Misspelled Names and Dreadful Movies
Sep. 4th, 2013 08:53 amSince relocating to Poughkeepsie, I've been grappling with the burning question: Why does Dutchess County misspell its own name?
I mean, there is no "t" in "Duchess," right?
Yesterday it finally dawned on me, No, stupid. The spelling references the DUTCH – the earliest white settlers to these parts. A major "Duh!" moment, I'll tell you.
In other news, I watched the Baz Luhrman version of The Great Gatsby last night, kind of a perverse exercise since it was every bit as awful as I imagined it was going to be.
Now, I'm agnostic as to whether movies made from books actually need to follow the plot outlines of those books or only need be faithful in their fashion. But you know, there has to be something, some spark of similarity. And this movie had nothing in common with its source material other than the barest outline of a plot. Why not call it Scott Pilgrim Does the Masque of the Red Death in the Twentieth Century? and have done with it?
The Great Gatsby is one of the most muscular masterpieces in the American canon. I mean, we are talking prose that just got out of the shark cage there after swimming from Cuba to Key West. Not an ounce of fat on its spare little frame. So for this novel to mushroom into this self-indulgent phantasmagoria was just wrong. Deeply wrong.
Then you have the fact that the acting was uniformly dreadful from the guy phoning in a bad Hemingway imitation as Tom Buchanan to Carey Mulligan's leaden, sleepwalking performance as Daisy. If her voice sounded like money, it was the quarters that come out of the laundromat change machine when you finally succeed in feeding it that crumbled five dollar bill, I'll tell ya.
DiCaprio was not bad as Gatsby. Except that Gatsby is not a Christ figure. More a kind of Herbalife CEO.
Nick Carroway is the most interesting character as such in Gatsby. Note, however, that Gatsby is not a novel that relies heavily on characterizations being a morality play of sorts. Anyhoo, Nick Carroway is interesting because while he's a third person narrator in the classic tradition of Conrad and Kipling, he's also a foil – the nameless narrator of The Man Who Would Be King doesn't change much through the recounting of Peachie's tale, but Nick does. Not enough to end up on Shutter Island though.
But what about the party scenes? The much vaunted art direction?
Horrible. Beyond horrible.
I could go on and on. And on and on.
As a Mel Brooks-inspired parody of a horror movie, though -- maybe something entitled Scott Pilgrim Does the Masque of the Red Death in the Twentieth Century -- Gatsby has a kind of campy, fuzzy charm. Which is not to say it worked. Just that it amused. But it really needed a better soundtrack.
I mean, there is no "t" in "Duchess," right?
Yesterday it finally dawned on me, No, stupid. The spelling references the DUTCH – the earliest white settlers to these parts. A major "Duh!" moment, I'll tell you.
In other news, I watched the Baz Luhrman version of The Great Gatsby last night, kind of a perverse exercise since it was every bit as awful as I imagined it was going to be.
Now, I'm agnostic as to whether movies made from books actually need to follow the plot outlines of those books or only need be faithful in their fashion. But you know, there has to be something, some spark of similarity. And this movie had nothing in common with its source material other than the barest outline of a plot. Why not call it Scott Pilgrim Does the Masque of the Red Death in the Twentieth Century? and have done with it?
The Great Gatsby is one of the most muscular masterpieces in the American canon. I mean, we are talking prose that just got out of the shark cage there after swimming from Cuba to Key West. Not an ounce of fat on its spare little frame. So for this novel to mushroom into this self-indulgent phantasmagoria was just wrong. Deeply wrong.
Then you have the fact that the acting was uniformly dreadful from the guy phoning in a bad Hemingway imitation as Tom Buchanan to Carey Mulligan's leaden, sleepwalking performance as Daisy. If her voice sounded like money, it was the quarters that come out of the laundromat change machine when you finally succeed in feeding it that crumbled five dollar bill, I'll tell ya.
DiCaprio was not bad as Gatsby. Except that Gatsby is not a Christ figure. More a kind of Herbalife CEO.
Nick Carroway is the most interesting character as such in Gatsby. Note, however, that Gatsby is not a novel that relies heavily on characterizations being a morality play of sorts. Anyhoo, Nick Carroway is interesting because while he's a third person narrator in the classic tradition of Conrad and Kipling, he's also a foil – the nameless narrator of The Man Who Would Be King doesn't change much through the recounting of Peachie's tale, but Nick does. Not enough to end up on Shutter Island though.
But what about the party scenes? The much vaunted art direction?
Horrible. Beyond horrible.
I could go on and on. And on and on.
As a Mel Brooks-inspired parody of a horror movie, though -- maybe something entitled Scott Pilgrim Does the Masque of the Red Death in the Twentieth Century -- Gatsby has a kind of campy, fuzzy charm. Which is not to say it worked. Just that it amused. But it really needed a better soundtrack.
no subject
Date: 2013-09-04 01:31 pm (UTC)Ah ha ha... I've missed your updates. ;o)
no subject
Date: 2013-09-06 12:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-09-04 04:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-09-06 12:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-09-05 08:41 pm (UTC)http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6223/the-art-of-biography-no-3-michael-holroyd
no subject
Date: 2013-09-06 12:18 am (UTC)Your reading lists astound me, frankly. You read such interesting books, and you listen to such interesting music, and I can't figure out why since all you seem to be interested in is God. I'm not saying that to be hostile or anything, and I hope I'm not coming across as too obnoxious -- it's a genuinely interesting paradox to me.
no subject
Date: 2013-09-06 10:22 am (UTC)