El Gran Gatsby [Blu-ray] [Spain Import]

This movie wasnt as good as the original one , the acting feel a little flat but it was okay

each time a new version arrives i think back to alan ladd who was perfect as the great gatsby what on earth has happened to that film

This is a great film, my son was reading the book for school and needed to get a head start on what the book was about. Quick shipping too!

I reviewed the 1949 and 1974 movie versions of The Great Gatsby novel before witnessing this 2000 A&E made-for-television version. This prepared me well for comparing all three and winnowing out a deepened understanding of how small changes in plot details and casting can amplify deviations between versions and away from the original F. Scott Fitzgerald story. All three versions are love triangle movies in which Jay Gatsby and Tom Buchanan compete for the love of Daisy Buchanan, Toms wife. All three depict party-happy and rich Northeastern American behavior during the 1920s jazz era. Driven by curiosity, Nick Carraway arrives on the scene from the American Midwest, befriends Gatsby and becomes a witness to and narrator of the story. Complexity is added to the basic love triangle by a car accident that kills Toms mistress with confusion over who was driving and by a murder with confusion over its justification. Additional confusion is added by the needs to document the common threads of shallow, selfish behavior laced with disregard for others that seems rampant among newly rich partygoers. For clarity, we can strip away comparisons embedded in all sources of complexity and focus on the love triangle and its witness involving Gatsby, Tom, Daisy and Nick. For additional clarity, we can omit Daisy since she plays a similar role in all three movies, being flattered, confused and mentally buffeted about by male egotists like the ball in a ping-pong match or a hen courted by two roosters. This approach allows us to compare the impacts of only three people (Nick, Gatsby and Tom) in an effort to see how casting can amplify differences between three movies on the same subject and differences between any of these movies and the novel they are trying to portray. Nick is supposed to be an outsider from Midwestern America, although Nick looks like a smooth Northeasterner who is comfortable with rich partygoers in both the 1949 and 1974 movie versions. Nick (Paul Rudd) is perfectly cast in the A&E 2000 version. He looks out of place, skeptical and open minded. Gatsby is assertive, forceful, convincing and likeable in the 1949 version and handsome, neutral and relaxed in the 1974 version. Gatsby (Toby Stephens) is cast in the A&E 2000 version as a sneaky lesser mortal with a habitually crooked smile who is overreaching his talents in courting Daisy. Tom is cast as an easy to dislike man clearly inferior to Gatsby in the 1949 and 1974 versions. Tom (Martin Donovan) is cast as a big, strong, mature man with leadership ability who is rotten in his own way, but clearly superior to Gatsby and worthy of keeping his wife who Gatsby is trying to steal. Someone watching the 1949 movie could disbelieve Nick, pull for Gatsby to succeed and love the thorough early information on exactly how Gatsby got rich. The same person watching the 1974 movie could miss learning how Gatsby got rich, Disbelieve Nick, think Gatsby isnt acting and is too soft to fight his way to wealth. The same person watching the A&E 2000 version could miss learning how Gatsby got rich, think Nick was the perfect, lost-looking narrator and believe Tom should fight off the Gatsby sleazebag and keep his wife.

A brooding, dark film which is semi-autobiographical on the lives and times of the Fitzgeralds. F. Scott and Zelda both personified the roaring twenties excesses and sexual liberation of the times. All of which came crashing down with the collapse of the stock market and the events brewing in Europe. A winsome look back to the life and times.

I found this version, on my first time seeing it, quite good. The acting amused me and the story was both interesting and well planned. Then, I read the book. I found the movie, after a second time seeing it, a horribale adaption to F. Scotts masterpeice and will never live up to the book. The acting is apauling. Although Mira Sorvino is a wonderful actress ( as can be seen in such films as Mighty Aphrodite) she can not be seen as her best in this adaption. Her lack of entusiasim pulls the production down, and it lacks the excentricy and entusiastic energy that the charector of Daisy requires. The part of Tom is also horribally acted by what ever his name is, an unknown. You would think casting could find a better brute. Both these charetors are met to the top in every charectoristc that the parts require, Daisy and Tom in the 1974 version by Mia Farrow, which is a much better adaption. Perhaps it did have more mouney and big Hollywood producers, but it does not take mouney to make a good movie. Some good things (which were very few) I found were the parts of Jordan aand Nick. Nick was wonderfully well acted by a young actor who is making a good name for himself. Jordan, at sometimes,also had her lows, but her highs, if youre comparing the Jordan in the 1974 version. And last but not least, in this review, is the oh so crucial part of Jay Gatzby, which was played in the most of cornieness you could possibly find, and if youre comparing him with Robert Redfords betrayel he shouldnt even be noticed. In conclusion this shallow and boring adaption is not worth wasting mouney, or late fees.

