Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Carey Mulligan just isn't pretty enough to play Daisy Buchanan

I'll probably go see this because I'm a slave to how pretty Baz Luhrman movies are but I just don't get why she was cast in this and how I'm going to be able to believe that a plain Jane like her was worth Gatsby and her husband going insane over.

Bitch better have insane charisma.

by Anonymousreply 26501/24/2017

But her voice is full of money!!!

by Anonymousreply 104/29/2013

So true, but I didn't want to spend months in Australia.

by Anonymousreply 204/29/2013

She seems to have gotten incredible leverage for roles she's really wanted.

Not too uncommon for actresses under 30 who sink their hooks into the upper ranks.

by Anonymousreply 304/29/2013

You need to grow up, OP.

Maybe the movie will help you.

by Anonymousreply 404/29/2013

Why would a movie about fake shallow people help me grow up r4?

by Anonymousreply 504/29/2013

She's as pretty as the actual woman Daisy Buchanan was based on, the heiress Ginevra King. In fact, she looks much like her.

by Anonymousreply 604/29/2013

Di Caprio isn't handsome enough for his part, either. I think we'll all live.

by Anonymousreply 704/29/2013

Having Di Caprio repeat Robert Redford's role is sort of like going from a show horse to a donkey.

by Anonymousreply 804/29/2013

Well, I think the whole picture looks marvelous and can't wait to see it. I just hope Luhrman shitcanned the song he used in the first trailer that caused a commotion. People hated it and it was dropped rom the second trailer.

by Anonymousreply 904/29/2013

She doesn't look like Ginevra King in that picture at all.

But just because the real-life Ginevra was homely doesn't mean they need to cast an average-looking woman to play her fictional likeness.

by Anonymousreply 1004/29/2013

"Having Di Caprio repeat Robert Redford's role"

Redford does not own the role. Other men played it before him, including Alan Ladd. And the Redford adaptation is widely considered weak.

by Anonymousreply 1104/29/2013

Jordan is always prettier than Daisy in the movies.

by Anonymousreply 1204/29/2013

Ginevra King was not homely--she was considered a great beauty in her day.

by Anonymousreply 1304/29/2013

the worst part is going to be all the terrible music that will be in it

by Anonymousreply 1404/29/2013

I agree R12.

by Anonymousreply 1504/29/2013

I've never gotten the hype either. Part of the problem is that horrendous hairstyle she trots around. Like someone took Mia Farrow's hair and stuck it on a young Bud Cort's face.

by Anonymousreply 1604/29/2013

She would have been better cast as Myrtle Wilson.

Di Caprio,,,ug...just, ugh. Why does he even get any roles?

by Anonymousreply 1704/29/2013

R3, What "upper ranks" did Mulligan "sink her hooks into?" Please explain your post.

I thought the point of the book was that Daisy was so desirable because she was from the rich elite that Gatsby aspired to be a part of, perhaps by marrying into it and then by being given a job with connections and status. Also was Gatsby supposedly partly Jewish and thus an outsider to the WASP elite of the time?

by Anonymousreply 1804/29/2013

Same with Michelle Williams.

Look at this cute actress. I have never seen her in anything, but she's cute.

by Anonymousreply 1904/29/2013

Mulligan doesn't have much charisma and she looks very uncomfortable in all of the 20's period costumes. And frankly, they seem to highlight her pug like face.

I'm not sure it's even that she's not really attractive. She just doesn't have IT. I think Kirsten Dunst could have been great in the part. Or Michelle Williams, who is a million times more interesting on screen than Carey Mulligan.

Baz keeps on saying that she nailed the audition, so that performance better show up in the movie.

by Anonymousreply 2004/29/2013

no, Michelle Williams is an American Carey Mulligan.

by Anonymousreply 2104/29/2013

Mulligan is a fantastic actress.

Not only was Shame perfection, but after we all witnessed her brilliance in The Seagull, and to a lesser extent the misguided Through a Glass Darkly, how can one say she won't be interesting in the role.

by Anonymousreply 2204/29/2013

R18, I think you're reading too much into the post.

by Anonymousreply 2304/29/2013

I've been a fan of Mulligan since An Education.

