MovieChat Forums > The Great Gatsby (2013) Discussion > To anyone complaining about the music in...

To anyone complaining about the music in this film...

posted 11 years ago by Paigedowns91
53 replies | jump to latest

I want to say first off...if you have never seen a Baz Luhrmann movie (the director of this film) then I understand why you were taken a back by the musical choices, for example Moulin Rouge (the film is set in the end of the 1800's) there are tons of music from the 80's, 90's, 70's and 60's in the film including one original song. A lot of the songs are rehash of their own counter parts, instead of just using the exact recorded versions of the songs. This is a little different in Gatsby where most of the songs used are just being played no one is really singing them in the scenes of the movie. I have always found that unique from most musicals while others have called it lazy. I really think the director did not want to make a straight up period piece and while having a film in a certain period of time does confine you to somethings like the costumes or design of sets, you don't HAVE to have the music of that period to capture a story that could really be presented in a variety of time periods. This director is HIGHLY visual and music is A BIG PART of his formula when it comes to story telling even if it's not a musical like Romeo + Juliet was or Great Gatsby is. All three of these films are set in a period of time but honestly the music choices make them feel like they are in a limbo between period pieces and a current long music video that has dialogue. It's just different and odd. Luhrmann has A LONG HISTORY of doing this so I was not surprised when some of the same choices were made in Great Gatsby. Also the trailer had music with Kanye West in it so I was expecting some rap influences already going into it.

Now this film follows a very similar formula on it's approach to music. The only difference is that the music has less variety in genre than Moulin Rouge did. Which doesn't bother me. I think the biggest gripe is because a huge amount of the soundtrack is rap music which musically isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I'd like to explain why I was not only okay with it, but thought it was a very interesting choice that elevated the film for me. Rap isn't my go to genre for music but I can appreciate it at times. I feel like the rap music genre in general focuses on decadence, money, sex, fashion, wealth, and partying (with tons of drugs and booze). The era the film is set in is ALSO set in a time period that is marked for it's wealth and decadence among ALL the things I listed that the rap genre is focused on. We have themes about this in the story AND commentary given by the main character. I love Jazz music and I understand people's beef with it not being the prime focus of the film in this movie but that would have made it a straight up period piece and that's not the Luhrmann formula.

Jazz is shown and has it's influence here. A lot of the other songs are given a new twist that gives them a jazzy sound like "Crazy In Love". The movie is not a musical in a sense where we have characters singing songs to each other like we did in Moulin Rouge so the songs kind of give the film a music video effect. There are more original songs as well then have been in his other films. Young and Beautiful is probably my favorite song from the soundtrack. There are also songs that are not rap music as well that I think worked for the most part. Not all the songs are heard in their entirety even which is why I'd suggest checking out the full soundtrack if you liked some of the songs that only got a couple seconds of play in the film.

I just wanted to explain all this because to just write off the music because it doesn't match the period of the film in a literal sense because YES rap music didn't exist in the 1920's, is not really a good reason for writing it off based on that fact alone or claiming it hurt the film in anyway. Luhrmann did not want it to be your typical 1920's film retelling the acclaimed novel he wanted to visualize it and put a twist on it. If you have never seen Moulin Rouge and Romeo + Juliet I understand why some of the artistic choices were odd to you and I suggest you watch those films to fully understand what I am talking about. I'm not saying the film doesn't have flaws but I think criticism of the soundtrack is misguided.

EDIT: You know looking through all the replies... some that are reasonable and some that are from "I LOVE THE BOOK, THE MOVIE SUCKED" approach... I want to point out an example of someone else visualizing a period of time while having music in that visualization that doesn't match the period at all and EVERYONE loves it! Michael Jackson's Smooth Criminal...the music video is set in a 1930's night club so it's even close to the time period the Great Gatsby's set in. Would a pop influenced dance song be in a 1930's dance club? Hmm no, but we all enjoy it for the most part and it actually elevated the song and it's mood. Some say it's one of the best music videos ever made. Here is a link to video for those who have never seen it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj4zNWW2nvY

ANOTHER example comes from Mr. Jackson with his collaboration with Paul McCartney in the song "Say Say Say" which has it's music video set in a period that would not have had pop music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QC2Grms55Fw . I am showing these videos to kind of give you an idea of the same aspects the director was trying to put in this film. I have already said his style is kind of like a long music video with dialogue that is so long it's a film. I honestly feel like he would be an amazing music video director and wish he would produce music videos because the creativity that used to be in music videos is few and far between these days. Anyways thought those were good examples.

