| ||||||||||||||||||
Frequently Bought Together
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
Boy loses girl, boy wins her back, boy loses her again and is killed in his pool. F. Scott Fitzgerald's classic Jazz Age tragedy once again makes a somewhat rocky transition from page to screen in this A&E production starring Academy Award winner Mira Sorvino as the feckless Daisy. This version has Paul Rudd (the stepbrother who got the girl in Clueless) doing the honors as narrator Nick, who reintroduces his married cousin to his lavish-party-throwing neighbor Gatsby. Toby Stephens captures the heartbreaking single-mindedness of Gatsby, although not once does the phrase "old sport" seem to fall naturally from his lips. Director Robert Markowitz uses flashbacks of Daisy and Gatsby's prewar courtship in an attempt to explain their reckless relationship, but they do little more than slow the pace of an already leisurely 93 minutes. The costumes and sets are opulent, however, and Montreal substitutes nicely for Long Island. --Kimberly Heinrichs
Product Description
Jay Gatsby is a man possessed--driven by greed, ambition and, most of all, an unwavering desire for a woman he met before the Great War, when he was poor and she was unobtainable… F. Scott Fitzgerald's masterpiece is an extraordinary journey into the heart of the American Dream and out the other side, where the spoils of success do not always suffice. This lively and lavish adaptation from A&E captures the heady swirl of the Jazz Age in all its excess and decadence. As Gatsby reinvents himself in an attempt to buy his way into the social elite of Long Island's Gold Coast, he yearns to rekindle his romance with the woman who stole his heart years before. But when the chance finally arrives, a shadow of tragedy is cast over what Gatsby long-imagined would be his triumphant moment. Starring Mira Sorvino (Summer of Sam, Mighty Aphrodite) as Daisy, Gatsby's siren, THE GREAT GATSBY is a mesmerizing, tangled tale of wealth and entitlement, love and longing.
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
75 of 81 people found the following review helpful
Format:VHS Tape
While many of you may turn your nose at a movie version of perhaps the greatest American novel starring Mira Sorvino and Paul Rudd, I assure you the casting was wonderfully done. Sorvino fulfills the character of Daisy, somewhat ditzy, materialistic, and self-centered. And Paul Rudd has always been a wonderful actor (let's just pretend "Clueless" never happened). The rest of the cast is wonderful as well. As I mentioned in my review of the OTHER movie version of the Great Gatsby, I was disappointed that (among other things) there was no narrator. Nick DOES narrate this one. It is brilliantly accomplished as well, because he is only narrator at crucial moments where dialogue would otherwise be lost. This movie also includes the famous last words of the novel: "So we beat on, boats against the current, born ceaselessly into the past" which I feel is a crucial part to include in the movie. Scenes were also accomplished with more tact and finesse than the other. The important ones had more time to sink into your memory. It's shorter than the other one, yet you gain more from this version than the older. A&E does not dissappoint!
20 of 21 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD|Amazon Verified Purchase
I am a great fan of Toby Stephens, who consistently turns in splendid performances (even making the dour Mr. Rochester terribly appealing), but I believe that the actor has been miscast in the role of Jay Gatsby. I don't think that Stephens fits into the shoes of Gatsby as F. Scott Fitzgerald has conceived him--larger than life; a man of mystery, who, in the party scene, remains anonymous in the crowd of what Shakespeare would have called "gilded butterflies" and what Fitzgerald himself seems to portray as moths blustering too close to a guttering candle flame. The dreamlike quality of the novel (which, as I recall was evident in the David Merrick/Jack Clayton/Francis Ford Coppola version), is almost totally missing from this latest production.
Where Fitzgerald suggests, the director of this film states outright. in the novel, for example, Nick's memories of his first encounter with Daisy and Jordan--on a seemingly floating divan--are suffused with light drifting through insubstantial billows of white curtains. In the movie, however, Nick simply walks into the living room of an elegant house in which a couple of beautiful girls are lolling on a white couch. In the novel, Nick's first memory of Gatsby is of a lonely stranger, standing at the edge of the water, gazing across the sound at the distant winking green light on Daisy's pier. In the movie, however, the concept has been reversed, in a closeup of a wistful Daisy standing next to the green light on her own pier looking across the sound in the direction of Gatsby's mansion. The reversal of perspective completely misses Fitzgerald's point that Daisy is Gatsby's dream, not the other way around.
These are not the only differences. In the novel, for instance, through Nick's eyes, we witness a deterioration of the mansion, as Gatsby's created world of false elegance gradually disintegrates. As autumn approaches, the proper servants have been replaced by sinister subordinates with underworld connections. In the movie, however, there is no hint of the ugliness beneath the luxurious façade that Fitzgerald seems to suggest with the change of servants.