But like a previous poster, i would have preferred to see Kirsten Dunce as Daisy.

by Anonymousreply 2404/29/2013

R3, R23, Just wanted to know the truth of how Mulligan scored the role of Daisy.

by Anonymousreply 2504/29/2013

Kirsten Dunst? Kirsten Dunst?

by Anonymousreply 2604/29/2013

I agree that she doesn't look it on screen but in person Mulligan is very very pretty, I saw her in person a couple of years ago

by Anonymousreply 2704/29/2013

[all posts by ham-fisted troll a removed.]

by Anonymousreply 2804/29/2013

Can we talk about the music of this movie? WTF happened? Why did they hire some urban dj to remake the music? Fuck, I'm NOT seeing it bc of that. Fuck urban music.

by Anonymousreply 2904/29/2013

Music - Jay Z is the music guy on it, so he's playing all his crappy shit - Kanye, Beyonce, etc. The music is awful. Jay Z is awful. Not seeing this POS and I love Baz Luhrmann - I've been a fan of his forever.

by Anonymousreply 3004/29/2013

Mulligan can do no wrong after her raw performance in Shame. Knightley wishes she were her.

by Anonymousreply 3104/29/2013

[quote]Mulligan is a fantastic actress.

The only thing I've seen her in is "An Education", which I found to be overrated and tedious. Mulligan was especially annoying and I can't see why and how she got so much hype for that one-dimensional performance.

by Anonymousreply 3204/29/2013

This movie is a piece of crap and will be a bigger bomb than Australia. What is the obsession with actresses having to be a certain kind of "pretty" for gay men? Fagolas Baz and Leo wanted Carey.

by Anonymousreply 3304/29/2013

No R3/23, you made it pretty clear that you had some sort of inside info about CM.

If you know she fucked someone to get the role, just spill it. If you don't, then stop with the annoying "Thindy Brady" hints.

by Anonymousreply 3404/29/2013

Her head is too small

by Anonymousreply 3504/29/2013

From what I've seen, she scored the role after DiCaprio saw her tape and wanted to audition with her. He thought she was flawless and lobbied Baz to cast her. They agreed the chemistry was perfect.

by Anonymousreply 3604/29/2013

This movie will be an abysmal failure, just like all Gatsby adaptations and it won't be Mulligan's fault.

Gatsby cannot be filmed. If Baz and Leo are too stupid to know that, they deserve the ass kicking they're about to get.

by Anonymousreply 3704/30/2013

They should have cast me. Again.

by Anonymousreply 3804/30/2013

Carey Mulligan is just that quintessential blonde girl. She's an amazing actress and I think her plainness actually works in her favor. I've seen her in An Education, Shame, and Drive and she is so different in each it's very compelling. She can gain/lose weight, get dolled up or be plain. She's a great actress and pretty enough for Hollywood actress standards (I.e. thin, white, and blonde). There's a reason she gets so much work and I think she'll be around for a long, long time. Can't wait to see Gatsby.

by Anonymousreply 3904/30/2013

carrie mulligan is a bottle blonde, no?

by Anonymousreply 4004/30/2013

Leo is too fat, round-faced and sweaty for that role. I can't even stand to watch the trailer.

by Anonymousreply 4104/30/2013

[quote]she looks very uncomfortable in all of the 20's period costumes.

Really? She was on set for months shooting a huge movie and YOU can tell she is uncomfortable in her costumes. Oh my.

by Anonymousreply 4204/30/2013

She was great in Shame. Daisy isn't supposed to be a great beauty - that isn't why Gatsby is obsessed with her. He fixates on her because she is rich and represents the American 'aristocracy' Gatsby longs to belong to.

by Anonymousreply 4304/30/2013

Mia Farrow wasn't a great beauty.

by Anonymousreply 4404/30/2013

Yes, R42. She does look uncomfortable. She also looks like shit on the cover of Vogue where she's made up as Daisy. 20s clothes don't look good on her.

by Anonymousreply 4504/30/2013

Why did they choose her? Did the studio insist?

by Anonymousreply 4604/30/2013

Agreed, R44. Mulligan was incredible onstage in THE SEAGULL and I've liked her film work. I like what she's done with Daisy's voice in the trailer. She's not the most beautiful actress out there, but if they cast someone solely on looks, they probably wouldn't have the talent and DL would be complaining about that.

by Anonymousreply 4704/30/2013

She was terrific in An Education, but I agree with OP: Daisy is a beauty who turns heads. Carey is cute. That is all.

by Anonymousreply 4804/30/2013

Carey is gorgeous Leo is a fug one.

by Anonymousreply 4904/30/2013

I'm not pleased with the casting myself, but I looked on IMDb and saw that Blake Lively and Olivia Wilde were considered for the role, and suddenly it didn't seem so bad after all.

by Anonymousreply 5004/30/2013

The role was made for Kirsten Dunst. But Remember when folks gossiped about Blake or Scarlett getting the role? Carey definitely s better option than them.

by Anonymousreply 5104/30/2013

Leo DiCaprio is convinced he's both brilliant and stunningly beautiful.

You can see it in his hammy acting. I do believe he's a very good actor, but it's difficult to pretend I don't see his attitude coming across on screen. Since he was a child he's been told that he's both preternaturally handsome and talented and of course he's still convinced of it.

