Warners delays Lurhmann's 'The Great Gatsby'

In what may surprise only a few people and upset some others, Warner Bros. and Village Roadshow Picture’s announced that Baz Lurhmann’s adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel The Great Gatsby will not be released this Christmas Day as planned, but will be delayed by at least by six months.

No real reason was given, but the studio heads put out a positive official statement: “what we’ve seen, Baz Luhrmann’s incredible work is all we anticipated and so much more. It truly brings Fitzgerald’s American classic to life in a completely immersive, visually stunning and exciting way. We think moviegoers of all ages are going to embrace it, and it makes sense to ensure this unique film reaches the largest audience possible.” Disitribution presidents Dan Fellman and Veronika Kwan Vandenberg added: “Baz is known for being innovative, but with this film he has done something completely unexpected—making it in 3D—while capturing the emotion, the intimacy, the power and the spectacle of the time. The responses we’ve had to some of the early sneak peeks have been phenomenal, and we think ‘The Great Gatsby’ will be the perfect summer movie around the world.”

Still, unofficially, some have said the delay was needed to finish off the effects and compile a soundtrack that will rival Moulin Rouge. Lurhmann, who is not known for too much substance with his films –he’s all sound and fury mostly- is also well known as a director who takes his time finishing and refining his projects in post-production, but no official has come if this is the reason for the delay or is it something else.

But historically, a film delayed means a film in trouble. The Great Gatsby, which has been adapted several times with the last big screen version coming out in 1974, is known as the “Great American” novel that is also fairly un-filmable. 

When the trailer was released in May, it got somewhat positive reviews –mainly by fans that for reason I’m not able to understand, think Moulin Rouge is a great film. The trailer presents audiences with a caricature of the 1920's rather than attempting to be completely historically accurate, which may impress younger audiences who don’t want a literal adaptation of an 87 year-old novel (indecently, of all the versions of this novel made into films, only one is said to be the truest version. That one, a silent version released in 1926, is gone forever, so we’ll never truly know).

Also, no release date beyond the nebulous “summer 2013” has been given. This strikes me odd as well, considering with April, May, June and most of July is clogged up with event pictures, and sliding in an anachronistic period drama that looks pretty to look at, but seems hallow, is not a way to get a good box-office total. Granted, since the domestic release figures little into the studios coffers these days –bad films that die here seemly do wonders in the foreign markets- maybe that’s what Warners and Village Roadshow will be counting on.