Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 5, 2014 at 2:45 pm #427Liesel ZimmermanParticipant
After our class discussion last week on anti-heroes, this was the first time I had viewed Gatsby in this light. I agree with Megan and Dorothea in that I had originally considered him to be a tragic hero, guilty only of maintaining his idealized dream for the future. Instead of instantly seeing Gatsby as a hero, I instead took note of his more sinister traits.
Especially when compared to the 1974 version of The Great Gatsby, Luhrmann’s film makes a point of emphasizing Gatsby’s pride in his underhanded business dealings. In Clayton’s 1974 version, Gatsby is somewhat more reserved and secretive when discussing his financial affairs. He hesitantly offers Nick a business connection when he agrees to host tea with Daisy, and Nick politely declines. In the 2013 film, when Gatsby tells Nick he can have a part in his side business, Gatsby almost seems hurt that Nick refuses his offer and insists it’s just a favor.
Gatsby also shows more emotion in the Luhrmann film when he is informed of phone calls from his associates. He becomes noticeably agitated when he shouts into the phone that “Well he’s no use to us if Detroit is his idea of a small town…” Also, he snarls at his butler when he tells him that he has a phone call when he is entertaining Daisy, Tom and Nick at the party. The Gatsby in the Clayton film was more subdued in his expression of his displeasure.
Gatsby is also shown to be an anti-hero in the way that he abandoned his family simply because they were poor people. He even had the gall to claim that he didn’t even consider them to be his real parents. In the book and in the 1974 film, Gatsby’s father comes to his son’s funeral to mourn the loss of his child. In both cases he tells Nick that he doesn’t blame Jay for leaving, because he understands that he had his whole life ahead of him. He also says that Jay was good to him once he had made his fortune. Luhrmann’s film lacks this redemptive scene, lessening Gatsby’s appearance as a tragic hero and augmenting his portrayal as an anti-hero. Even as the anti-hero, I agree with Marlene that I was still left wanting him to somehow win Daisy and avoid being murdered by Wilson.
March 11, 2014 at 1:36 pm #283Liesel ZimmermanParticipantIn response to your noting of the “extreme close-ups,” this is something that I noticed as well. Throughout the film, Lecter highlights the concept of “simplicity,” and I feel that the filmmakers took this to heart. The use of close-ups for the exchanges between Lecter and Agent Starling let the richness of the dialogue speak for itself. There is no need to pay attention to anything other than the facial expressions of the actors and the lines they are speaking.
This is my third time viewing this film, and I picked up a considerable amount more each time I saw it. Another aspect of “simplicity” that I observed this time around was when Lector was being difficult with the senator, but finished their conversation by coyly saying “Love your suit.” Though that line may go unnoticed, it hints at the fact that Lecter knows what Buffalo Bill is doing, in turning his victims into a female skin suit. This small, seemingly random line foreshadows Clarice’s big revelation that is to come a few scenes later.
In that revelation scene is another use of simplicity on the part of the filmmakers. When Starling is inspecting Frederica Bimmel’s room, the only sound is the eerie melody of a music box. The innocence of the music box is juxtaposed against the smut pictures found inside. In having that single sound permeate the scene, suspense is built until Clarice figures out Buffalo Bill’s plan. Once she makes the connection, loud music breaks into the scene to emphasize her epiphany. This simple technique achieves the heightened emotion and urgency to show the gruesome importance of Agent Starling’s discovery.
March 11, 2014 at 1:25 pm #282Liesel ZimmermanParticipantIn response to your noting of the “extreme close-ups,” this is something that I noticed as well. Throughout the film, Lector highlights the concept of “simplicity,” and I feel that the filmmakers took this to heart. The use of close-ups for the exchanges between Lector and Agent Starling let the richness of the dialogue speak for itself. There is no need to pay attention to anything other than the facial expressions of the actors and the lines they are speaking.
This is my third time viewing this film, and I picked up a considerable amount more each time I see it. Another aspect of “simplicity” that I observed this time around was when Lector was being difficult with the senator, but finished their conversation by coyly saying “Love your suit.” Though that line may go unnoticed, it hints at the fact that Lector knows what Buffalo Bill is doing, in turning his victims into a female skin suit. This small, seemingly random line foreshadows Clarice’s big revelation that is to come a few scenes later.
In that revelation scene is another use of simplicity on the part of the filmmakers. When Starling is inspecting Frederica Bimmel’s room, the only sound is the eerie melody of a music box. The innocence of the music box is juxtaposed against the smut pictures found inside. In having that single sound permeate the scene, suspense is built until Clarice figures out Buffalo Bill’s plan. Once she makes the connection, loud music breaks into the scene to emphasize her epiphany. This simple technique achieves the heightened emotion and urgency to show the gruesome importance of Agent Starling’s discovery.
-
AuthorPosts