[–] ameilius 11 years ago

I understand what you're saying but I still don't like or agree with what the producer did. Here he's dramatizing a beloved, classic novel of the Jazz Age, which by all rights OUGHT to be set in 1922. But it isn't. Instead he has given us this weird hybrid thing that's neither fish nor fowl. It's set in a nowhere land that never existed. Because people back in 1922 dancing to hip hop...well, THAT never could have happened. And if that could never have happened---except in a movie about time travel, which this isn't---well, then the whole reality of "The Great Gatsby," as well as the audience's willing suspension of belief, has been severely compromised. Once there are historical inaccuracies as glaring as this, the whole structure of the story is in danger of collapsing. And what a major disservice to F. Scott Fitzgerald, who wrote a damned fine novel that deserves a much better treatment than it got here.

A lot of angry movie goers (myself included) walked out of the theater once the amplified hip hop came on. Hip hop is a great art form for 2014 but sorry, it doesn't belong in 1922. I like cell phones, too, but I don't want to see a film about George Washington, in 1776, texting Betsy Ross! I mean...wtf?

And why is the director doing stuff like this? Is he deliberately dumbing down his material? Is he trying to appeal to a younger generation that he considers brain-dead? He seems to be saying, "You're all stupid, you don't know or care about history anyway, so let me muck around here." His "playing to the pit" attitude is an insult to all of us. Not to mention his inflated ego. He wants to universalize the Gatsby story...okay...but Gatsby is very much identified with a specific time period in our past, namely the Jazz Age. And as such it really needs to feature a soundtrack of music from that era. Young people---as well as older people--- today are much smarter than he thinks and would appreciate good music from the 1920's, if given half a chance.

[–] Paigedowns91 11 years ago

Again if you watch the director's films before this, this is exactly his formula. I didn't personally want to see a literal interpretation of the Great Gatsby we already have a film that did that. Those that hold onto the book and won't open their minds up to a new interpretation are missing out. Like I said it's a music video effect. It's not to be taken literal. The movie still very much was 1920's with the costumes, hair styles, buildings, and so more many aspects. It's sad you walked out on a movie not because it was too gory, violent, or nasty, but because you didn't agree with one aspect of it. Maybe if you would have stayed you would have see the rap music goes away about half way through the film anyways. Also comparing a scenario to George Washington doesn't fit or make sense. I explained why having rap and partying music makes sense as a metaphor in the realm of this film. Don't like metaphors? Don't ever watch a movie by this director.....

[–] bosley25 11 years ago

It's interesting because a lot of viewers' reactions to the film's music are very similar to those that would have found jazz revolting and inappropriate in the 20s. It's jarring and bizarre, just as jazz was jarring and bizarre during that time. What Luhrmann does is shatter all the old nostalgic stereotypes that the 20s would have been a fun time to live in and the allure of parties like Gatsby's. What Fitzgerald was getting at wasn't that their lifestyle was enviable. These were gross people who were out of control, and the melange of new music with an old time period is IMO a great way to demonstrate how Fitzgerald intended his book to be. Compare the party scenes of this version to those from the 2000 or 1974 versions. It's a joke. Everyone's calm, classy, and collected (for the most part). It's not exactly like an amusement park (direct quote from the text) the way the 2013 version portrays it. For today's audience, it wouldn't make any sense for them to behave that way if the only music used was "Ain't We Got Fun." To drive the point home that the 20s truly were "roarin'" and not, I'll use this word again, a nostalgic, silly time, Luhrmann used the musical means he had to break us from our traditional viewpoint of the 20s. Not saying anyone's opinion is wrong, I just want to show that Baz isn't off his rocker.

[–] Paigedowns91 11 years ago

Totally agree. It seems people cannot think out of the box on this one lol.

[–] mickeymyhorse 10 years ago

Ehhhh? I'll think outside the box. I didn't mind the music, and like yourself "Young and Beautiful " was my fav. Different directors are known to do things their own way/style. Look @ David Lynch, or Ang Lee, M. Night Shayalaman (sp). Just using them as examples, I'm sure there are many more. But, anyway, I'm not bitching about the music. Other posters can have their opinion & that's okay w me. :)

[–] flame664 11 years ago

@bosley25

Anyone who read The Great Gatsby and thought about its themes seriously would already understand the roaring 20s were not a "nostalgic, silly time." You don't need garbage rap music and other pop trash to make the obvious point clear. I absolutely hated the soundtrack and the obvious ploy to satisfy every dumb teenager's childish need to relate to a film to like it.

