After the closely watched casting, the first trailer for Baz Luhrmann's take on "The Great Gatsby" has arrived - and 1920s New York has never looked so good.
With Jay-Z and Kanye's "No Church in the Wild" plus Jack White serving as the soundtrack, we see Tobey Maguire as Nick Carraway, Carey Mulligan as Daisy Buchanan, and Leonardo DiCaprio starring as the man himself, Jay Gatsby.
Carey Mulligan's Daisy tells Gatsby, "You always look so cool," and indeed DiCaprio does, appearing elegant throughout the two-and-a-half minute clip.
That could also apply to the city itself, as we're told that in the New York of 1922, "the buildings were higher, the parties were bigger, the moons were looser and the liquor was cheaper. The restlessness approached hysteria."
Judging from the parties depicted in the trailer, hysteria can be an awfully good time. "The Great Gatsby" arrives in theaters December 25.
One of the two acknowledged American classics - the other being Huckleberry Finn - with Gatsby being a ghost story. about the unattainable ghosts of our dreams past. I can still can quote the end from memory. This novel isn't about the party's but the silences reigning in their background. This looks horrible. Incidentally, Mulligan did feature in Pride & Prejudice. - JJB
I loved this book in high school and I re-read it every few years. They shouls have picked a less well known actor for Nick to reinforce the everyman point of view in the storytelling. Mulligan may be an interesting Daisy. But I think Dicaprio is a poor choice for Gatsby – and why does he seem so angry in nearly all the shots in the trailer?
This is awful. Leo looks cross-eyed most of the time, K Mulligan looks tired and the chemistry is all wrong. Mia Farrow was breathtaking and understandably attractive to a man like Gatsby. Why redo something like a classic with this? It is like redoing Gone With The Wind! Ugh!!!
The best thing for me about "Gatsby" was looking at those long shots of Robert Redford's face! And Leonardo is no Robert Redford.
@HTD, Mulligan played one of the sisters to Knightly. She was the one that was always laughing with her other sister.
Don't judge a movie by its trailer. There could be some 20's music in the actual movie; it is more than six months before the movie comes out. The modern music mention and use in the trailer could be just a lure to get a younger audience. There is plenty of 20's music that still speaks to and matches the times of today, often to an eerie degree.
Spot on Cindi. I couldn't agree with you more.
I loved the Redford and Farrow movie. I think Carey Mulligan is a great actress and loved her in "Pride and Prejudice" but I just don't connect w/her as "Daisy"; At least not in this trailer. I like Leo too but agree w/an earlier post – he just tries too much in his movies to make a believable performance. And why in the world does it have to be in 3D?? To attract a younger audience???
Keira Knightly was in Pride and Prejudice, (2005) not Carey Muligan.
The Great Gatsby is my favorite book, so I am a little bit cautious of how this movie will hold up. I liked the Robert Redford version a lot, and Mia Farrow obviously looks more like Daisy than this chick does, she also acted like Daisy perfectly to a tee. The fact they are going to do the soundtrack with Kanye and Jack White kind of makes me wary of this movie. This trailer kind of disappoints me and makes me think that they are going to butcher the greatest novel in American literature.
I'd like to see them skip the crappy effects, skip the rap music/pop music soundtrack, and skip adding in their own drama. Just do the Great Gatsby exactly like the book, its not a long book at all, it should be easy to do the movie exactly like the book.
Don't be afraid of the now or the future–if you don't like this one then watch the version you like. Change is good because it will motivate a whole new generation to read and venerate the book and the writer.
At least they didn't re-do it with an all
black cast like everything else. And, now, ladies and gentlemen, Tyler Perry as the Great Gatsby!
you should be ashamed of yourself Mammy!!
Your so weird–were you dropped on your head as a baby?
