Movie Review: The Great Gatsby

Background

The Great Gatsby is a book everyone is supposed to read, only about half actually do, and a handful of people list as one of their favorites to try and sound smart.

Review

There were three things that gave me hesitations about this movie well before I saw the film or any of the reviews leading up to its release.

1) Baz Luhrmann

Baz isn't exactly a household name, but chances are you've seen one of his three big releases. He is the man behind the mid-90s Romeo + Juliet, Moulin Rouge, and Australia. He is a perfect example of someone who is style over substance. His theory seems to be, if I show you something shiny or beautiful, you'll forget that what you're watching doesn't have much else besides pretty visuals. For some people that might be enough, or for certain movies that might be enough, but literature classics are usually considered such because of their story. This movie certainly could have used more Fitzgerald and less Luhrmann.

2) 3-D

3-D movies are a new fad that is really only there for the studios to get a few more dollars per ticket at the box office, while you have to sit and watch a darkened version of a movie with glasses that probably give you headaches. The quality of 3-D in movies, outside of maybe a very small few, has usually ranged from bad to meh. I can see the niche appeal for a movie that has a lot of action going on, or possibly used in a campy style for a by-the-numbers horror movie, but in a drama? Not only does a story like Gatsby not need to be in 3-D (and I guarantee it wouldn't have been if any other director in the world had made this), but it wasn't even originally planned to be, and the release was pushed back by 6 months in order to convert it to this unnecessary format. Which brings me to my next point...

3) Delayed December Release

The official reason that was stated for this film, which was originally slated to open in December 2012, to be delayed until May 2013, was the post production 3-D conversion. While that may very well be the main reason, there is another theory that most critics come to when any December release is delayed. Most movies released late in the year, especially a drama with big name actors, and in this case a unique visual style, is usually done so for the opportunity to be discussed as a potential Oscar nominee. When a movie is willing to trade in gold statues for a bigger box office return, they've usually been told already their movie isn't good enough.

The biggest problem with this movie isn't that there is any one or two things disastrous about it, but there isn't even one thing overly brilliant. The visuals, even if you think they're great, are really only a huge focus for about the first third of the film. Outside of a few car driving scenes, once you get through the first party and the introduction of Gatsby, the visual style is really quite toned down, and in my opinion, more tolerable.

The downside to this is, once you get past the first act, this movie just becomes really boring.

The acting is a little over the top at times, although I imagine some of this was done purposefully. Dicaprio is, as usual, extremely good, and even Joel Edgerton as Tom Buchanan has his moments, but outside of that, the word bland comes to mind. Tobey Maguire's voice has always been annoyingly pre-pubescent to me, so his narration throughout becomes tiresome. I wouldn't have any complaints about Carey Mulligan on her own right, but her and Leo's lack of chemistry makes for some awkward scenes. It's like watching two people who were set up by mutual friends, so they feel obligated to play up their feelings towards each other, but you never really buy that they are "the one" for each other.

I would have appreciated a hip-hop full soundtrack in a movie that took place in the 1920's a lot more if I thought there was an artistic reason behind it other than trying to milk the soundtrack sales and bring in another demographic to the theaters by splashing Jay-Z's name on advertisements. There could have been a real meta thing going on between the theme of excess in America before the Great Depression, and how it relates to the rap culture today, but that's giving this film and filmmaker way too much credit.

In the end, this isn't a terrible film. It isn't even a bad film. It's really just a terribly disappointing one.

Rating

6 out of 10

Next Week: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Movie Review: Iron Man 3

Background

Iron Man 3, clearly the sequels to Iron Man 1 & 2 and The Avengers (essentially Iron Man 2.5), pits Tony Stark against arch nemesis The Mandarin. Now that we got the obvious out of the way...