The disconnect between the novel and the movie is particularly noticeable in the party sequence: in Fitzgerald's narrative, Gatsby's extravagant fete has an impressionistic quality as partygoers and snatches of conversation flit in and out of Nick's consciousness; in the movie, however, the raucous party-girls and their outrageous antics are thrust not only in Nick's face but also in that of the viewer. Moreover, because of the literal orientation of the director, Gatsby's extravagant festivities have a similar impact to Tom and Myrtle's tawdry party. Furthermore, Fitzgerald's subtle use of Gatsby's name and his delayed introduction of the title character, which whets the reader's interest, is mishandled in the movie with clumsy flashbacks of various characters repeating the name, "Gatsby" . . . "Gatsby" . . . "Gatsby!"
While one might praise the scriptwriter's use of Fitzgerald's prose in a voiceover, the writers have taken inexcusable liberties with it. For instance, they have put words into the mouth of "Owl eyes," an inebriated guest who marvels that Gatsby has real books in his library, to the effect of "Oh yes, I look just like Dr. T.J. Eckleberg on the sign in the Valley of Ashes; everybody says so!" Although Fitzgerald may have used "Owl Eyes" as part of his recurrent imagery of viewing (including the disembodied billboard eyes of Dr. T.J. Eckleberg), he never expresses the idea explicitly. Fitzgerald leaves it to the reader to make the analogy between Eckleberg's eyes staring down at the Valley of Ashes and "Owl Eyes" scrutinizing Gatsby's coffin--"Owl Eyes" being the only other mourner besides Nick and Gatsby's long-forgotten father at the funeral.
But back to Toby Stephens. He has charm to die for but somehow--and I believe that the fault can be laid at the door of the director--in this role he lacks that air of elusiveness that causes everyone in the novel to speculate about Gatsby's origins; Stephens is certainly likable as Gatsby, but he somehow seems too literal in his portrayal of Gatsby, a man who has invented himself so expertly that he keeps everyone guessing as to whether he has been a German spy; an Oxford scholar; a war hero, or a con man. In Stephens' otherwise excellent portrayal, unfortunately, no guesswork is necessary.
Where Fitzgerald suggests, the director of this film states outright. in the novel, for example, Nick's memories of his first encounter with Daisy and Jordan--on a seemingly floating divan--are suffused with light drifting through insubstantial billows of white curtains. In the movie, however, Nick simply walks into the living room of an elegant house in which a couple of beautiful girls are lolling on a white couch. In the novel, Nick's first memory of Gatsby is of a lonely stranger, standing at the edge of the water, gazing across the sound at the distant winking green light on Daisy's pier. In the movie, however, the concept has been reversed, in a closeup of a wistful Daisy standing next to the green light on her own pier looking across the sound in the direction of Gatsby's mansion. The reversal of perspective completely misses Fitzgerald's point that Daisy is Gatsby's dream, not the other way around.
These are not the only differences. In the novel, for instance, through Nick's eyes, we witness a deterioration of the mansion, as Gatsby's created world of false elegance gradually disintegrates. As autumn approaches, the proper servants have been replaced by sinister subordinates with underworld connections. In the movie, however, there is no hint of the ugliness beneath the luxurious façade that Fitzgerald seems to suggest with the change of servants.
The disconnect between the novel and the movie is particularly noticeable in the party sequence: in Fitzgerald's narrative, Gatsby's extravagant fete has an impressionistic quality as partygoers and snatches of conversation flit in and out of Nick's consciousness; in the movie, however, the raucous party-girls and their outrageous antics are thrust not only in Nick's face but also in that of the viewer. Moreover, because of the literal orientation of the director, Gatsby's extravagant festivities have a similar impact to Tom and Myrtle's tawdry party. Furthermore, Fitzgerald's subtle use of Gatsby's name and his delayed introduction of the title character, which whets the reader's interest, is mishandled in the movie with clumsy flashbacks of various characters repeating the name, "Gatsby" . . . "Gatsby" . . . "Gatsby!"
While one might praise the scriptwriter's use of Fitzgerald's prose in a voiceover, the writers have taken inexcusable liberties with it. For instance, they have put words into the mouth of "Owl eyes," an inebriated guest who marvels that Gatsby has real books in his library, to the effect of "Oh yes, I look just like Dr. T.J. Eckleberg on the sign in the Valley of Ashes; everybody says so!" Although Fitzgerald may have used "Owl Eyes" as part of his recurrent imagery of viewing (including the disembodied billboard eyes of Dr. T.J. Eckleberg), he never expresses the idea explicitly. Fitzgerald leaves it to the reader to make the analogy between Eckleberg's eyes staring down at the Valley of Ashes and "Owl Eyes" scrutinizing Gatsby's coffin--"Owl Eyes" being the only other mourner besides Nick and Gatsby's long-forgotten father at the funeral.