All that said, I think I'd like to see the movie in theaters as opposed to waiting for the DVD. Anything period focused on New York I find fascinating.

by Anonymousreply 5204/30/2013

Agree that Kirsten Dunst is perfect. No great beauty herself, but somehow she still seems perfect, if a little too old at this point.

by Anonymousreply 5304/30/2013

[quote]Yes, R42 She does look uncomfortable. She also looks like shit on the cover of Vogue where she's made up as Daisy. 20s clothes don't look good on her.

She's not a very good actress because she seems like an uncomfortable person is real life (see interviews). And as someone up thread pointed out she hasn't got IT.

A few years back I saw an actor's panel with many actress including Gabby Sidibe and Carey Mulligan. Gabby has IT- charisma was pouring out of her. Carey looked like she wanted to sink through the floor- uncomfortable and awkward.

by Anonymousreply 5404/30/2013

No way does Leo DiCaprio think he's exceptionally handsome now. I imagine his confidence in his talent and position is such that he doesn't put much investment in his looks.

by Anonymousreply 5504/30/2013

No Mia wasn't, that's why I thought they might go with someone a little more exotic looking.

by Anonymousreply 5604/30/2013

Redford was gorgeous.

by Anonymousreply 5704/30/2013

DiCaprio has to know he's not a beauty, he depends on his talent.

by Anonymousreply 5804/30/2013

"A few years back I saw an actor's panel with many actress including Gabby Sidibe and Carey Mulligan. Gabby has IT- charisma was pouring out of her. Carey looked like she wanted to sink through the floor- uncomfortable and awkward."

Maybe Carey had just eaten and knew that Gabby could smell the food on her.

by Anonymousreply 5904/30/2013

I don't think Mulligan is plain. her face is interesting as far as I'm concerned. I think her lookalike, Michelle Williams, is also very pretty.

by Anonymousreply 6004/30/2013

Carey Mulligan = proof that white bitches with British accents will always find work in Hollywood no matter how untalented and ugly they are.

by Anonymousreply 6104/30/2013

Sally idolizes Don, because she hates her mother and because Don is handsome and perfect 9as far as she knows) and she remembers very well when her parents were together.

Bobby probably doesn't remember so well when his parents were together, and has spent most of his recent years with henry rather than Don, and probably considers Henry more of a real father to him.

Gene probably has no idea yet who Don really is--he's just the strange man married to the pretty woman he goes to visit every other weekend.

by Anonymousreply 6204/30/2013

"the worst part is going to be all the terrible music that will be in it"

What's with hip-op and other current music being used in a movie set in that era?! To attract a different demographic ? Epic Fail.

Hollywood is running out of ideas, for the past 10-15 years it's been nothing but re-doing old movies and bringing TV shows to the screen, that hasn't worked so far. Some fresh blood is needed, there must be some talented people coming out of film and art schools, where is the true talent?

Where are today's equivalents to the foreign New Wave films of the 50s and 60s and the American filmmakers of the 1970s?

All consumers seem to get are re-hashed tripe and GCI action nonsense with 'stars' such as Mark Wahlberg.

I haven't been to a movie theater in years, I see way too much of this crap on my cable premium channels, why pay even more money for this headache inducing garbage which never lives up to it's overblown hype?

by Anonymousreply 6304/30/2013

To be fair, Carey herself said she wasn't confident or comfortable. In an interview she pinpointed a scene in Never Let You Go which she thought she was terrible in.

She's not a movie star or someone with this great charisma, but she doesn't have to be. Some people just act. If you find her fug then well she's a character actress. A leading lady might be pushing it, but she has the chops at least.

by Anonymousreply 6404/30/2013

I recently watched the Robert Redford version and was confused about his obsession with Daisy. Also, did Daisy's husband really go insane? I didn't catch that in the film.

by Anonymousreply 6504/30/2013

Wasn't Lena Dunham or Greta Gerwig available?

by Anonymousreply 6604/30/2013

In the commentary for "The Talented Mr. Ripley," Anthony Minghella said that male American actors "are not comfortable" doing upper class, so he cast Jude Law to play a character that was American. He said Gwyneth effortlessly conveyed upper class. But, if you think about it, it is kind of true. Not many American film actors, male or female, it seems, can do "upper class, aside from DL fave Fishsticks. So maybe that is why they cast Carey as Daisy.

by Anonymousreply 6704/30/2013

f scott fiction just can not be filmed...too bad. his books all have an interesting take on a certain american period in history....curios case of BB probably was the most adaptable. i have always enjoyed f scott fiction more than that of hemingway or steinbeck with the steinbeck adapted movie being the exception. but on paper, f scott rules.

by Anonymousreply 6804/30/2013

Can Keira Knightley do an American accent? Hmmm...

by Anonymousreply 6904/30/2013

R63, did you read about what Soderbergh said in the thread about him?

