Escape to the Movies: The Great Gatsby

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Ukomba:

bravetoaster:

Ukomba:
I'm curious if many people have read what Card has said, or just read what others have said about him. In a resent article, Salon (the whole article painting him as practically Naziesk in his hate) said his "most controversial anti-gay screed" was saying homosexual relationships are different than heterosexual ones. Not really the rabid hate I was expecting.

They later go one to direct the readers to slash fan fictions of his work, the article is really classy.

Are you able to endure reading Card's bigoted, ignorant, fallacious rants? Take a shot, if you like, but I tried, just now, and it was painful: http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-02-15-1.html

It's not that he's a universally bad writer and not that he doesn't or can't make reasonable points on other topics, but Card sure does seem to have an impressive hate-on for anyone who happens to be homosexual. If nothing else, that makes him an asshole.

(OT: my captcha just asked "which one is a country?" and when I chose "Canada" over bunny rabbit, colored pencils, chicken salad, fried rice, or a truckload of cabbages, I somehow failed. I feel like my world has been turned upside-down. Which one of those is a country, then?)

It might be me, but I think you're reading a tone that isn't there. He seems to come off as more stridently pro-Heterosexuality than anti-homosexuality. He does seem to have a hate on for the political part of it though. He comes off as more ani-liberal than anything else.

Actually, it's a little meta. The whole article is him railing against the suppression of free speech and how anyone who is for transitional marriage is branded as evil and bigoted, and the article gets him branded evil and bigoted. Proving his point?

It's an uncomfortable subject to be sure, but I can Enjoy Terry Pratchett, and think he's one of best writers currently alive despite disagreeing with him on some very uncomfortable positions he's taken.

Personally, I got as far as "lesbian women can marry a man and have a child" before I got too disgusted to continue. Insisting that the ability to marry someone of the opposite sex is the same as marriage equality seems like entirely missing the point.

There are a lot of famous authors who had questionable beliefs or practices, Wallace Stevens, Charles Schulz, TS. Eliot, etc, but I still think their work can be enjoyed on its own merits, personally.

Ukomba:
Actually, it's a little meta. The whole article is him railing against the suppression of free speech and how anyone who is for transitional marriage is branded as evil and bigoted, and the article gets him branded evil and bigoted. Proving his point?

It's an uncomfortable subject to be sure, but I can Enjoy Terry Pratchett, and think he's one of best writers currently alive despite disagreeing with him on some very uncomfortable positions he's taken.

If that was his point, he wasted a LOT of words trying to make it... and then still didn't make it. No one's taking away his free speech. Just like no one's taking away freedom of speech or assembly from the KKK. He, like them, can always hide behind the first amendment. And I'll gladly stand in front of it and protect it for him, should the situation ever arise.

It is interesting how we can (or cannot) separate the artist as a person from the art. I have an easy time doing that with some artists, not so much with others.

(Edit: I sent you a PM with longer commentary on the essay.)

imagremlin:

RJ Dalton:
You also can't spoiler something that's required high school reading. Anybody who doesn't know the story of The Great Gatsby by this point has no excuse not to.

Its funny how Americans assume that if it was required reading for them, it was for everybody. I was only vaguely aware of the existence of the book and only recently learned it was required reading through a joke on Failblog.

If a movie was made about a Latin-American novel, say, 100 Years of Solitude, required reading where I grew up, would it be OK if I assumed everybody knows how it goes?

Not that it matters in this case, as I had zero intention of seeing it, but still.

Or, perhaps we don't care? It's an American novel made into a movie by an American studio, primarily for an American audience. That said, most classic literature, and this is classic literature, is pretty well known. People might not know how Dracula gets killed, but they tend to know about Mina Harker and van Helsing. They might not know how or why people die in Macbeth or Romeo and Juliet or Hamlet, but they know it happens.

i read this in high school but, dont remember anything about it (it was required reading, i was focused on finishing it in time, not on the story). i remember things not ending great for gatsby, and i remember (strangely enough) the description of a billboard. thats about it

imagremlin:

RJ Dalton:
You also can't spoiler something that's required high school reading. Anybody who doesn't know the story of The Great Gatsby by this point has no excuse not to.

Its funny how Americans assume that if it was required reading for them, it was for everybody. I was only vaguely aware of the existence of the book and only recently learned it was required reading through a joke on Failblog.

