“It eluded us then, but that’s no matter—tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther… And then one fine morning—So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.” —F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby
Baz Luhrnman’s The Great Gatsby is an audacious, fascinating technological and aesthetic experiment in expressionism, a “kaleidoscopic carnival,” to borrow Fitzgerald’s phrase, as bursting with bejeweled excess as its title character’s boozy parties, the cinematic equivalent of the biggest, craziest, loudest guest at a gathering where the confetti falls and the champagne flows like monsoon rain, and the twenties really roar their golden roar. Everything shines in baroque, brilliant, beautiful fakeness.
A
lavish, splashy celebration of the extravagance of the Jazz Age, Gatsby is filled to the brim with the
sort of stylistic gambits Luhrman fans have come to expect—epic, classic
melodrama that blends old world theatrics with the newest in postmodernist
subjective filmmaking, CGI cityscapes, anachronistic soundtrack mashups of period
music and modern pop, psychological drama and speedy slapstick. But through the
brightly-hued haze of acrobatic camera movements, opulent flowers, flappers,
fringes, and frills, Luhrman’s reverence for his source material shines through
like the blinking green beacon of light at the end of Daisy’s peer.
The
film begins with narrator Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), writing a memoir from
the confines of an asylum. Although a point of divergence from the novel, this
framing device is hardly a blasphemous indulgence. But is it necessary? Some of
us still like to think of Carraway forever preserved on the “thrilling
returning trains of my youth,” his idealism shaken but not shattered; instead we get a
depressive, anxious, sleepless alcoholic in a mental institution. The story he
tells is well known, a trenchant tale of love, loss, wealth, corruption and
staggering ambition.
The
single best thing about Luhrman’s film is the self-invented, self-deluded Jay Gatsby
(Leonardo DiCaprio) himself, played as an unreal, mysterious, mythical
projection of his own psyche made achingly real by DiCaprio’s performance. The
movie arguably reaches its peak 30 minutes in with his masterful introduction,
accompanied by an explosion of fireworks and the merging of reality and
illusion over the strains of Gershwin’s “Rhapsody in Blue” and the magic and
romance of half-remembrances of other times and other places.
With
Carraway’s help, Gatsby, who now lives in a house vaguely resembling a Disney
palace that might strike Charles Foster Kane as excessively large and vulgar,
plans to lure back Daisy (Carey Mulligan), a dazzling debutante he’d loved and
lost when he was younger and poorer.
Fitzgerald
describes his title character’s smile as “one of those rare smiles with a
quality of eternal reassurance in it, … [that] faced—or seemed to face—the whole
eternal world for an instant, and then concentrated on you with an irresistible
prejudice in your favor. It understood you just as far as you wanted to be
understood, believed in you as you would like to believe in yourself, and
assured you that it had precisely the impression of you that, at your best, you
hoped to convey.” DiCaprio, through his precise gestures, body language, and
voice, creates a man seen not as what he is, but as what he would wish, at his
best, to be, what others see and understand him as. The actor’s blue eyes match
the azure of Gatsby’s pool in both color and depth, creating an anguished
portrait of magnificent proportions—a shimmering enigma, an omniscient false
idol of crystallized illusions shattered and toppling from his pedestal, romantic,
beautiful, delightful, terrifying, and pathetic all at once.
Daisy
Buchanan, the girl that got away and the purpose for the main character’s
ill-gotten fortune, in the novel a glimmering figment of Gatsby’s fantasies, is
also humanized. The film never idealizes her as Gatsby and even Nick do. She surfaces
as a complicated, contradictory individual with complex thoughts and feelings,
although the actress lacks the harshness of the source material’s character, a
woman with a hard, narcissistic edge and a “voice full of money” who, along
with her husband “smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into
their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them
together, and let other people clean up the mess.” Tom Buchanan (Joel Edgerton
in a stand-out, scene-stealing performance) captures the jovial arrogance of a
“hulking” brute, a bully and a bigot impersonating a cultured man with money. Some
of the best, most intimate scenes transpire between him and Gatsby, and real
emotions poke through the film’s gleaming, well-manicured surface.
Fitzgerald’s
seductive prose is what made Gatsby
truly great, and the depth and delicacy of feeling the author packed into every
sentence is lost in Luhrman’s movie. A bit too literal-minded in its
symbolism—we get it about that billboard, already!—this Gatsby’s biggest flaw is in its unwavering enthrallment with
surface over depth. In Luhrman’s world, nothing means a thing if it aint’ got
that bling.
Everything
looks just right—thanks in no small part to director of photography Simon
Duggan and costume and production designer Catherine Martin—but feels off. Taking
what is perhaps the greatest American literary achievement of the 20th century
and focusing on all the great shiny stuff seems stubbornly superficial. At its
most opulent, the film becomes performative rather than immersive, keeping us
at an emotionally distant, dreamlike remove that is always bigger, louder, and
lusher than life. Which is not to say the film isn’t immensely enjoyable and
utterly, breathlessly alive.
Although
too carefully choreographed against a bright storybook backdrop of unreal
perfection, Luhrman brings Fitzgerald’s novel to throbbing life in this
hyper-real, hyperactive, hyperbolic adaptation. Swooping, swirling, and
swerving much like an amusement park ride, a calculated mix of refinement and
vulgarity, Luhrman’s Gatsby transcends
artifice and becomes art. It jumps off the screen but remains just out of the grasp
of greatness.
No comments:
Post a Comment