella Swan..........

Okay, so it's not a sign of great literature.

:D

I am all about Carey. I don't care how shiat the movie is, I'll watch it.

//exception made for Wall Street: Money never sleeps.

Does not approve

The book sucks and blows so by extension a movie based on a bad book is probably going to suck and blow.

Mr. Melon, how would you characterize The Great Gatsby?

He was... uh... great!

It's already been remade in a modern setting. They called it "Seinfeld".

//If you ignore Gatsby's pining for Daisy and instead focus on it being miserable people making everyone around them miserable. Gatsby's "love" story was the worst part of the whole book anyway.

Larry Mahnken: Sally Sparrow? Sweet.

Quite. I'm still hoping for the Sparrow and Nightingale spin-off

t3knomanser: It's already been remade in a modern setting. They called it "Seinfeld".

//If you ignore Gatsby's pining for Daisy and instead focus on it being miserable people making everyone around them miserable. Gatsby's "love" story was the worst part of the whole book anyway.

It's one of my favorites of classic literature, and I've read it a handful of times, but yeah, it is really about nothing. There's no epic story here, just some people doing some stuff.
I'm actually excited about DiCaprio.

I'm not a fan of the novel so its going to suck no matter what.

Marley'sGirl: t3knomanser: It's already been remade in a modern setting. They called it "Seinfeld".

//If you ignore Gatsby's pining for Daisy and instead focus on it being miserable people making everyone around them miserable. Gatsby's "love" story was the worst part of the whole book anyway.

It's one of my favorites of classic literature, and I've read it a handful of times, but yeah, it is really about nothing. There's no epic story here, just some people doing some stuff.
I'm actually excited about DiCaprio.

It's about the declining importance of the American dream in the 1920s and how greed consumerism and hedonism corrupted the ideas America was supposed to stand for.

I'm convinced people who don't like it were forced to read it while in high school and hadn't lived long enough to understand what it was saying.

It is a perfectly structured book. Further, it is a novel of ambition. The story of Gatsby's rise and fall is told through a narrator in the story (Nick). Most people expect Nick to be the catalyst for the action. He is there purely to narrate.

Fitzgerald is making a statement about the belief that money can get you anything. Gatsby is revealed as a bootlegger (he's turned all Walter White to amass his fortune). He thinks his wealth will win Daisy back. He doesn't. His dreams are crushed. The way he orders these events is purposeful. Fitzgerald jumbles the timeline by using flashbacks. Chronologically the story is a confusing mess. This was all done on purpose to reflect Gatsby mood and loss of values. The overall story is extremely tight. There are no plot holes. It is a perfect novel as Chinatown is a perfect movie script.

Is it the most exciting work of literature? No, at least not in my opinion. But is one of the most finely crafted novels ever published.

/not a huge Fitzgerald fan story-wise
//loves me the Hemingway and modern British authors
///this book is not good material for a movie...to subtle, too many flashbacks (which slow most movies down)

Marley'sGirl:

It's one of my favorites of classic literature, and I've read it a handful of times.

What good classic literature might look like:

Carth: I'm convinced people who don't like it were forced to read it while in high school and hadn't lived long enough to understand what it was saying.

I don't dislike it. But it is essentially "Seinfeld". Oh, it's sweeping and dramatic, but in the end, it's really about nothing- miserable people meandering about their miserable lives, doing little more but hurting those around them and substituting affectation for personality.

One of my worst weeks ever as a high school substitute teacher was when they were showing the Robert Redford piece of sh*t film version of the book.
I had to sit through all or part of all week, multiple times. I know that's why the teachers were "sick" that week so they wouldn't have to watch it. If they had used that movie as punishment the district would have been sued for cruel and unusual punishment.

t3knomanser: Carth: I'm convinced people who don't like it were forced to read it while in high school and hadn't lived long enough to understand what it was saying.

I don't dislike it. But it is essentially "Seinfeld". Oh, it's sweeping and dramatic, but in the end, it's really about nothing- miserable people meandering about their miserable lives, doing little more but hurting those around them and substituting affectation for personality.

It's all very surface with transparent metaphors, which is why it's a perfect book for high school Lit. classes.

I work three blocks from Fitzgerald's grave, so I'll keep an eye out for any signs of spinning-in-grave.

I agree with most that it was a lukewarm book at best. Maybe frazzenrazzen put it best, I wouldn't know, I'm not an editor. That aside, the movie couldn't be any worse than a lot of the utter BS that's thrown up on the big screen these days, and might even be better. If nothing else, it could make an interesting period piece giving a decent glimpse of America in that time.

I'll probably watch it. When it comes out on Netflix.

My prediction: 3 Academy award noms for Costume, Set Design, etc., no wins, followed by rumors that a 2014 sequel planned, then back onto the bookshelf for decades until the next series of desperate screenwriters "rediscover" it.

brigid_fitch: gunga galunga: Daisy Buchannan makes me stabby.

I'm serious. When I read the book, I wanted to reach into the pages and throttle her.

But, I s'pose that's a sign of great literature that it got such a reaction out of me.

She's just not a likable character and that's part of the point. Gatsby's completely misguided when it comes to her. She's shallow, conceited, and selfish. Her daughter is named Pearl because the kid's just a bauble to be presented in front of guests and then whisked away when the novelty wears off. She promised to wait for Gatsby when he went to war but married Tom because he had money & could provide her with a life of lounging around, partying, and buying stuff that'll impress people. She later sleeps w/Gatsby & leads him on, never intending to leave Tom (even though she knows he's cheating on her & later runs down his mistress). Daisy's a symbol for what's wrong w/the American Dream in the early 20s.

Absolutely. The character definitely works within the context of the story, and unlike others in this thread, I consider it a great read. But for my tastes, she is one of the most unlikable characters in classic American literature. The fact that poor Jay gets gunned down all due to her selfish shenanigans puts the crown on the top of my hatred for her.

It's shallow and pedantic, you could even say it insists on itself.

FARK literary critics, ha

The Great Gatsby for NES (new window)

rorypk: It's shallow and pedantic, you could even say it insists on itself.

FARK literary critics, ha

I'm inclined to agree, but many folks on fark are college educated and can often produce intelligent remarks on books even though I may disagree with some.

If a very well heralded critic like Harold Bloom were on Fark he'd make Pocket Ninja look like a liter.