But back to Toby Stephens. He has charm to die for but somehow--and I believe that the fault can be laid at the door of the director--in this role he lacks that air of elusiveness that causes everyone in the novel to speculate about Gatsby's origins; Stephens is certainly likable as Gatsby, but he somehow seems too literal in his portrayal of Gatsby, a man who has invented himself so expertly that he keeps everyone guessing as to whether he has been a German spy; an Oxford scholar; a war hero, or a con man. In Stephens' otherwise excellent portrayal, unfortunately, no guesswork is necessary.
31 of 36 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
This wild shot at Fitzgerald's masterpiece sees it all as a sort of proto-Godfather saga, 60 years ahead of its time. Beautifully costumed and with a sharp and accurate period look, this British TV version is a very distanced interpretation (if you can call it an interpretation, rather than an abject misunderstanding) of Gatsby. The take is pure gangland style -- an element certainly in the book, but which hardly subsumes it all -- or ought to, anyway. The story is really about romantic extravagance and earnestness; that takes more than mere costuming and sets, but actors with a lot of heart. The men here have no appeal whatsoever; they're all thugs. Mira Sorvino's Daisy, however weird, is presented as some sort of heroine -- about as far from Fitzgerald's intent as you can get. The dialogue is all accurate, mind you, and the story line is not significantly altered. Simply, this total misunderstanding of Gatsby is an object lesson on how mere "textual faithfulness" is far from enough to properly mount a literary work as film.
You can't blame our cousins across the Atlantic River though. The tight, terse Fitzgerald text is obviously based on the reader sharing certain cultural assumptions; this version exposes that fact about the book, and to that extent is useful. And the Brits never understood Scott Fitzgerald from the get-go, though he has always bugged them. The late great British literary critic Cyril Connelly summed it up perhaps best, "Scott Fitzgerald is an American imposition, and I am beginning to resent him." This was in the 60s, in the heights of the Fitzgerald revival which continues to this day.
The film still rates 3 stars because -- paired off against the more famous Redford Gatsby (which is also quite textually accurate) -- it presents fascinating issues of textual interpretation and personal and cultural orientation. Know the book well though, and see the other film first before coming to this.
You can't blame our cousins across the Atlantic River though. The tight, terse Fitzgerald text is obviously based on the reader sharing certain cultural assumptions; this version exposes that fact about the book, and to that extent is useful. And the Brits never understood Scott Fitzgerald from the get-go, though he has always bugged them. The late great British literary critic Cyril Connelly summed it up perhaps best, "Scott Fitzgerald is an American imposition, and I am beginning to resent him." This was in the 60s, in the heights of the Fitzgerald revival which continues to this day.
The film still rates 3 stars because -- paired off against the more famous Redford Gatsby (which is also quite textually accurate) -- it presents fascinating issues of textual interpretation and personal and cultural orientation. Know the book well though, and see the other film first before coming to this.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
full rounded rendition
This is a fully rounded rendition of Fitzgerald's book: scenery, content, background, costumes, vehicles, dialogue, etc. It even put African-Americans as mentioned in the book. Read more
Published 4 months ago by Zorrito53
A Newer Take on "Gatsby"
First of all, if you haven't read "The Great Gatsby," you should, because no one will ever make a "perfect" film version of the book. Read more
Published 12 months ago by Basbleu
Good... but watch the '74 version instead!!!
Whule this made for TV adaptation was a good, generally faithful to Fitzgerald's book, and had gorgeous costumes and scenery, it doesn't hold a candle to the 1974 adaptation. Read more
Published 14 months ago by Crazy Cat Lady
Not a bad movie!
I've bought the 1974 version and was impressed by it. The 1974 version provided us with a perspective which is similar with the book. Read more
Published on November 20, 2009 by C. Tunan
Awesome movie!
I liked this movie very much! I saw the original first and was recommended to check out this version. I like this one much better than the original. Highly recommend it!
Published on October 5, 2009 by O. Trobaugh
The Great Failure...
I purchased this film after seeing Toby Stephens' excellent performance in the 2006 adaptation of Jane Eyre. He oozed charisma and owned the lead role... Read more
Published on June 3, 2009 by Shopper
intriguing failure
This is a fascinating example of how a movie adaptation can be almost excessively faithful to a book -- transcribing dialogue line for line, including voice-over narration -- and... Read more
Published on December 3, 2008 by Heather Hadlock
Winning features are the Fitzgerald bio and his narrative text in...
Pros and cons of the 2000 (UK, 2001 US) A&E version of The Great Gatsby have been extensively discussed. Read more
Published on August 30, 2008 by Rudolf Schmid
Decent, but could have been better
Although I was eager to see the updated version of Fitzgerald's novel, by the end of the film I only felt lukewarm about its delivery. Read more
Published on April 26, 2008 by fra7299
the best version was with alan ladd.nothing since has come near
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
as the great gatsby what on earth has happened to that film
Published on March 30, 2008 by H. A. Holden
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Look for Similar Items by Category
Look for Similar Items by Subject
|
