Escape to the Movies: The Great Gatsby

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

FireAza:
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?

I think Bob's still recovering. After all, Scout went up to that fat-bald-fatty-fat-fat-fat and broke his stupid crap by headbutting him. Basically, he's kind of a big DICK.

I feel like some of you guys miss the point, in novel Daisy is the American dream during this time period. Where we have romanctice view something much more then it is, and in the end it may not be worth effort put into it. That Make Gatsby so sad made will and enegry of titian and undying hope, for his dream to not worth of him.

PS this fellow does ten time better job of the explaining then then me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw9Au9OoN88&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtOeEc9ME62zTfqc0h6Pe8vb&index=4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn0WZ8-0Z1Y&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtOeEc9ME62zTfqc0h6Pe8vb

The book "The Great Gatsby" really annoyed me when I read it a couple years ago. I thought the point of that book was to illustrate how everyone in every social class were rotten, with an emphasis on the rich. Rich men were Scrooge McDuck and rich women were shallow and/or arrogant. Almost as if, in some twisted way, the book is trying to say to agree with the cultural idea that rich people are snobs of one kind or the other with the words "Yep, that's really what they're like!"

The only characters who could be described as good, in my mind, were Nick Carraway and George Wilson. The story goes out of its way to try to crush both of their spirits through the "corruption of the world around them". Wilson's actions may not have been justified, however the woman he loved manipulated him and warped his mind. Last I checked, physical and mental spousal abuse tend to leave pretty serious scars on a person's mind.

Gatsby used to be a good man, yet he went out of his way to put up a sham to disguise himself as one of the evil rich because...I honestly do not recall what his motive to "become one of the rich" was exactly. As for why Nick respected Gatsby so much in the end, I think it was because Nick recognized how the attitude, charm, and determination of Gatsby could have changed the world if he had not fallen under its sway.

I realize this is a terrible place to put this, however I just wanted to get out of my system why I personally think the book is overrated. I don't think this is worthy of its own thread because I haven't read it recently and I'm no professional critic. Maybe the movie improves upon the book in some ways, maybe not. I haven't seen it yet so I don't know.

I would love to see a film adaptation of The Giver or a new The Outsiders.

I'm seeing this movie tomorrow morning and I'm supposed to review it so I don't want to spoil the criticism with Bob's video, but could someone please tell me why is everybody dropping Orson Scott Card on the subject?

Johnny Novgorod:
I'm seeing this movie tomorrow morning and I'm supposed to review it so I don't want to spoil the criticism with Bob's video, but could someone please tell me why is everybody dropping Orson Scott Card on the subject?

It has nothing to do with the actual review, just the bit in the credits where Bob points out they're making a movie out of Ender's Game, a book by Card, and wondering what kind of public relations mishap Card is going to pull.

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?

Not really. Just because you are free to say something doesn't mean you are free from the consequences of expressing that opinion.

Card absolutely has the right to spout his bigoted nonsense, and the rest of us have the right to call him on it.

Ukomba:

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.

Ok, I have to ask: what "uncomfortable positions" has Terry Pratchett ever taken? I've read every one of his books and even had the pleasure of seeing him speak once, and the most controversial thing I've ever heard him say is that people should generally refrain from being mean to each other.

Unless you're referring to his wild and crazy notion that he shouldn't have to watch as his mind slowly betrays him?

j1-2themax:

Johnny Novgorod:
I'm seeing this movie tomorrow morning and I'm supposed to review it so I don't want to spoil the criticism with Bob's video, but could someone please tell me why is everybody dropping Orson Scott Card on the subject?

It has nothing to do with the actual review, just the bit in the credits where Bob points out they're making a movie out of Ender's Game, a book by Card, and wondering what kind of public relations mishap Card is going to pull.

Much obliged :) Still not sure why is Card's homophobia an issue though. I'm sure it need not affect the movie.

Abandon4093:
Never read Gatsby.

But the way you described it, it sounds a lot like the Count of Monte Christo after the Château d'If.

It really isn't. The Count is a misguided man, Gatsby is just a moron.

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.

Here is a summary of Card's history with homophobia. In 1990 he said he wanted homosexual acts to be illegal (not gay marriage, literally the act of gay sex), in 2004 he said "The dark secret of homosexual society-the one that dares not speak its name-is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse, and how many of them yearn to get out of the homosexual community and live normally." And more recently in 2008 he said "[t]here is no branch of government with the authority to redefine marriage," and in 2009 he became a member of the board of directors of the National Organization for Marriage, a group which actively lobbies to keep gay marriage illegal.

Johnny Novgorod:
I'm seeing this movie tomorrow morning and I'm supposed to review it so I don't want to spoil the criticism with Bob's video, but could someone please tell me why is everybody dropping Orson Scott Card on the subject?

