Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

ChanBot i must have seen a different film!!

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

federovsky This film seems to be largely out of favour, and it does have problems, but taken as an Ibsonian study of 20s flapper society, it's fine. Class, money, personality and style form a cocktail that looks far better than it tastes and this film captures the vacuousness being absurdly rich quite effectively. The tendency to overblow this story is strange though, as it's basically a chamber piece.For a classic novel, Fitzgerald's story is ungainly, with an unconvincing mix of themes, the metaphorical nature of which is too transparent - such as the sordid road between Manhattan and the Eggs. Mainly it is misogynistic, and the film doesn't attempt to elucidate the real subtext of the story - Gatsby's implicit bromance with Carraway. Of course, Gatsby was not meant to be gay, only codedly gay - it was impossible for Fitzgerald to be literal, being firmly in the closet himself. That angle, as in the book, is more obviously portrayed by Jordan, whose role is to provide the clue.It also perhaps simmers too long - it's a while before we meet the man, and the improbable lifestyles and flapper parties have to carry things along until the mystery of Gatsby's personality takes over. Unfortunately it is also a mystery why he is so attracted to shrill, neurotic Daisy (Mia Farrow) and that undermines what ought to be the driving dynamic of the film.The tension does mount steadily in the latter part of the film though, amplified by the (now rather stock) stifling weather trick (did Tennessee Williams get it from here?). If Coppola's meandering script were a little more incisive, Farrow replaced by someone that Gatsby might have actually found desirable, and the camera pulled back a little from all the perspiring faces, this could have been a classic.

M Campbell I just finished re-reading F. Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby". It's a novel I hated as a child -- was forced to read it for English in high school -- but appreciated much more as an adult. Then I went to Netflix and watched this movie again. It is, for the most part, a faithful adaptation of the novel but Fitzgerald's beautiful, succinct prose is the only reason to read this tragic tale to begin with. No matter how big the stars or how gorgeous the sets the bottom line remains the artistic assembly of words in the novel. Intermittent narration doesn't cut it and the story itself isn't much to begin with. It's ALL about Fitzgerald's use of words. Lacking that is lacking everything that makes "The Great Gatsby", the novel, something of value. This movie compared to the novel is like...a paint by numbers kit for a masterpiece by Van Gogh or an elementary school band's rendition of Beethoven's 9th Symphony.So, I guess I'll say, if you haven't read the novel you may enjoy this movie. And even if you've read the novel the movie may satisfy on some level though the heart of it has been cut out. But do yourself a favor and read the novel. Read every word. Drink them in. Admire the skill with which Fitzgerald uses language. Then go watch "The Great Waldo Pepper", another Redford film, and enjoy.

Ross622 Jack Clayton's adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby" was a very well made movie with some of the best character development I have seen in a fictional work that was turned into a film. The movie stars Robert Redford as Gatsby who is a very successful businessman who has his own private company, Redford plays Gatsby it's as if he is taking the role like it is nothing to him. In the film we also meet the narrator to the story which is a bondsman named Nick Carraway (played by Sam Waterston) who is the cousin of the woman of Gatsby's dreams Daisy Buchanan (played by Mia Farrow) who got married to Tom Buchanan (played by Bruce Dern) while Gatsby was serving in WWI. Basically this movie along with the book is just one huge love square because Tom has a mistress named Myrtle Wilson (played by Karen Black) who is married to George Wilson (played by Scott Wilson). There is a lot of things that I like about this movie besides the acting, I also was really impressed with the production design as well as the costumes which both areas won Academy awards for 41 years ago. I did read Fitzgerald's novel before I saw this movie and while watching it the story became much more clear to me. I would rank this as one of the best romance movies of all time along with Gone with the Wind (1939), Ball of Fire (1941), It Happened One Night (1934), La Dolce Vita (1960), The Apartment (1960), and Some Like It Hot (1959). This is one of 1974's best films.

aramis-112-804880 THE GREAT GATSBY is one of the great works of world literature. The screenplay for the 1974 version is about as perfect as any book transfer can be.Jack Clayton may not have been the best choice for director. How much better might it have been if the screen writing kid, Francis Ford Coppola, had been given a chance? Too bad we'll never know.The star role, Nick Carraway, is perfectly limned by Sam Waterston. Some of the lesser parts are also wonderful. Lois Chiles, Edward Herrmann, Karen Black, Howard da Silva, all are superb.The three major roles of the "romantic triangle" ruin the movie. Bruce Dern would have been much better as George.And then there is the infamous miscasting of Robert Redford and Mia Farrow. Pretty-boy Redford just doesn't look like the sort of guy who fought his way to the top. In fact, he's pretty bland all around. I don't have another choice for his part, but someone with a harder edge would have been preferable. Redford's not even there. He's nothing more than the sum of a lot of nice suits.If Redford was a mistake, Farrow was a disaster, turning in a bizarre performance as Daisy. The character is flighty, but Farrow ought to be institutionalized. If it's true Tuesday Weld was up for the part, someone blundered. Another good choice would have been Blythe Danner, but she was probably not considered enough of a star (though she could act Farrow off the screen in a showdown).Excellent screenplay, excellent production design. I love 1920s styles and I can really wallow in this movie, except when Redford and Farrow, the blandest couple ever, come on. Then I fast forward. Sam and Lois make a much more interesting team. Too bad we can't flush Gatsby and Daisy altogether. When Nick says "You're better than the whole damn bunch put together," we wonder who he's talking about. Certainly not Redford's lousy Gatsby.