He was sitting next to a guy on an airplane:

"and there’s a guy on the other side of the aisle in front of me and he pulls out his iPad to start watching stuff. I’m curious to see what he’s going to watch – he’s a white guy in his mid-30s. And I begin to realize what he’s done is he’s loaded in half a dozen action sort of extravaganzas and he’s watching each of the action sequences – he’s skipping over all the dialogue and the narrative. This guy’s flight is going to be five and a half hours of just mayhem porn."

The Hollywood studio execs have no interest in art and are making movies for that guy.

by Anonymousreply 7004/30/2013

Yeah, they should have made it with Lena Dunham and Seth Rogen and Jason Segal and Jonah Hill.

by Anonymousreply 7104/30/2013

Oy, R71. That version would only play in Boca Raton and the Upper East Side.

by Anonymousreply 7204/30/2013

I don't think she's ugly at all. I don't think she can pull off sexy.

by Anonymousreply 7304/30/2013

So why is Gatsby obsessed with Daisy?

a) Daisy is beautiful, for the time period b) Daisy is sexy, for the time period c) Daisy is from a wealthy, old money WASP family that Gatsby wants to be a part of d) other reason ???

by Anonymousreply 7404/30/2013

R74 What's this 'for the time period' talk?

by Anonymousreply 7504/30/2013

Beauty standards are always changing. What was beautiful in 1924 is not necessarily what would be the standard today.

by Anonymousreply 7604/30/2013

Funny I found LEO to be the tough sell here: Late 30s, alcohol bloat and just fug.

Mia Farrow was no prettier than Carey Mulligan (not a CM fan at all just calling it like I see it)

I'll see it but Leo & Tobey Maguire being 10 years too old for the parts they play will distract me.

by Anonymousreply 7704/30/2013

We never asked for chemicals to be put in our food and water and we never asked for Carey Mulligan and Michelle Williams to be put in movies.

by Anonymousreply 7804/30/2013

How do you feel about Joel Edgerton? I like him.

by Anonymousreply 7904/30/2013

Agree with R77 that this movie is 10 years too late for the perfect casting of Leo, Toby and Kirsten Dunst.

by Anonymousreply 8004/30/2013

Who the fuck wants Kirsten Dunst cast in anything?

by Anonymousreply 8104/30/2013

Maybe the novel is not film-able unless you have a writer, cast and a director that know exactly what they are doing. Baz is one of the worst filmmakers out there. Grandiose and stupid.

by Anonymousreply 8204/30/2013

Haven't seen Shame yet, and I'll agree that Carey Mulligan doesn't look quite right in the Gatsby trailers (a little plain and dumpy) but she was absolutely beautiful in Drive.

by Anonymousreply 8304/30/2013

Just wanted to chime in about the horrifying music. I was stunned when I saw the preview in the theater the other night. Just horrible. And it wasn't just hip hop. It was also that other terrible genre that is the bastard child of Pearl Jam and Tool. I don't know exactly what that sucky, dudish music is called, but it has been going on since the mid 90s. Think Scott Stapp and his ilk. I imagine it plays at white frat parties and stripclubs all night long. Why does it belong in The Great Fucking Gatsby?

by Anonymousreply 8404/30/2013

Just watched the trailer. The music is awful, but not as awful as the casting of an plain, ordinary girl in the part of an ethereal beauty.

by Anonymousreply 8504/30/2013

I'm not understanding why everyone assumes Daisy is supposed to be some kind of knockout or look like a Barbie doll.

by Anonymousreply 8604/30/2013

I think R67 has it right. We've bred a trash culture. I mean, think about Blake "Boobs Legsly" Lively in the role. Daisy with vocal fry and dead eyes?

Actually, GOOP would have been an ideal Daisy 15 years ago.

by Anonymousreply 8704/30/2013

It's very tragic drag queen to lament the casting of actresses, as if the failure of The Great Gatsby will have anything to do with Carey Mulligan. Maybe it's just another shitty Hollywood movie. They have embargoed reviews but it was unreleased last Christmas due to being awful, and that remains its fate.

by Anonymousreply 8804/30/2013

Is the music from the trailer actually used in the film? I didn't mind it in the trailer actually but it would be ridiculous if that modern music is in the movie.

by Anonymousreply 8904/30/2013

It wasn't her beauty that captured Gatsby so obsessively as much as it was her shear unattainability, along with her status and a kind of luminosity to her aloofness. Add vulnerability and the 'poor bastard' was toast.

