Still struggling with the Great 2008 Depression, enduring economic inequality and Congressional intransigence, Baz Luhrmann's "The Great Gatsby" looks as if it will become a major miscalculation--not only a box office disappointment, I expect, but a significance misjudgment of where the country is at.


As the reviews roll in from the first press screenings, it's apparent that Luhrmann's penchant for stylistic excess has drained any ounce of substantive blood from F. Scott Fitzgerald's original American tragedy. In the age of Occupy and America's enduring and rightful anger at the 1%, are American audiences even remotely in a place to sympathize with the plight of the corruptible upper-class, or relish in the fanfare of their exotic jazz-age opulence. We are not in the same place as we were in the 1930s, when Hollywood churned out glossy backstage musicals and audiences sought escape in these rich fantasy lives. We are far more cynical than that. (Though we will gladly see billionaire superheroes blow shit up.)

What would be more interesting to viewers these days, I suspect, is a subversive retelling of "Gatsby," once that doesn't “get seduced by the seductions that the book itself is warning about,” as Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor of The New Republic, told the NY Times' Maureen Dowd.

"What most people don’t understand is that the adjective ‘Great’ in the title was meant laconically,” he said. “There’s nothing genuinely great about Gatsby. He’s a poignant phony. Owing to the money-addled society we live in, people have lost the irony of Fitzgerald’s title. So the movies become complicit in the excessively materialistic culture that the novel set out to criticize.”

A really great movie of the novel, he argues, would “show a dissenting streak of austerity.” He thinks it’s time for a black Gatsby, noting that Jay-Z might be an inspirational starting point — “a young man of talents with an unsavory past consumed by status anxiety and ascending unstoppably through tireless self-promotion and increasingly conspicuous wealth.”

The problem with the “Gatsby” movies, he said, “is that they look like they were made by Gatsby. The trick is to make a Gatsby movie that couldn’t have been made by Gatsby — an unglossy portrait of gloss.”