I think others have replied to you, but I thought you might appreciate the summary as well. Yeah, basically Card is a flaming homophobe and so putting his name anywhere near the press is like putting a candle in a box of fireworks. One way or another, something is bound to go off, and regardless of how removed the film Ender's Game is from his craziness people won't be able to separate the two and it could damage the film's box office numbers. Because who wants to see a film based on the work of a flaming homophobe, and will only give him more money to lobby against gay marriage?

SnowWookie:

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?

Not really. Just because you are free to say something doesn't mean you are free from the consequences of expressing that opinion.

Card absolutely has the right to spout his bigoted nonsense, and the rest of us have the right to call him on it.

Because throwing around loaded labels really adds to the discourse, like how bringing up Nazi's really helps with the tone of the discussion. It's the difference between saying 'you're wrong' and 'you're evil'. Calling someone a bigot just seems like an easy way of dismissing everything they say and is a good way to frighten anyone else away. Just look at some of the response I got for saying I don't think hates gays as much as he's portrayed to and giving my own opinion on what he wrote. I can assure you I've gotten worse private messages. In the future I better keep my mouth shut hu?

SnowWookie:

Ukomba:

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.

Ok, I have to ask: what "uncomfortable positions" has Terry Pratchett ever taken? I've read every one of his books and even had the pleasure of seeing him speak once, and the most controversial thing I've ever heard him say is that people should generally refrain from being mean to each other.

Unless you're referring to his wild and crazy notion that he shouldn't have to watch as his mind slowly betrays him?

What a wonderful way of sugar coating his stance. It comes off more like I don't want him to get cured rather than not wanting him to die.

Yes, I find his assisted suicide stance really really troubling and uncomfortable, and I am allowed to feel uneasy about allowing doctors to kill people. Not least because he'd already be dead, dead as of 2009, which means there would be no 'I Shall Wear Midnight', 'Snuff', or the forth coming 'Raising Steam' among others. There a lot of other issues with starting down that road and I find it troubling. I don't think it makes him a bad man, and it doesn't stop me from enjoying his books.

Dansen:

Abandon4093:
Never read Gatsby.

But the way you described it, it sounds a lot like the Count of Monte Christo after the Château d'If.

It really isn't. The Count is a misguided man, Gatsby is just a moron.

But it is about a man leaving his home by twist of fate, going through his own personal hell and changing everything about himself so when he returns he can swindle the upper echelons of society in a bid to steal back(?) the woman he desires.

Granted Dantès just wanted revenge, but it works out that way.

I didn't say it was exactly the same, but from the way Bob described it there seems to be more than a few parallels. Even if Gatsby is treated as more of a moron than Dantès.

Daaaah Whoosh:
I was hoping for a more meaningful film, considering I liked the book, but I suppose after the trailers, this is really all I should have expected. Oh well, I still need to go see Iron Man 3.

...you saw this first? I'm not saying either seem like bad choices, just curious why.

I mean to see it. and the new direction sounds like a neat ride.

I'm the only guy who doesn't want the movie to be exactly like the book cause for once I've read this book.. why would i wanna pay 10 dollars to watch what i already know.

Same reason i skipped total action recalls remake.. "it's the same thing scene for scene? no thanks."

I have not jumped into this film and won't be bother doing so. The trailer makes my skin itch (in a negative way) considering Baz Luhrman is more of a grand showman where sing and / or dance are the main course. That's fine if you're a middle-aged woman who thinks that their life is just as glamorous as Carrie Bradshaw her life in SATC.

Before you jump the guns to shoot me down, SATC has really influenced women's life and their mindset and many of the women I meet really behave like that. So it's either art imitating life, or life imitating art. Both things are very possible.

Ukomba:

SnowWookie:

Card absolutely has the right to spout his bigoted nonsense, and the rest of us have the right to call him on it.

Because throwing around loaded labels really adds to the discourse, like how bringing up Nazi's really helps with the tone of the discussion. It's the difference between saying 'you're wrong' and 'you're evil'. Calling someone a bigot just seems like an easy way of dismissing everything they say and is a good way to frighten anyone else away. Just look at some of the response I got for saying I don't think hates gays as much as he's portrayed to and giving my own opinion on what he wrote. I can assure you I've gotten worse private messages. In the future I better keep my mouth shut hu?

At this point, I'm starting to wonder if *you* have actually read his stance of homosexuality. He is the textbook definition of a bigot. It's an accurate description of his position.

As I said, both he and you are entitled to your respective opinions (and I recognise you're not saying you share his opinion, merely that he has a right to it), but again, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.

I don't know or care what private messages you've received on the topic (you'll note I didn't attack you on it, merely disagreed), but it's hardly surprising that people are annoyed at your "defence" of Card.