No, not everybody. Just everybody who matters.
http://youtu.be/Npkhyeotzog

On a side note, I should probably wait at least until there's two or three pages of comments before posting if I'm going to forget the obvious facts. You're like the fifth or sixth person to comment on this today. _

Ukomba:
I'm curious if many people have read what Card has said, or just read what others have said about him. In a resent article, Salon (the whole article painting him as practically Naziesk in his hate) said his "most controversial anti-gay screed" was saying homosexual relationships are different than heterosexual ones. Not really the rabid hate I was expecting.

They later go one to direct the readers to slash fan fictions of his work, the article is really classy.

It doesn't matter what Card says. While his rants are calm and not the mad ravings of a lunatic, though no less laughably pathetic and weak (We're not stopping gay people from marrying! ...someone of the opposite sex! Hrhrhr, I'm so clever and smart), he's still a board member of the National Organization for Marriage, the same one that passed Prop 8 and opposes both civil unions and gay adoption. Actions speak louder than any words, and Orson Scott Card is among those that are actively trying to impede the progress of the LGBT movement. It doesn't matter that he's "pro-heterosexual" more than "anti-homosexual." Changing the label doesn't make me think any higher of him. At the heart of the matter, Card is still an active member of those that are trying to harm what should be natural rights of American citizens.

OT: I didn't really like the book, but that's more my fault than the book's. I don't really like sad/bad endings. Still, the 2013 movie seems to have an interesting take on it.

No matter what, I'll still see it because it has Leo DiCaprio. I just can't help it. I've had a crush on him for yeeeeeeeears.

RJ Dalton:

On a side note, I should probably wait at least until there's two or three pages of comments before posting if I'm going to forget the obvious facts. You're like the fifth or sixth person to comment on this today. _

Sorry mate, I was originally going to post that remark as a general reply, aimed at Bob actually, then saw your post and went for it. My bad, should have read the whole thread before posting.

imagremlin:

RJ Dalton:

On a side note, I should probably wait at least until there's two or three pages of comments before posting if I'm going to forget the obvious facts. You're like the fifth or sixth person to comment on this today. _

Sorry mate, I was originally going to post that remark as a general reply, aimed at Bob actually, then saw your post and went for it. My bad, should have read the whole thread before posting.

No need to actually apologize. I'm more annoyed that I made that mistake than people calling me out on it, if only because the inevitable result was people calling me out on it. *headdesk*

Interesting. OK gonna have to see what he says about this

Sean951:

Or, perhaps we don't care? It's an American novel made into a movie by an American studio, primarily for an American audience. That said, most classic literature, and this is classic literature, is pretty well known. People might not know how Dracula gets killed, but they tend to know about Mina Harker and van Helsing. They might not know how or why people die in Macbeth or Romeo and Juliet or Hamlet, but they know it happens.

I'm curious, when you say you don't care... is it about foreign literature? about the fact that the Great Gatsby isn't so big outside the US? Or the fact that there may be people out there who genuinely never heard of it and would like to see the movie? Just asking clarification, not trying to antagonize.

I've read or heard about all your other examples and so did most people I grew up with, but not the GG. Not saying is a bad book or anything, in fact, after Bob's review and by the comments I've read so far I may give it a try.

EDIT: Thinking about this, I realize that even though I know about these books, I was never required to read them. They are not required on any spanish speaking country that I know of. So I'm guessing our knowledge of any literary works outside your own language is probably related to how much its been used in popular media. Do you know about Don Quixote? You probably do, although I'm guessing you were not required to read it. That may explain why the Great Gatsby is such an unknown work in other languages.

I hated the book, the people in the book and having to read it. There is nothing you could do that would drag my ass into a movie theater for this. This is on the same level as Pride and Prejudice.

I read 'The Great Gatsby' in college or high school, I forget which. It was one of the most laborious and dull reads I'd ever had in my fucking life. I felt like a champ when I read 'The Power of One' (a great fucking novel and a pretty good movie) because it was the size of a house brick. Gatsby was about 1/5 the size and took thrice as long to read.

Everyone, even Nick to a degree, is a total douchebag. I uttered what TV Tropes calls the Eight Deadly Words of "I don't care what happens to these people" within the first chapter and was praying for the outbreak of WWII by the middle.

That the movie is just as empty is no shock.

Was forced to exclaim profanities at the screen just at the trailer when I saw Baz Luhrmann's name as were a lot of other people in that particular screening. Although not the Hulk-like rage I get from even the trailer to Juno, I'm not going out of my way to see any of his movies. What captcha? "Such a dag"?!