Iron Man 3 is written and directed by Shane Black, who has penned a number of popular action films (Lethal Weapon series, The Last Boy Scout, Last Action Hero), but this is only the second film he has directed. His first, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, is a lesser known but both extremely underrated and a monumental film in Robert Downey Jr.'s filmography.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang proved that Robert Downey Jr. was ready to be a leading man in mainstream Hollywood after finally kicking his drug habit that resulted in many arrests and problems in the late-90's/early 2000's. It was his role as Harry Lockheart that led in part to his becoming not only the quintessential Tony Stark/Iron Man, but a damn good Sherlock Holmes as well.

Review

While I have nothing but high praises for Shane Black's directorial debut, there was a very slight concern of how he would be able to manage a movie in a franchise that has done nothing but deliver every time, due in most part to stability from film to film. Jon Favreau, who directed the first two, took more of a backseat role due to other directing commitments, but is still around as bodyguard (now Head of Security) Happy Hogan, so his notes and influence were still present. Plus I'll never complain about him getting more screen time (Swingers is in my top-5 favorite movies).

The film begins and ends with a Robert Downey Jr. voiceover narration that lets you know right off the bat that Shane Black is bringing his style to the series. This tactic was used in the aforementioned Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, and while they sort of give an explanation for it at the end of that film, stay for the always great post-credit scene to see the reasoning for the narrative exposition throughout this time.

Robert Downey Jr. plays a perfect Tony Stark for the fourth time (fifth if you count The Incredible Hulk post-credit scene), and can weave between badass and smartass with ease and humor. Tony is not only fighting The Mandarin, but also has to fight his own demons with his psychological state after the events in New York. These problems are putting a wedge between him and girlfriend Pepper Potts, as he spends most of his time tinkering with his toys in the basement during sleepless nights. This is what leads to the high number of suits you see in the trailer, as Tony is up to the Mark 42 suit that he mainly uses throughout. During the last action scene, fanboys will be able to recognize a lot of different suits that have been used throughout the comic's run.

The supporting cast also brings their A-game, from the returning Gwyneth Paltrow and Don Cheadle expanding their characters, to Sir Ben Kingsley and Guy Pearce as the new evil doers. I'll get back to Kingsley in a moment.

One of my favorite parts of the movie was the second act, when Tony Stark is left without his suits and only his brain to survive. He is stuck in a small town in Tennessee where he is trying to figure out the background to where the latest threat originated, and is accompanied by a young boy that helps him in his research and recovery. This part is played perfectly by both, as Tony clearly has no idea how to deal with a young child other than to treat him as any other person who he believes is supposed to help him because of who he is. There are times when you believe a cliche moment is coming, only for the writing to play against the stereotype of this situation.

Getting back to Ben Kingsley as The Mandarin, this will be the topic of the film that will cause the most debate, at least among the hardcore comic geeks. I won't give away any spoilers, but the way in which he is portrayed in the third act will be very polarizing. While I can completely see where someone who doesn't like it is coming from, I thought it played out just fine for the style of the film. Many liberties are taken between original comics and their film counterparts, and not everything can be done the exact way with the change of tone and audience.

On this same topic, this film incorporates the Extremis story arc, but mostly in name only. This is one of those instances where they could have called the "weapon" created by the villain anything, but they sort of decided to just name drop the reference. That won't be nearly as big a topic of debate as the above, but something diehards will possibly nitpick.

Overall, this is exactly what you expect from a Iron Man/Marvel universe film. The success of the original is what has led to this expansive universe that is able to exist within itself, and Paramount (now Disney) has done a good job of the old adage of "if it's not broke, don't fix it". These films have all been done seriously, but with only as much seriousness within the movies that is needed to push the drama. In the end, these are still comic book adaptations, which are supposed to be fun and a little cartoon-ish. Shane Black's style, while different from Favreau's, is different but still appropriate. A minor part I loved is the end credits, where the music and quick shots of all three past films is very reminiscent of old Saturday morning cartoons.

A title card at the end says that Tony Stark will return, which we all know will happen at the very least with The Avengers 2, but until a less-than-stellar Iron Man movie is made, I'll continue to be excited about anymore the studio want to give the fans every few years.

Rating

8 out of 10

Next Week: The Great Gatsby