The movie opens with the death of Gatsby and the falling of the precious cufflinks to the bottom of the swimming pool. About five years ago Gatsby loved and wanted to marry Daisy, but couldnt because he was too poor. Finally he has earned enough money, but Daisy is already married. The Great Gatsby is the story of upper-class society in the 1920s and the interactions between a group of people. Nick, played by Paul Rudd, was what I expected Nick to be like when I read the book. He was short which I think was supposed to show his unassertiveness and also he just looked controlled and exactly like the character I had read about before. Gatsby was played by Toby Stephens, who did a good job. The only thing I didnt like about his performance was that he reminded me of a really sleazy guy. When his smile turned to the side, he looked like he was trying to sell you a car or something. Overall I thought the cast was well chosen except for Gatsby because he seemed like a jerk. The movie seemed very accurate to book (themes, characters, symbolism, plot). It was really neat that when the two cars reached the setting of Myrtles house that it was all dark and gray and colorless. This was a change from the bright colors the rich and symbolized the difference between the two classes. Another similarity involved the mood of the scenes. Most of them seemed to fit very well, like when Daisy cried over the shirts and was like a little kid touching all of Gatsbys possessions. This scene is supposed to give a feeling of materialism, and its done very well. A major difference between the book and this movie is that at the begging of the movie it shows Gatsby being shot in his pool. I think the purpose of this was to get the movie of to a faster start before the introduction of the characters. One major problem with the movie was that it switched narrators about half way through. Instead of being from the perspective of Nick, it switched to Gatsby and Daisys perspective during their affair. This is a little confusing because in the book Nick is informed about their relationship from other people, and that information is changed depending on whos telling it. By changing this part in the movie, it takes away a certain character development that is given through the way they talk to others. An aspect of the movie that really impressed me was the camera movement towards the end. Although seemingly insignificant, this detail can create different feelings depending on the quickness of the movement or how much waiting time is allowed. After Gatsby is shot the camera goes from his body to his killer, Wilson, to the police officer, to Nick, and finally to the sky. This sweeping movement gives the viewer a new piece of information every time it moves. Also, the scene was relatively calm and relaxed, as the event was an inevitable conclusion. I really liked the music of this movie. It seemed to enhance each scene by making some of them more dramatic or warning the viewer when something bad is about to happen. Thats a quality that a movie can have that a book cant, it can use sound and visuals to bring the plot to a different level. Overall the Great Gatsby was a well-adapted movie of a book and used the extra senses to create feelings that werent apparent before. The directors knowledge of the themes, moods and characters was obvious through the careful presentation and flowing scenes. One area in which this movie could have been better was some of the details like nicks perspective seemed a little different or untrue to the book.

I thought this adaptation of the unfogetatble novel was fantastic. The movie had its own uniqueness which made it even more interesting. The acting was superb and I would recommend this movie to anybody who enjoyed the novel!

I was very pleased that A&E made an accurate adaptation of this book. Although I would not suggest movie versions over the book ,at any rate, if you have to choose one, choose this one. Ive watched the others, and they are appauling, especially the 1970s remake with Mia Farrow.

After reading the novel The Great Gatsby for school I went out and rented the 1974 version of the movie. I absolutely adored it. It showed the characters personalities as they were in the book. After that we watched the 2001 version in school and I found it to be almost unbearable. The acting was poor exspecially on the part of Toby Stephens (Gatsby). He seemed like more of a mix of Joey from friends and Boy George than a love struck man. While the hit and run scene did prove to be rather entertaining, over all I feel that this movie is just a waste of time and you would be much better off watching the 1974 version.