If Hollywood were one big football game, Jamie Foxx would be the audible play for every team. Seriously, the guy is showing up in everything lately! (not against it, just an observation)

RJ Dalton:
You also can't spoiler something that's required high school reading. Anybody who doesn't know the story of The Great Gatsby by this point has no excuse not to.

It wasn't required high school reading for me. Different places have different education systems so, there's that...

Edit: My bad, looks like you've been called out on this a lot already. It's late, and I'm feeling too lazy to read the whole thread before commenting and having a bit more trouble than I do when I'm fully awake resisting the urge to be a snarky asshole.

I will be pretty sad if Card's personal views go on to hurt Ender's Game at the box office. Besides using his story the project is the hard work of a lot of other very talented people and I personally am really looking forward to it.

The other thing about all the hullabaloo that comes up around Card's views on same sex marriage, as repugnant as many people find those views to be he has still written some beautiful books filled with great messages of acceptance and compassion that are not changed by his political views one bit.

I disagree with you on spoilers Bob. For example I had never heard of the Great Gatsby until I saw the trailer before a showing of Les Mis. I think that no matter how popular or old something is a spoiler is a spoiler because there is always someone new to what you are talking about.

I'm waiting for the day where Bob just says "Screw it!" and goes full Bostonian with his reviews. XD

I was thinking that this was good for using Dick Dastardly as the villain character then....

Bob trumps it with Rex "Power" Colt for the complicated hero pic

Well played Moviebob, Well played. You win the Internet!

A shallow movie about shallow people based on a shallow book about shallow people? No wonder it never works out.

why the hell does everything need to be in or have 3d sections in them? its a waste of time and money that does little to nothing for the films, i saw Iron Man 3 in 3D(I didn't pay for it and that's the only reason why i saw it in 3D at all) and maybe 1/4 of the movie had 3D bits in it maybe an hours worth of film total, not worth 23 bucks for 2 tickets at all.
Make the film engaging and you wont need to shill out thousand if not millions on bullshit effects

I love the slips into Boston-Bob mode. I'd love for you to do a video where you skip the radio voice and just read things out naturally. Either that or get a voice-acting job for a gangster themed game! :D

Can't help but be reminded of Django Unchained when looking at clips of Leo DiCaprio in a nice suit with a drink in his hand, toasting and cracking that same smile. Will keep an eye on this as it's released in Finland.

Talking about how good a movie could have been instead of where it stands as it exists now is an interesting, yet not quite as useful as you might think, tact to take.

The super annoying thing was the dirty trick The Escapist website used to dupe me into clicking on advertising I had no interest in looking at. I don't mind that there is advertising; I'll even suport the site by clicking on advertisements I'm actually interested in checking out. But that's not what happened - using a transparent field over content to trick me into clicking on it? That's stupid BS.

Thumbs down Escapist. Thumbs down.

about the whole "dosnt need a spoiler alert because its so old and everyone should know it" it does require a spoiler alert for some like me, as it may be required reading for yank's its not all to well known over here in the UK (most people know OF it, but beyond that not all that many have actually read it or have heard the story)

EDIT: I wonder how many Americans have read anything by Chaucer?

Heaven forbid a guy named "Electro" looks like he's made of electricity, as oppose to wearing a bright green and yellow costume with a lightning bolt mask. And yes, I am aware that Foxx looks more like an electrified Smurf, and I could not care less about that. With the inclusion of the Rhino (who is Paul Giamatti, officially), I'll just be happy IF we can get a Sinister Six on the big screen before Sony's films completely and financially bomb at the box office, worldwide, and we get (another) reboot from Marvel Studios.

Safaia:

Gorfias:

Kmadden2004:

One that's going to end up looking something like this, I'd imagine;

http://images.wikia.com/marveldatabase/images/f/f9/Maxwell_Dillon_%28Earth-1610%29_010.jpg

Wrong. That's Dr. Manhattan from "The Watchmen". Kidding!

But, it has been done before. Man, I'm going to miss the green and yellow outfit.

Unless there is a giant blue dick and Vietnamese abortions in this one too I'm not interested.

On topic: the English major in me wants to see this but bleh.