Carey has got to act her way through this one. No amount of editing, lighting, make up or genes will produce what this character calls for.

by Anonymousreply 9004/30/2013

Can we also dump on Leo for his valley girl accent. Wrong, wrong, wrong for this character.

by Anonymousreply 9104/30/2013

It's always rich when a group of Homosexuals men, berate, attack, and question a female that is obviously attractive to Heterosexuals men.

by Anonymousreply 9204/30/2013

Unfortunately, the weight of the entire believability for this particular tale of woe falls on the girl being convincingly the woman to whom a Gatsby type male would be so utterly obsessed. If that portion of the story/plot is not believed then the whole of it becomes almost comedic in its extreme.

So many posters crying unfair but she is the story. It is called the Great Gatsby but it really is about her class, her affect, her expectations, her power over him..... her. He does more but she is the story.

Carey Mulligan either carries it or she doesn't.

by Anonymousreply 9304/30/2013

R90, Thank you for your post. I never understood Gatsby's character, although I recently read that it was partially based on the author's own experience.

by Anonymousreply 9404/30/2013

Mira Sorvino 13 years ago was a good Daisy.

by Anonymousreply 9504/30/2013

"Beauty standards are always changing. What was beautiful in 1924 is not necessarily what would be the standard today."

True, look at the pale overweight women in classic Italian art, this look would not considered beautiful or desirable today.

Being pale was also a sign of wealth in certain era, then many decades down the line, having a Ban de Soliel tan was the epitome of class and wealth, so yes, beauty standards are always changing.

Look how bizarre and alien looking today's high fashion models are, especially the creepy Karlie Kloss.

by Anonymousreply 9604/30/2013

"I'm not understanding why everyone assumes Daisy is supposed to be some kind of knockout or look like a Barbie doll."

She's supposed to be an embodiment of upper-class ornamentation, the epitome of good breeding and polishing, rather than a great natural beauty. I'm very fond of Carey Mulligan and think she's pretty, but IMHO she's a bit too *real* to play Daisy. Daisy should be barely human.

Gwynneth really would be better casting, at least opposite someone of DiCaprio's age. Daisy and Gatsby are supposed to be close to the same age, as well as old enough to be bored with their wealthy lives (as I've said before, it makes sense to age the roles a little, modern people don't get bored with their marriages in their twenties). Gwynneth is not a great beauty but she really does spend all day grooming herself, has the intrinsic snootiness, and she's very good at this sort of role.

by Anonymousreply 9704/30/2013

I just watched a scene with Robert Redford and Mia Farrow and the acting seems dead and dreary. Carey can act but I can't stand to see another Leo red-faced scream scene. I am not feeling this production. Baz is like an addict they let out every 5 years.

by Anonymousreply 9804/30/2013

This movie comes out May 10 ... when is the embargo on reviews lifted?

by Anonymousreply 9904/30/2013

Leo is not a fug to straight women, who will convince their boyfriends to take them to see the movie. Big hit coming for Leo.

by Anonymousreply 10004/30/2013

Do straight women still like Leo or did they only like him when he was younger?

by Anonymousreply 10104/30/2013

My prediction is that this movie will bomb. It cost over $120 million. I don't even want to know how much additional money they are spending on advertising. You can market the crap out of something to get a decent opening weekend, but bad word of mouth will kill an adult movie.

by Anonymousreply 10204/30/2013

I think it will bomb, too.

by Anonymousreply 10304/30/2013

[all posts by ham-fisted troll a removed.]

by Anonymousreply 10404/30/2013

I predict that the movie will cleanup overseas. I never saw Leo as sexually appealing, just that he was lucky to be in some entertaining and popular flicks.

by Anonymousreply 10504/30/2013

The twenty and thirty something women love him. He is the Al Pacino of their generation.

by Anonymousreply 10604/30/2013

It's always rich when newbie fraus like R92 assume THEY are the only straight women here. Sorry honey, but CM really is not attractive enough to play Daisy. Not by a long shot. I was shocked at her casting.

R100, speak for yourself. Leo is fug and always has been to straight women. At the peak of his heart throb fame he really only appealed to little girls. The best description I ever read of him during the Titanic era, was, "he looks like a 13 year old lesbian." Leo is not sexy or masculine at all to me---his annoying valley girl voice sounds like it hasn't even changed yet.

by Anonymousreply 10704/30/2013

No they don't R106.

by Anonymousreply 10804/30/2013

The only way I would see Gatsby is if it got good reviews. Their strategy to release it here and then have it open at Cannes five days later seems like drunk driving into oncoming traffic.

by Anonymousreply 10904/30/2013

Is there seriously going to be Kanye West songs in the background of this movie?

by Anonymousreply 11004/30/2013

Kanye West "No Church in the Wild"

performed by Frank Ocean and Jay Z

Human beings in a mob

What’s a mob to a king?

What’s a king to a god?

What’s a god to a non-believer?