Leonardo is too old, too beefy and not emotive enough. He looks like a hard-drinking 50's star, not at all like Fitzgerald described Gatsby. Carey Mulligan looks great, and so does Tobey Maguire. This will be another horrific Baz overdone period piece that panders. He could have had fun with the period music, I'm so totally disappointed, I was hoping for the sense of time and place that he brought to "Strictly Ballroom". I guess we'll be lucky if they don't burst into song. I never could get through Moulin Rouge.
this was already done by Vincent Chase. another hollywood reboot. ugh...
Leonardo is certainly a good actor, however physically he resembles more Tom Buchannan. Film makers have to respect a natural appearance of actors.
They lost me in the first 30 seconds with the auto-tuned music. Sad and lame.
I'm a book lover, but I love movies too and don't get too bent out of shape when a book gets changed as it morphs into a movie. But if they have Gatsby & Daisy sleeping together, that's blasphemy. Completely warps the story.
I'm also ok with a remake, because Mia Farrow bugged the hell out of me in the Redford version, and I love Carey Mulligan. I know she'll do a much better job.
Add me to those who hope that craptastic music isn't actually used in the film.
Robert Redford and Mia Farrow made a timeless movie. I like Leonardo but he appears to be trying to hard again (even in the trailer). The book and movie is about understated yet over the top elegance. This movie looks like its completely in your face and misses the mark... And 3D? Really?!? I guess they expect a bunch of tweens to watch this.
I hate this book. It's pages should be used to insilate dog houses...provided you hate your dog.
Obviously you hated school too.
WOW! I wonder if this could actually live up the wonder that was Moulin Rouge? The trailer looks to have captured the magic of the atmosphere in the book!!! As for the detractor posts, Gatsby was about atmosphere (for me at least). The story took a back seat to the scene, which was so over the top it made you dream of a magical period that I dont think ever quite existed.
The only "wonder" for me about "Moulin Rouge" was that I wondered who Luhrmann blackmailed into greenlighting the thing. "Gatsby" is about the American (particularly WASP) experience in the early part of the 20th century. This film appears to be about making everything look shiny and neat and putting rap music behind flappers dancing–all style, no substance.
Don't like this version? Watch the Robert Redford version. Faithfully follows the book to the letter. Unlike other novels made into movies.
We read Fitzgerald at Arcadia College.
And then you got drunk and shared your GF with the rest of the frat boys.
Your mom went to college.
What the hell is up with the music in the trailer? Seriously? Is that in the movie? Way to completely destroy the atmosphere of a period piece. And why did it need to be remade again!
Just call it "Moulin Rouge II". This thing may find an audience, but it won't be with people who want to see another film adaptation of Fitzgerald's novel. This looks to be as much of a train wreck as "Moulin Rouge" was.
Thank God it wasn't that filthy rap garbage.
Boring book...boring trailer. My least favorite of the required readings I have ever had to do, either in high school or college. Even going to Wikipedia and reading the plot synopsis is boring.
YOU are boring.
Yet another attempt to translate F. Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby" to the screen. The foible of this movie is obvious. The music is too modern on the trailer and I suspect the film. Films about the 20s need the appropriate music of the era. Also, I am sure it will include a lot of the modern moral corruptions and pretend they existed in the 20s and with quick scene to scene cuts of explosions and car chases to keep modern audiences amused (18 year old males) who seem to need movies to move as fast as an X-Box game. The average speed of an auto back then was about 30 to 45 miles per hour. I am sure Gatsby's car will be doing 110 under the El from the look of things. Another failure enroute.
Ya Rick, it was definitely top 5 worst and most boring of all the required high school readings.
With “Midnight in Paris” and now “The Great Gatsby” it seems that nostalgia (at least for the 20’s) has never been more popular. Personally, I am most fond of the time “Not So Long Ago” between WWII and Korea. The whole world was at peace at least briefly.