Ukomba:

SnowWookie:

Unless you're referring to his wild and crazy notion that he shouldn't have to watch as his mind slowly betrays him?

What a wonderful way of sugar coating his stance. It comes off more like I don't want him to get cured rather than not wanting him to die.

Yes, I find his assisted suicide stance really really troubling and uncomfortable, and I am allowed to feel uneasy about allowing doctors to kill people. Not least because he'd already be dead, dead as of 2009, which means there would be no 'I Shall Wear Midnight', 'Snuff', or the forth coming 'Raising Steam' among others. There a lot of other issues with starting down that road and I find it troubling. I don't think it makes him a bad man, and it doesn't stop me from enjoying his books.

I don't want him to die either, but I'd much rather he was allowed to make the decision for himself rather than suffering through (especially for someone like Pratchett) would be the worst kind of hell.

And he wouldn't already be dead, that's FUD. He was only diagnosed in 2007, and has said he wants to keep going for as long as he can, but it should be *his* decision as to when that is.

Besides, there's a world of difference between someone who holds a controversial opinion about the right to die, and someone who believes we need anti-sodomy laws.

aaronmcc:
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.

No they won't...
Face it, Trekkies will oppose the very existence of Star Trek movies not based on any series etc, they shall cry foul murder at everything in the new movies that in any way differs from previous installments, damn the amazing action scenes as an insult to the sourse material, call Benedict Cumberbatch a tosser for not being of indian decent (or for not being an oiled up mexican), yell at the new Spock for having ears that aren't pointy enough / too pointy, call the "homages" and references to the old films a big "fuck you" intended to specifically offend them.

But the new Star Trek is damn, damn good.
Much better than Iron Man 3 and a friend of mine even said he liked it better than the Avengers...

Has......has Moviebob always had this Boston accent?

Because this seems like a new thing.

Joel Bridge:
I feel like some of you guys miss the point, in novel Daisy is the American dream during this time period. Where we have romanctice view something much more then it is, and in the end it may not be worth effort put into it. That Make Gatsby so sad made will and enegry of titian and undying hope, for his dream to not worth of him.

PS this fellow does ten time better job of the explaining then then me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw9Au9OoN88&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtOeEc9ME62zTfqc0h6Pe8vb&index=4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn0WZ8-0Z1Y&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtOeEc9ME62zTfqc0h6Pe8vb

Interesting videos--thank you for sharing. I still do not care for the story or book, but appreciate learning about its historical context and hearing an explanation for why someone else enjoys or appreciates it. I still do not like it, but that's a matter of taste; you can't be right or wrong for liking or disliking a particular piece of art.

So now Bob is going to rail against Electro losing the mask and green tights? I mean, come ON!

Also, for the record, here's Ultimate Electro, who presumably is the model for this:

http://www.samruby.com/Villains/UltimateElectro/UltimateElectro.gif

Bob not "caring" for the Ultimate series doesn't mean adapting it is necessarily a bad idea, right?

Oh, and Baz Luhrmann is a one trick pony, albeit an entertaining one. Yep. Noted. Not much else is new there.

Falseprophet:

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 might surprise you to learn the rest of the world isn't required to study your country's literary canon.

I don't think he literally meant that it's required reading everywhere, it was just a hyperbolic statement meant to convey the popularity and public recognition of the book. It might not be as popular in other places as it is in the U.S., but it is still popular to some extent, more-so than say "The Tommyknockers."

bravetoaster:

Joel Bridge:
I feel like some of you guys miss the point, in novel Daisy is the American dream during this time period. Where we have romanctice view something much more then it is, and in the end it may not be worth effort put into it. That Make Gatsby so sad made will and enegry of titian and undying hope, for his dream to not worth of him.

PS this fellow does ten time better job of the explaining then then me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw9Au9OoN88&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtOeEc9ME62zTfqc0h6Pe8vb&index=4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn0WZ8-0Z1Y&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtOeEc9ME62zTfqc0h6Pe8vb

Interesting videos--thank you for sharing. I still do not care for the story or book, but appreciate learning about its historical context and hearing an explanation for why someone else enjoys or appreciates it. I still do not like it, but that's a matter of taste; you can't be right or wrong for liking or disliking a particular piece of art.

As fan of book this current movie is retelling but stil miss mark when comes to meaning behind story.

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?

I'm not sure, as I attended an atypical high school, but at least personally, we were required to read parts of The Canterbury Tales in modern English.

I also just recently took a Chaucer course at my University, which is the entirety of The Canterbury Tales in original Middle English.

It's weird how your commentary so often has obvious, jarring splicing where it was clear you wanted to re-word something, but your stance on your accent slipping out of nowhere seems to be "eh, fuck it". Maybe the obvious, jarring splicing is frequently the accent-slippage you ended up noticing and redoing, I dunno, but it always struck me as strange.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

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