So, which Gatsby is really the greatest?

The Great Gatsby (1974): Mia Farrow, Robert Redford. Picture: Supplied Source: Supplied

Would it be wise to compare Baz Luhrmann's 2013 version of The Great Gatsby starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Carey Mulligan, with the 1974 version starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow?

Would it be wise to compare Baz Luhrmann's 2013 version of The Great Gatsby starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Carey Mulligan, with the 1974 version starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow?
 
Probably not.
 
Would it be fun? Absolutely.
 
Largely because of the stark contrast between the two.
 
The new one is a brassy blonde bombshell of a picture. The old one is more of a mousy librarian.
 
As we count down the days until Baz's blustery blockbuster finally makes it to his homeland, let's reverse down memory lane for a look at a quainter, quieter and (perhaps undeservedly) much-unloved adaptation of The Great Gatsby.
 

 
Bobbin' Up And Down
Robert Redford's performance as the enigmatic man of money Jay Gatsby is an uncharacteristically drab effort from the decorated actor.
 
Starts out strong, in spite of not even speaking a line until the 35-minute mark. Does have an endearing way of delivering the Gatsby catchphrase "old sport" with a studied, world-weary lack of warmth.
 
However, when the pressure is on to distil the elusive essence of Gatsby, Redford's reading of the character goes positively cold.
 
 
Bummer, Mia!
 If Redford's take on Gatsby can be deemed an honourable failure, you can go right ahead and drop the "honourable" when assessing the work of his leading lady Mia Farrow.
 
She takes aim at the crucial part of Daisy Buchanan armed with an annoying artillery of squeaks, shrieks and out-there outbursts.
 
Needless to say, Farrow misses the character by a country mile. Instead, it is the audience that cops the brunt of her vivaciously vacuous onslaught right between the eyes (and ears).
 
A Couple, A Daze

The chemistry between stars Farrow and Redford as the Gatsby and Buchanan. Pictures: Supplied Source: Supplied

 You want passion, longing and regret? Don't go looking for it in the 1974 The Great Gatsby.
 
Instead of giving us lovers who were never meant to be, Redford and Farrow give us fleeting acquaintances who were never really there.
 
In most scenes, the pair do not appear to be under the impression that they are in the same movie.
 
End result? A screen chemistry equivalent to an aspirin dropped in flat lemonade : Farrow fizzes away, while Redford fails to react.
 
 
Play It Again, Sam

Sam Waterston played Carraway in the 1974 version. Picture: Paramount Source: Supplied

Tobey Maguire as Nick Carraway. Picture: Big Australia Source: Supplied

Sam Waterston makes a fine fit for the key supporting role of Nick Carraway, the wide-eyed 'Ordinary Joe' who experiences a gradual loss of innocence as he gets to know his distant cousin Daisy and his next-door neighbour Gatsby.
 
As Carraway is also the narrator of the piece, it is Waterston's voice that often transports viewers from one scene to the next. His delivery is not exactly lively. But when compared to the work of Redford, he's a bundle of activity.
 
 
It's a Dern Deal

Bruce Dern plays Tom Buchanan in the 1974 production. Picture: Big Australia Source: Supplied

Joel Edgerton as Tom Buchanan. Picture: AP/Paramount Source: Supplied

 The best of the featured actors in the 1974 version is Bruce Dern as Daisy's philandering lummox of a husband, Tom Buchanan.
 
Though hardly a physical match for the "hulking" former college football player Fitzgerald envisioned on the page, Dern embraces the unthinking, uncaring nature of his character with both gusto and fine precision.
 
Continually gives a vibe he may have been the only person working on the film (including the director) who both read and understood the fundamental themes explored by the novel.
 
 
Let's Talk About Sets, Baby

Depicting one of Gatsby's famous parties in the 1974 production. Picture: Big Australia Source: Supplied

No one knows how to depict excess quite like our own Baz Luhrmann. Picture: Big Australia Source: Supplied

The production design is one department where the '74 Gatsby truly delivers. The movie looked a zillion bucks when first released, and has not dated badly at all in the intervening years.
 
The air of damaged glamour that was peculiar to the Jazz Age era is captured beautifully, with lots of elegantly composed long-shots of lavishly appointed rooms and grounds.
 
Interestingly, the two key locations for the movie were in two different countries. The Gatsby mansion was scouted in a ritzy Rhode Island address in the US, while the sprawling Buchanan estate was shaped on a backlot at the famous Pinewood Studios in the UK.
 
 
The Sound of Some Hands Clapping

Movie posters from the most recent two versions of the 1925 classic novel. Pictures: Supplied Source: Supplied

Though it is widely believed the '74 Gatsby was a disaster at the box office, its financials stack up pretty well when all is said and done.
 
The movie cost a relatively expensive $6 million to produce, but grossed over $30 million worldwide according to records of the time.
 
Just as Baz Luhrmann's new version is clearly the most heavily hyped movie of 2013 so far, the old version was also marketed to the max in its year of release.
 
In its first week of release, the production scored the covers of Time, Newsweek and GQ magazines, and dominated the daily press.
 
A month later came the ultimate proof of popularity : a Mad Magazine parody titled - wait for it - 'The Great Gasbag'.

Finally, as a special treat, here is a snippet from the long-forgotten 1949 production.

Here is a select scene from the 1949 movie, The Great Gatsby.

View the original article here