I have hope for Man of Steel as, Snyder seems a genuine visionary with something to show us. But, "bleh" is what I fear. Movie Bob voiced the fear that the new Star Wars and Star Trek will not be bad. They just won't be great. They'll be safe and technically proficient and we will walk out of theaters shrugging instead of having our imaginations set on fire. I "liked" the Amazing Spiderman... less so upon a 2nd viewing. Safe, samey. I'm hearing the new Star Trek will be more of the same. The next Spiderman has a lot of ground to make up. I think I'll like it again. That's not enough. I'm better off staying home watching "Game of Thrones" on TV.

cwmdulais:
about the whole "dosnt need a spoiler alert because its so old and everyone should know it" it does require a spoiler alert for some like me, as it may be required reading for yank's its not all to well known over here in the UK (most people know OF it, but beyond that not all that many have actually read it or have heard the story)

EDIT: I wonder how many Americans have read anything by Chaucer?

It's not uncommon to have to read Canterbury Tales. It's not quite as high up as To Kill A Mockingbird and you'll probably read it in one of the higher grades, but it still ranks up there.

I love your reviews Bob. Seriously 70% of the time your "go see it" is truly a fit for my personal tastes, but when you do this HORRIBLE thing where every other damn sentence is switched between your Boston accent and what seems to be your review voice it becomes nauseating.

Can you PLEASE go one way or the other? Either use your accent all the way through, or use the generic review voice you've used in the past. I can't possibly be the only person who dislikes the constant shifting between the two every couple of seconds in a review that barely goes over 5 minutes.

Sean951:

Hindkjaer:
I'm rather pissed that just because it's common in American Litteratur, it is considered okay to spoil it. Grantet this wasn't like "Vader-Luke" proportioned spoiler, but still. It seems a little arrogant.

It's not just common, it's been required reading for most high schoolers going back decades with 5 previous movie versions. The statute of spoilers goes back 20-30 years, and at that point I feel it's fair game. Exceptions being when this is the first movie/TV adaption from an old book.

Your last point being very important, because A Storm of Swords have been out for 13 years, but I would bet my bottom dollar that if you spoil that to anyone they are gonna be mad.
But I will give you, that the fact it has been out for so long, and have other adaptations, is a good reason to be able to just talk about it. Never the less, nobody I knoe in Denmark have heard about it...

I just saw Sta Trek Into Darkness and it's well worth it. Just the right amount of homage to Star Trek 2 with some great new takes and twists added in. Benedict Cumberbatch is terrifying but I was most surprised by the fact that Chris Pine proved he can act...you will see what I mean. Trekies will love the shit out of it.

Bob we love the Boston voice, in fact when it sometimes slipped in during videos we loved it and wanted it all the time in every video. We were wrong. No offence since it is your natural speaking voice, but its becoming quite detractive from the reviews now.

Captcha: no means no. Um... Capcha... do you need to have a talk with someone?

The was migraine inducing, Bob. Please stick with your broadcast accent. There's nothing wrong with it and we all know by now you're from "Bawstin."
Or if you have to speak in that accent, at least do it all the time instead of switching back and forth.

bravetoaster:

HBaskerville:
Also, the book/story is about horrible, unpleasant people. They are all jerks. Making Gatsby into some kind of honorable guy misses the point entirely.

Have you fully read the book? I recall trying to read it in high school and finding it unbearable because all of the characters were so intensely unlikeable, but, with all the people hyping and praising it as some kind of epic, nuanced masterpiece (despite the plot sounding like a watered-down, unfulfilling Count of Monte Cristo), I have found myself questioning whether my initial assessment was just me being a teenager with too much haterade in my system or whether the main characters are all, in fact, irredeemable and unlikeable.

Not that stories about terrible people can't be worthwhile or great art, just I seem to have a serious problem with those kinds of characters in any format outside of comedy/dark comedy (see: It's Always Sunny or Peep Show).

Also, I don't know how or why, but Bob's Bahstin accent's intrusions are somehow no longer unpleasant. It's still not pleasant, but, the first time it happened pretty hard, I was one of the whiners who had to stop watching the episode because it was so grating. I'd like to imagine this is somehow Bob playing the bizarre long game of acclimating the Escapist community to Boston accents (presumably for some kind of sinister purpose).

I had the same issue with Catcher in the Rye. Just a hopelessly unlikable jerk with an obsession with children and their "innocence". The Bell Jar was also led by a wholly unlikable character. I just think that its easy to call books like that "art" because they are so "dark", even in Gatsby's case where its superficially hidden by opulence.

I like Spiderman as character, but it's hard to enjoy the movies. I'm wishing they spent more time on the story than the special effects. Not to mention stopped trying wedge the expected love interest for Peter per each movie.

Oh hey, they got The Scout to do a guest review on Escape to the Movies! That's pretty cool, is Bob back next week?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here