Who don’t believe in anything?

I live by you, desire

I stand by you, walk through the fire

Your love is my scripture

Let me into your encryption

by Anonymousreply 11104/30/2013

Carey is cute but not sexy. I wonder if her knee pads need some stitching. Either she has serviced every Harvey Weinstein type in Hollywood or she completely blows away the casting directors on the casting couch...

by Anonymousreply 11204/30/2013

I am really creeped out by Nicole Kidman being so chummy with Harvey. He seems reptilian. Maybe Carey made Leo feel sexy in his pants so she got the job. Blake Lively flew all the way to Australia to audition and then be told "no."

by Anonymousreply 11304/30/2013

Agree with the people who said Mia Farrow wasn't that pretty in the previous version. Not sure though why that makes it OK for the latest version to make the same mistake in casting a male lead Gatsby too hot to be believably obsessed with the female lead.

by Anonymousreply 11404/30/2013

[quote] The best description I ever read of him during the Titanic era, was, "he looks like a 13 year old lesbian"

And now he looks like a 45 yr old lesbian. He's consistant

by Anonymousreply 11504/30/2013

I saw an insider tweeted it was horrendous. I guess we'll see...

by Anonymousreply 11604/30/2013

[quote]I am really creeped out by Nicole Kidman being so chummy with Harvey.

You know how it is, anything to get that next Oscar/nomination, darling. And they don't come any more desperate than ex-$ciento Nicole.

by Anonymousreply 11704/30/2013


by Anonymousreply 11805/01/2013

No, R82, none of that will help.

Gatsby cannot be filmed - period. What makes it brilliant and beautiful as a novel doesn't translate into plot and dialogue on the screen. Whenever they make a movie out of it, and many have tried, it's always a fucking mess.

It's Fitzgerald's genius as a writer that makes Gatsby what it is and it's turned out to be his lasting revenge on Hollywood. Good for him.

by Anonymousreply 11905/01/2013

r102 How the hell did they spend 120 million on this?? No non-action film should cost that much.

by Anonymousreply 12005/01/2013

[quote]It's always rich when newbie fraus like [R92] assume THEY are the only straight women here. Sorry honey, but CM really is not attractive enough to play Daisy. Not by a long shot. I was shocked at her casting.

Neither straight nor a woman. You're no Sylvia Browne, Honey.

[quote]How the hell did they spend 120 million on this?? No non-action film should cost that much.

CGI, CGI and more CGI.

by Anonymousreply 12105/01/2013

Carey Mulligan is not beautiful, intriguing or mysterious enough to be the object of any man's obsession. She looks like a farm girl playing dress up.

by Anonymousreply 12205/01/2013

Her hair is the color of piss.

by Anonymousreply 12305/01/2013

R123 Well then who would you consider beautiful enough to be Daisy?

by Anonymousreply 12405/01/2013

There is no actress alive who could play Daisy and please everyone on this thread.

If this thing bombs, Mulligan will be fine. She can go back to England or the stage and work. The fault will be all on Luhrmann and that pumpkin head, DiCaprio.

by Anonymousreply 12505/01/2013

I think that they should have cast a top Victoria's Secret-style model. In the book Daisy is portrayed as rather vacant and self-absorbed, a body to be possessed, not a real person with very complex emotions, and a member of the "idle rich." It's one movie role that doesn't require a very good actress to portray the limited amount of emotional depth of the original character.

How sad that Gatsby was obsessed with the "idea" and status of Daisy, rather than who she really was as a person or her brain and heart. Reminds me of some men who want male or female arm candy to supposedly make them look better, when they actually only end up looking extremely foolish. Hello to "real life" Leo, George Clooney, etc.

by Anonymousreply 12605/01/2013

Holy shit what is happening with her hairline at the premiere?

by Anonymousreply 12705/01/2013

She always looks like she's in pain.

by Anonymousreply 12805/01/2013

More pictures.

by Anonymousreply 12905/01/2013

[quote]Well then who would you consider beautiful enough to be Daisy?

She's a bit too old to play Daisy now, but Jennifer Connelly a decade or so ago could have played the part.

by Anonymousreply 13005/01/2013

How the hell is she a lead actress in Hollywood and less attractive than Tobey Maguire's wife?

by Anonymousreply 13105/01/2013

As the previous poster said, lots of actresses could play Daisy just fine because the character's only requirement really is that she is attractive.

Even hair and coloring and whatnot would not be a big issue because the only real description of her appearance was that she was pretty while looking sad and had bright eyes and bright lips.

Any of the actresses considered in this 2010 article would have been better than Carey Mulligan. Any one of them.

by Anonymousreply 13205/01/2013

Pictures from the premiere.

