Distanced from the Source: The 1974 The Great Gatsby

The 1974 version of The Great Gatsby (TGG) is definitely .   The novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald is unique in its tone and way of story telling--so much so that some have called it un-adaptable in terms of making it into a movie or other medium.

Jack Boozer talks about the three levels of distance from a source.  He says the closest to the source is the literal/close reading level.  Next is the general correspondence/traditional level.  and farthest from the source material is the distant referencing/radical level.

In our class we talk a lot about what the most important criteria is when determining how "good" or "bad" an adaptation is.  Most people would probably say fidelity is still the most important thing to look at when judging an adaptation.  But to that I would ask, "Fidelity to what?"

The 1974 TGG is largely a literal adaptation of the novel, that borders on traditional because it is not a four hour movie.  Obviously it leaves parts out for time's sake, but the language of the movie is taken straight out of the novel, making it "faithful" to its source text.   But it doesn't capture the essence of the novel.  As Lesley pointed out humorously in class, it's like the director said, "Now lift your hand out toward that light, cause that's what it says he does in the book."  They got the words right, but lacked the emotion of the novel.

One scene in particular stuck out to me in this:  the first party Nick goes to, the one at Tom and Myrtle's apartment in the city.  The novel isn't entirely clear as to what happened at the party other than drunkenness, conversation between Catherine and Nick, and " . . . wild, strident argument[s] . . ." (pg. 35).

Sure, it was a party, and it was faithful to the novel in text, like with Myrtle's speech about how her and Tom met, but it didn't feel like a party, especially not one hosted by cheating lovers, in the midst of prohibition. 

By the end of the film I was left feeling a little like I had just wasted two hours of my life because the film didn't mean anything.  It looked like the 20s.  It sounded like the 20s.  But did it feel like the 20s?  The Gatsby that was supposed to have such a troubled, lowly past said all those words, but didn't show it in his acting.  The only major dynamic character was Nick, and even then I didn't understand or see much of his change.  If I hadn't read the book I would have been confused as to why Nick likes Gatsby, or has pity for him, or why he was so affected felt the need to move back home after that summer spent in West Egg.

While it gets the words right, the 1974 TGG doesn't do justice to the story; to the tale F. Scott Fitzgerald is telling in his novel.