Okay I get it, the Great Gatsby was not so great, but all you Luhrmann haters need to stop and think for a second

So… maybe the ‘Great’ Gatsby didn’t quite live up to it’s name BUT this is definitely not an excuse for Baz Luhrmann haters to get all full of themselves and post lots of ill-thought out hate for him.

Yes, Gatsby was wildly overdone, and all the while still managed to lack the energy of his earlier, simpler films, probably because of that horrible HORRIBLE CGI, but let’s not forget, a great artist is never perfect. That would be boring. 

So what if he’s made one or two bad films? Has everyone forgotten the sheer brilliance and bravery of films such as Strictly Ballroom, Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge? Films with subject matters that could make many people retch (including me), but they don’t because Baz Luhrmann has that rare skill of being able to keep that teetering, magic balance between gaudiness and skilful restraint at the right moments. His movies are what I believe film should be; true, beautiful escapism, where everything is strangely bright, fun and comical, with high drama and sometimes even tragedy and and audience that are made to feel like part of the story. I’d like to live inside a Baz Luhrmann film.

The films he has made recently don’t change the fact that it was him, Baz Luhrmann, who made these brilliant films before. Yes, the same mind that made Gatsby, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a brilliant mind. Maybe he was just looking for inspiration in the wrong places.. or looking too hard. I get the feeling Gatsby is too obvious a choice, maybe that was his downfall.

I get why Luhrmann did what he did. The Great Gatsby is already such a lavish, Luhrmann-style book, it was difficult for him to find a way to step it up a notch, and he ALWAYS needs to step it up a notch in his films (see Romeo + Juliet). So he put in all this CGI and 3D and the teetering balance that he usually keeps so well came crashing down, gaudiness spilling everywhere and restraint forgotten.

In Gatsby’s defence, the acting was mostly up to par, especially Leonardo DiCaprio (lets just forget about Tobey Maguire shall we- he was either massively miscast or misdirected), and I certainly felt the emotion the book gave me in the film (it’s my favourite novel, so that’s saying something!), especially in the scene where Tom Buchanan confronts Gatsby in the hotel room. Now that scene had a touch of the Baz Luhrmann I miss, the Baz who could build up emotion and tension so much you feel as if you’re being drawn into the screen.

…

And for all you snobs who slag off Baz Luhrmann because he’s not ‘classy’ enough or whatever, just because Baz Luhrmann does camp and trashy well he’s not a bad director, in fact there are very few directors who can do that, it takes a lot of skill and talent. Maybe you’re not into over the top films, but you should know a good film when you see it, even if you don’t like the style, as appreciating skill and style are two totally different things. It’s wrong to dismiss a director just because their films are not catered to your specific taste. A skilful director should always be appreciated by true film lovers just for their ideas and exploration of film, as they help enrich the overall cultural landscape of film and create new ideas.

That also goes for all you (too many!) people who say ‘Great Gatsby: great film, shit book’…….ITS WIDELY CONSIDERED TO BE THE QUINTESSENTIAL AMERICAN NOVEL! What more can I say? You are certainly allowed to not like it but F.Scott Fitzgerald and ‘shit’ just should not be put in the same sentence!  Come on, really? Shit? Could you write that? No? Then it’s not shit is it! If you still don’t get it… see above. This ‘short post’ has turned into a full on rant.