Now I can't help but focus on Carey's receding hairline.

by Anonymousreply 13305/01/2013

Ugh, the merchandising tie-in is with Tiffany? Most Americans are struggling financially.

by Anonymousreply 13405/01/2013

[quote]I predict that the movie will cleanup overseas.

R105 you are nuts. Movies that cleanup overseas have explosions and action. The "Great American Novel" isn't going to translate or appeal abroad at all, even with DiCaprio.

by Anonymousreply 13505/01/2013

actually when you look at the trailer, I thought it was meant to appeal to overseas markets

by Anonymousreply 13605/01/2013

I have seen marketing estimates that this film will make $100M domestic and $150 foreign. That is of course best case scenario.

by Anonymousreply 13705/01/2013

Leo is popular overseas. The movie does not appear to rely on dialogue, like the book, but on visuals to convey basic emotion and passion. The condensed version of the story with its moralistic message that adultery has consequences and money does not always equal happiness and love is easily understood everywhere. Didn't the also very beautiful looking Angelina Jolie and Johnnie Depp starer also do very well overseas?

by Anonymousreply 13805/01/2013

Australia, Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge all did more than $100 Million overseas while bringing in about $45 to 60 million domestically.

Baz has a formula down.

And come to think of it... teenage Claire Danes wasn't pretty enough for Leo in Romeo + Juliet either.

by Anonymousreply 13905/01/2013

Great Gatsby had its premiere last night. Has anyone seen reviews yet?

by Anonymousreply 14005/02/2013

You know, Mulligan is looking awful in the pre-release press tour, haggard and sickly. She was mildly pretty before she Went Hollywood (see below), or at least I think so, but suddenly she looks much older and less healthy.

She shouldn't worry about the film bombing and hurting her career, because if is a turkey, Luhrman will be the one to take the fall. This is his *second* comeback as a director, he won't get another chance is this is as bad as "Australia".

Leo will be unscathed, more's the pity.

by Anonymousreply 14105/02/2013

It's getting raves, especially with the photography and clothes.

by Anonymousreply 14205/02/2013

Sorry, here's Mulligan looking kind of pretty, before she hit Hollywood.

by Anonymousreply 14305/02/2013

And here she is now. What happened, besides the Bad Hair?

by Anonymousreply 14405/02/2013

I thought she was cute in Pride & Prejudice.

by Anonymousreply 14505/02/2013

It's getting raves? Where? Mulligan is in a not happy marriage.

by Anonymousreply 14605/02/2013

First review...very positive!

by Anonymousreply 14705/02/2013

I've read that she's been suffering from hair loss caused largely (or in part) from all the changes in hair colors and styles required for her parts during a short number of years, and she's been taking various hair-loss treatments.

r144's photo is from the Dr Who episode Blink, (I think). I saw it after having watched her film Drive (where I found her so beautiful and delicate) and had no idea that it was the same actress - completely different physical look and personality (I've never seen her act in anything with the same vitality and charisma as in the Who episode). She's clearly had a nose job, not sure what else.

(btw, how do you embed photos in a post? I wanted to include a photo of her from Drive, for example. Do I just post the URL in the "Url:" box below the message box?)

by Anonymousreply 14805/02/2013

Roger Friedman is a shill but at least he didn't say people left the theatre.

by Anonymousreply 14905/02/2013

Why do I get the feeling that much of this movie is a visual portrayal of "the best of times among the elite?" Or a music video reflecting an idealized time in the past? Waiting for the influence on fashion trends in 3, 2, 1 . . .

by Anonymousreply 15005/02/2013

I hope she shows off her little saggy titties and bushy gash like she did in Shame.

by Anonymousreply 15105/02/2013

[quote] Mulligan doesn't have much charisma and she looks very uncomfortable in all of the 20's period costumes. And frankly, they seem to highlight her pug like face

She always look like she just smelled a gigantic smelly fart

by Anonymousreply 15205/02/2013

[quote]You know, Mulligan is looking awful in the pre-release press tour, haggard and sickly. She was mildly pretty before she Went Hollywood (see below), or at least I think so, but suddenly she looks much older and less healthy.

by Anonymousreply 15305/02/2013

[all posts by ham-fisted troll a removed.]

by Anonymousreply 15405/02/2013

Wow she actually looked human at the NY Public library event.

Why the hell did her stylist put her hair up at those other events to bring attention to her fucked up hairline if her hair could like that when it was down.

by Anonymousreply 15505/02/2013

Leo is way too old for this role and she's not pretty enough.