[–] Paigedowns91 10 years ago

trash rap music? sigh....honestly if you think rap isn't a form of music then that's also unfortunate. again if you love the book and can except no other interpretation of it's themes then i would never suggest watching a screen adaptation because you'll be disappointed.

[–] netmedia 9 years ago

This is an excellent post. On a DVD extra Baz goes into a detailed discussion on why he choose the music he did using the same points you made here.

Baz has an distinct strong style. If you like it or can see around it you will enjoy this, but for many it seems to get into the way. It took me a few watchings before I could see what his intentions were. Once beyond that styling I came to very much enjoy the film and highly appreciate it as a fine piece of work.

Watch the DVD extras they are fascinating and have a lot of information. Baz put a lot of effort and thought into preparing them.

[–] chas437 11 years ago

Exactly right, thanks for articulating this, I don't have the patience.

I think the soundtrack is downright cynical, assuming you need a hip hop soundtrack from Jay Z to get people to see an adaptation of an American literary classic. Its an insult to those who love the novel.

The film is a failure. I don't give a crap about who the director is, and what his/her style is, this is garbage.

I'm a civilian, I'm not a trout

[–] Paigedowns91 11 years ago

Again...totally ignoring anything that might be reasonable and just saying 3 rap songs were in the film to appeal to young people. I explain in my first post why that's a very misguided opinion. There was rap music in the trailer for this film so they were not hiding that this was not going to be a literal interpretation of Great Gatsby. Also I think there was about 3 rap songs in the film. The rest were R&B, pop, techno and jazz influenced. Go watch the 1974 film if you want a more straight forward approach. Although you may not care about the director's other films, I was explaining how he has used the same kind of formula in his other films. Not everyone is a fan. Some people didn't like Moulin Rouge or Romeo + Juliet but I was just explaining where this guy was coming from. It's sad to me that people can't have an opened mind. It's okay if you don't like it which some more reasonable minded people have stated but to say it's garbage and bad just because you don't like the soundtrack is highly stupid. I just ordered the soundtrack on vinyl and am looking forward to listen to it. I loved the soundtrack and rap is not my favorite genre but I can appreciate it as an art form and I do like rap songs that were in the film. I do like Moulin Rouge better than Great Gatsby but I enjoyed Great Gatsby a lot because I didn't go in putting the book on some godly pedestal. If you do that you will always be disappointed and yes I have read the book.

[–] glp046 10 years ago

In the 'behind the scenes' for the film, Leonardo says they used hip hop in order for people to understand the cultural references. It seems we have lost the ability, to a degree, to understand/feel something in it's historical context - a by product of todays self-absorbed culture (can you say 'selfie'?) So while that is Baz's formula, at the very least a part of using rap/hip hop is to appeal to a broader audience, hence the trailer having hip hop. After all it is a movie and they're in the movie making BUSINESS. I'm personally mixed on the soundtrack. The hip hop did have the effect Baz intended and it was good to listen too, but it did take away from the 20's feel/vibe. Maybe if they had more 20's music playing louder at times. Other recent movies/shows have shown the decadence from that era with only 20's music being played - like Boardwalk Empire. It's a function of the song chosen and how it's integrated with certain scenes. Lastly, overall Baz wanted to make everything larger than life and the style was overdone at times, in particuar (for me anyways) the extremely vivid colors which at times seemed cartoon like. Still a good movie.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] chas437 11 years ago

The film fails, mostly because of the soundtrack. People are laughing at this film.

