In the transition from novel to
film, many characters are shown in a new light. We may find ourselves loving a
character we hadn’t cared for or disliking a character we loved. For me, the
1974 version of The Great Gatsby cast
a light on the shady side of Gatsby and reminded me of the lawlessness of the
man that goes along with the hopeful dreamer I always tend to picture.
In the 1974 version of The Great Gatsby viewers are met with a
traditional translation of the novel to screen. The filmmakers generally stuck
to the novel as far as plot, but rearranged some parts, changed and added
others. For example, Daisy tells Nick that she hopes her daughter will be
foolish at a party later in the movie rather than during the first party Nick
attends at the Buchannan’s home. There is an entirely added portion where Nick
is brought to Gatsby’s office in what we called a Godfather-esque fashion.
The
character of Gatsby is probably the most affected by these changes, at least in
my mind. The filmmakers seemed to choose to focus more on the illegal dealings
that brought Gatsby to the wealth he possesses during the film. During the
added portion of the scene where Nick is introduced to Gatsby, we are given a
much more suspenseful scene than expected. This suspense sets Gatsby up as a
kind of Godfather character, definitely not the hopeful Gatsby I always
gathered from the book.
In a later
scene, Nick meets Gatsby’s business associate, Wolfsheim. The movie follows the
novel pretty closely here. The inclusion of the story of the man who was shot
and the molar cufflinks aid in creating a lawless character for Wolfsheim and
casting a question of how good Gatsby can be if he is associated with the man.
This scene, though included in the book, is retained in it’s entirety in the
film while other scenes, such as flashbacks to Gatsby and Daisy’s first
meeting are edited and changed.
The scenes
a filmmaker choses to bring to screen really determine what the character give
the character a personality and emphasize different parts of their personality.
Overall, I wasn’t a huge fan of the 1974 version of this movie, but the
different view of Gatsby was a very interesting thing for me to look at.
I think your right about this version having a little more focus on Gatsby's ill-gotten gains, his current profession, and, consequently, his general shadiness. I think some of that could have been overshadowed had Redford found a way to bring out the idealistic midwestern Gatz from time to time. But, in my opinion, he never did, making his shadiness even more stark. He never really portrays a character that deserves any empathy, unlike Fitzgerald's hopeful slightly naive midwestern dreamer. I too am not a huge fan of this version. A lot of my other concerns, (casting acting), would have been assuaged if they could have just nailed Gatsby, with either a different direction from Redford (not sure he's capable) or another actor. Gatsby's portrayal is crucial in such a relatively non-eventful distraction-less plot. I think the casting folks mistakenly counted on Redford's 'heart throb' cred to carry the day--they were wrong.
ReplyDelete