One of the reasons the book is so good and highly regarded is the economy of the writing - really, not a whole hell of a lot happens but much is suggested and, moreover, evoked. It puts a lot on the reader to get, from the parties to the eyes of God on that billboard. Film is very literal–a flick like "Wings of Desire" is extremely rare–and so the challenge for "Gatsby" in a make-it-big-and-win-the-Oscar culture is daunting as hell. Leo as Jay makes sense; he has the depth and cred to rise to the occasion, provided he doesn't let his mannerisms get in the way of the pure character he's got to capture. That Mulligan as Daisy isn't a rare beauty makes sense–but she's got to convey that complex brew of innocence and loss and paralysis in the shadow of her bully husband or the whole thing collapses like a bad souffle. That's what F. Scott cooked up - a confection as rich, light, delicate, and lasting as anything you can remember with love and mourning.
Yeeah I remember reading that in High School and yes, the movie too. The book was really good though.
Trailer says it's in REAL D 3D – you've got to be kidding me!
What could 3D possibly do for this story? It's already a crappy gimmick in most other movies.
Wow. Take digs at the movie, but the book? It's one of my favorite reads of all time. As everyone has said, it's as relevant today as it was (think about this) almost 100 years ago.
The morals were looser, not moons!
the article quotes "the moons were looser." I think the narrator says "the morals were looser." I never heard of a loose moon! I hope our moon's not loose!
Lmao you're funny.
Is it just me, or does almost everyone in the trailer look like they're twelve?
I'm sorry I love Leo but this looks like garbage...
History is once again re-written by bloated Hollywood budgets and marketing systems fed to the masses. The truth of history is being replaced by fiction for a profit.
This is a film adaptation of a famous work of fiction. It's not a history book.
What are you talking about? I've read the book three times, and this trailer looks spot-on - with the exception of the modern soundtrack.
the "truth" of history is all to often fake. How often do we fail to address real social issues from the past in these movies, and highlight only the things we like remembering.
I think people feel today's issues weren't present 20, 30, 40 years ago, but that would be false.
What history, rewritten or otherwise, were you able to glean out of that trailer exactly?
Was there a crying need for this movie to be made? The 1970s version was a flop and the book isn't widely read or hugely popular these days.
Or is it just Leonardo DiCaprio still trying to get everyone to forget Jack Dawson?
The book isn't widely read? It's one of the most assigned books in high school English. It's also regularly read on the college level. It also happens to be an American classic. It's not sparkling vampires or children Thunderdomes or boy wizards or whatever popular crap is selling by the dumpster load this year. It's timeless, relevant and yes- still very widely read.
It's a beautifully written American classic with a message that is as relevant now as it was when it was written. Maybe more so.
Here's a fun fact: 2.5 million units of Gatsby sold in trade paperback (Simon and Schuster edition) to date this year alone (I don't have the numbers all time, but they would be staggering), according book publishing industry numbers, so yes, it is still one of the most widely sold and read books. If a new book came out and sold half that number in the first five months of the year, it would be called a phenomenon.
Oops, factual correction to my previous post. 2.5 million copies in trade paper sold lifetime to date–more than 80,000 sold this year. I don't have the hardcover numbers. Still a very large number for first 5 months that don't include the holiday shopping season (I thought the 2.5 million units sounded way too high and looked into it a bit more. 80,000 is nothing to sneeze at. It isn't Twilight or Harry Potter numbers, but still great business for a book that's been around this long).
Every young girls fantasy fairy tail, two very rich men fighting over her.
Yeah, except they're all nihilists and pretty much everyone comes to a bad end.
I wonder if it'll be as over-hyped as the book, or if that's even possible.
The book 'over-hyped'?!? WOW! I guess literature doesn't mean much any more does it?
Beautifully, elegantly written piece of American literature. Maybe you should read it again.
Apparently its elegance and styling was lost on you. Pity. It's an American classic for a very good reason.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Our daily cheat-sheet for breaking celebrity news, Hollywood buzz and your pop-culture obsessions.
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.
Join 7,751 other followers