I'm a civilian, I'm not a trout

[–] howdy2525 11 years ago

well, "Gatsby", co-starring leo, 39, and carey, 28 (and mixing modern pop/hip-hop songs with '20s music/visuals), made $145 million in the u.s./north America (#18 for 2013) and made $351 million globally (#21 for 2013), so "Gatsby" "beat" "the conjuring", "identity thief", "grown ups 2", "wolverine", "anchorman 2", etc. in the u.s./north America in 2013 - the last movie that baz luhrmann, 51, did before "Gatsby" was "Australia" in '08, which co-starred Nicole kidman, 46, and hugh jackman, 45, and "Australia" made only $50 million in the u.s./north America, so "Gatsby" made $95 million more than "Australia" did in the u.s./north America (but of course there's inflation to consider)

[–] JanuaryFrost 10 years ago

If you're trying to make a point with that... unfortunately you failed. I watched this movie not knowing its director was Baz Lurhmann, as I watched it I actually thought hey this reminds me of the work of Baz Lurhmann, it was only when the credits rolled I realized I was right. It's just very obvious to me that he didn't want to make a conventional 1920's film where it'd be completely expected, and I liked that he went with this creative direction. People can laugh all they want, the same people probably have laughed at Moulin Rouge in 2001, they didn't stop him from making this one, and they certainly won't stop him from making more movies with his own vision in the future.

[–] mymoviemind 11 years ago

Thanks for your comprehensive and well worded explanation of the music in this movie. Having never seen a Baz Luhrmann movie before, I too, was taken back by the music. Although I appreciate your comments, I have to agree with many of the other viewers that the music was distracting and unappealing, although I certainly wouldn’t say the movie stinks because of it. And when it comes to classics, I feel everyone should be able to have their own interpretation of them. That’s the beauty of a classic. Just not my favorite variation.

[–] Paigedowns91 11 years ago

Thank you for the nice reply. It's good for everyone to have their own opinions and not just write someone off as dumb like others have been doing in the thread. My mom wasn't a fan of the whole soundtrack but she did enjoy the film. She is almost 60 though lol.

[–] mymoviemind 11 years ago

You're very welcome.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] imdstuf 11 years ago

Your justification or rather defense of the music in this film is weak at best when you have to point to a Michael Jackson video set in the past. A music video is a supplement to the song. The song is the core. It came first. A music video can be anything. This film is based on a novel. The novel does constrict it to a certain period, not just for the sets and clothing, but for everything. If there can be hip hop music, why can't they have cell phones?

Also, I do not care if that is the director's style. You can practice a mistake all you want, it is still a mistake.

I might have given the movie another star if not for the music score.

[–] Paigedowns91 10 years ago

I was using it as an example of something that was set in a period and yet used modern music. also no just because something is based on a novel set in a period of time does not constrict it from changing things up. No, just because there is modern music in the back drop does not mean the music has to fit into that time period.

[–] imdstuf 10 years ago

I bet if someone made a movie about the life of Denzel Washington and someone used country music from the 1970's as the soundtrack people would have a problem with it.

[–] Simon-140 10 years ago

The novel does constrict it to a certain period

Let me take a stab in the dark: you didn't like the production of Othello on motorcycles, either.

[–] dem_t-74-384045 10 years ago

If there can be hip hop music, why can't they have cell phones?

Because the cell phones exist in the movie's world while the music does not. It is heard by the viewers, not by the characters in the movie.

[–] imdstuf 10 years ago

The music is an audio queue, or prop as you would, that assists in transporting the viewer to the time period. Modern pop music draws the viewer out of the time period and keeps them from getting as absorbed as they should, rather it distracts them and keeps them acutely aware they are in just watching a movie, and not a very good one at that.

[–] dem_t-74-384045 10 years ago

I answered to the argument that having modern music in a movie that takes place in the past is the same as having cell phones. Cell phones don't just distract the viewer. They ruin the logical cohesion of the movie's world. The music doesn't ruin it because it is out of it. Whether it ruins the enjoyment of the viewer is subjective. If the characters in 'Gatsby' listened to hip hop then it would be a problem objectively.

If the music always had to be the same as the music 'played' in the movie's world then, for example, medieval adventures would have bards singing and 'Star Wars' wouldn't have an orchestral soundtrack.
Almost always music in modern movies is modern because we produce it today.
Whether you are distracted or not depends on your expectations and your interest in the story. I think people who didn't like the music of 'Gatsby' also didn't like the story. So, perhaps their problem wasn't really the music. And if they didn't like the story that's not because of the music. The story is separate. It's in the screenplay, created before anything else.

Movies that take place in the past or even fantasy films have characters who speak modern English but we accept that.
Sound does not work in the same way as images in cinema.
So someone of course may not enjoy the music of 'Gatsby' but I don't believe its musical choices were by definition wrong.

[–] InfoBabe 11 years ago

This horse is being beaten to death.

