asako

Fitzgerald's fine novel was horribly butchered, dumbed down, and sanitized in this adaptation. I don't have anything to back this up, but I blame it more on the Studio than the screenplay writers: This version decided to spell out the unspoken mysteries of how Jay Gatsby made money at the very beginning and made Klipspringer a faithful protege from Jay's army days. Tom Buchanan's affair with his mistress was treated as lightly as possible, and he even tried to save Jay Gatsby at the end - not once but twice! Jordan Baker did not marry Nick Carraway or finagle a fancy yellow car from Jay Gatsby. Some may argue that alteration of the original story is a necessary evil, but none of the changes they made kept the spirit of the story. The only good they served was to make the story palatable to the purported audience whom the Studio assumed morally righteous and had no brain power to handle any ambiguity in the film.

I read that some thought Betty Field was not classy enough as Daisy Buchanan, but I thought she did a fine job. Much better than neurotic Mia Farrow in the 1974 version or too sweet and innocent Carey Mulligan in the 2013 version.

I totally agree with the assessment of the first reviewer: it is a beautiful, claustrophobic film with very little "drama". One thing I would like to add is that the film depicts the dying king with great respect and dignity. Having touched by death of elderly family members in recent years, I appreciated the film's compassionate and dignified portrait of Louis XIV and the people who served him closely. There is no political intrigue or ugliness in the film. It quietly and matter-of-factly tells a story. So even though the film's main theme is death, it is not a depressing film and you leave the theater marveling the fine acting of Jean-Pierre Léaud.