A solution would have been to bring the story to the late 1990s when fortunes were made and lost by everyone including the young, and drugs are rampant. Then everything would be contemporary, music, cars and the Hamptons. Sort of a Wolf of Wall Street with rap music.

[–] ameilius 11 years ago

Any period piece film has the potential to be a great time travel adventure. We're transported back to an earlier era---in this case, to the year 1922---and normally, much of our pleasure comes from seeing how different everything was back then. The fashions, the hair, the lifestyle, the manners. Oh yeah, and also the MUSIC. And when we expect a magical adventure like that, anything out-of-place or anachronistic is bound to be jarring. Taken to the extremes that we see in Gatsby, it can even ruin our acceptance of the story being told. It destroys the illusion. Rap music in Gatsby screws us over because it compromises our willing suspension of disbelief. That's why a large portion of us were disappointed. We expected one thing and got something else.

And to say "Well, that's just how the director rolls" isn't really much of an excuse. He's dumbing down the content, and why? Either through his overeagerness to be "artsy" or through a general disrespect for our collective intelligence. Either way, we the audience are screwed.

[–] bosley25 11 years ago

But what Luhrmann was getting at, especially with the music, is that The Great Gatsby is anything BUT a "magical adventure." It's a movie about sad people that is still very relevant for today's culture of excess and obsession. The music makes the link to our generation easier for viewers who may have missed it in the book or previous adaptations.

[–] marchingman 11 years ago

I have to agree with the OP in this regard. While I understand the argument of the (for lack of a better word) purists who think a 1920s movie should have 1920s music, one really has to understand who the filmmaker is. There's a reason the choice of director is such a huge choice: each director has his own vision, and a big part of that vision is the audience. So let's really start dissecting the audience here. While I have no concrete evidence of this, I would argue that a good majority of people below the age of 30 these days only know The Great Gatsby as a "great, American novel" solely because they were forced to read it in school and were told it was a "great, American novel." I think you would be harder and harder pressed these days to find a younger person who really appreciates The Great Gatsby the novel, and that doesn't surprise me. It's why a lot of authors don't like to specify a time period: when your novel takes place in a certain time period, it loses the impact little bit by little bit the farther away you get from that period. So unfortunately, the farther away we get from the 1920s, the less the impact of the era will be for the novel.

This also brings the idea of the medium into question. Unfortunately, novels like The Great Gatsby aren't necessarily flying off bookshelves, at least not outside a school setting (not saying there have been many novels like it, but still). As such, the influence of a novel like this slowly fades. Baz Luhrmann strikes me as a director who - with both this and Romeo + Juliet - takes it upon himself to tell a literary classic utilizing a medium that more broadly speaks to audiences. What I think Luhrmann managed to accomplish with the music in Gatsby is rather striking: he uses the music to say to the audience, "Yes, this is a movie that takes place in the 1920s, but IT IS NOT a story that CAN ONLY take place in the 1920s." In other words, while the novel is specifically in the 1920s and about the 1920s, the message of the story is timeless. Let's look at Luhrmann's own words:

The question for me in approaching Gatsby was how to elicit from our audience the same level of excitement and pop cultural immediacy toward the world that Fitzgerald did for his audience? And in our age, the energy of jazz is caught in the energy of hip-hop.

Luhrmann recognized the change in the audience between now and the time of Fitzgerald's novel and embraced it. Yes, it's jarring. Yes, it's extravagant and strange. Everything Luhrmann does is jarring, extravagant, and strange. So I guess what it really all comes down to is just that Luhrmann's style isn't for everyone, which isn't necessarily a new concept. He's going to get in your face. It's going to be loud, it's going to be bright, and it's going to be excessive. I personally think that Luhrmann's take on this is bold and necessary: The Great Gatsby is a novel that deserves to be read for years to come. And if it takes throwing in some seemingly out of place modern music to bring this novel to the modern generation, so be it.

The key to immortality is first living a life worth remembering.

[–] spookyrat1 11 years ago

Luhrmann has A LONG HISTORY of doing this...

Yes of course! It would have been a greater surprise to me if he hadn't done it.

BTW I think it works and works really quite well.

[–] fanaticita 11 years ago

I absolutely LOVED the music! It fit in very well with the spectacular, wild events of the era, even though it was different and modern. So what? I hardly noticed because there was so much to see, especially in the party scenes.

[–] star52-2 10 years ago

Agreed!!! To my TOTAL surprise...