Who could play Daisy and satisfy everybody? I don't know, how about a young Liz Taylor?

by Anonymousreply 15605/02/2013

grace kelly could have played the role. she certainly had the voice, the poise, the mystery...

by Anonymousreply 15705/03/2013

It would have to be an actress who can be effortlessly upperclass. That leaves out most of them.

by Anonymousreply 15805/03/2013

I'm surprised nobody on DL has seen a screening of this.


by Anonymousreply 15905/03/2013

If we're going to look at the whole history of acting, Gracy Kelly would have been the best. Beautiful, effortlessly wealthy, shallow, totally aware of her meat-market value.

by Anonymousreply 16005/03/2013


by Anonymousreply 16105/03/2013

"Beautiful and mesmerizing, Daisy is the apex of sociability. Her privileged upbringing in Louisville has conditioned her to a particular lifestyle, which Tom, her husband, is able to provide her. She enraptures men, especially Gatsby, with her diaphanous nature and sultry voice. She is the object of Gatsby's desire, for good or ill, and represents women of an elite social class."

Any of the following actresses (and others not named) would be better cast as this character than Carey Mulligan:

1. Michelle Williams 2. Emily Blunt 3. Jennifer Lawrence 4. Emily VanCamp 5. Elisha Cuthbert 6. Diane Kruger 7. Sienna Miller 8. January Jones 9. Rachel McAdams 10. Emma Stone 11. Amanda Seyfried 12. Hayden Panettiere 13. Kirsten Dunst 14. Kate Hudson 15. Becky Newton 16. Paris Hilton

by Anonymousreply 16205/03/2013

First review is in with a B-

by Anonymousreply 16305/04/2013

Still not pretty at the Met gala but thankfully her stylist has started covering up her forehead.

by Anonymousreply 16405/06/2013

Variety panned the movie and said it was like a Macy's Parade done by Liberace.

by Anonymousreply 16505/06/2013

While I've liked Mulligan in other projects, a very talented actress would have known that you must drastically change your body language to play a girl from the upper crust that is an object of lust. Almost rigid posture, a look of complete confidence, a knowing smile, etc are the basic cues. Professional models who show off high end jewelry have a completely different attitude than when they are photographed in low-end merchandise.

by Anonymousreply 16605/06/2013

Alison Loham should've played Daisy. She was very good in White Oleander:

by Anonymousreply 16705/06/2013

She's no ETB

by Anonymousreply 16805/06/2013

White Oleander came out 11 years ago and Alison Lohman has no IMDB credits since 2009.

by Anonymousreply 16905/06/2013

Man Diane Krueger would have been perfect! But good for her on avoiding this mess!

by Anonymousreply 17005/09/2013

R163 Dead on with Number One. MW is a good actress and she's better looking than Mulligan. She pulled off playing Marilyn so she could pull off Daisy.Mulligan looks like a waif or even worse a twink with a short hair wig!

R171 I like Diane BUT she can be an utterly blah actress. She's very beautiful though.....

I heard a critic on the radio and he savaged the film. He basically said it makes the boring Redford version seem like Gone With The Wind in comparison!

by Anonymousreply 17105/09/2013

Well, R6, photos from that era never look good, so maybe Ginevra King looked better.

by Anonymousreply 17205/09/2013

Daisy is a combination of Ginevra King and Zelda Fitzgerald. Zelda was definitely a looker in her prime. She was said to be very very captivating.

by Anonymousreply 17305/09/2013

Well I saw it.

I still think Carey Mulligan was miscast but I give credit to the make-up and visual effects artists on this film for making her look not hideous and occasionally almost pretty (like when a heavy film was placed over her in flashbacks).

by Anonymousreply 17405/10/2013

Just returned from movie. Really didn't like any of the actors.

Think Daisy would have been better with McAdams. She has more of a flirty nature and southern charm than Carey.

I grew up on Long Island...acutally right on the water where this is supposed to take place and I thought the homes portrayed were just awful.

by Anonymousreply 17505/10/2013

She's actually quite pretty and funny in this Colbert Report skit:

cOlbert's Book Club - "The Great Gatsby"

by Anonymousreply 17605/10/2013

I loved the Colbert skit. Mulligan has a surprisingly pleasant low voice.

by Anonymousreply 17705/10/2013

r158: Grace Kelly had zero mystery. She was very bland.

by Anonymousreply 17805/10/2013

[all posts by ham-fisted troll a removed.]

by Anonymousreply 17905/10/2013

Just saw it. Carey was miserably, horribly miscast in every way. She was not believable as a captivating, beautiful woman who not only snared Gatsby but every other officer in Louisville. Not only is she unattractive, she has not one wit of charisma and no chemistry with Leo.

Her close ups were painful on the eyes and I thought she looked even worse in the flashbacks. Daisy was supposed to have IT. Remember, even Jordan Baker remembers being jealous of her because Daisy was the most sought after and popular. Some intrinsic something that everybody wanted.

Carey was just an absolute bore and her acting was really quite abysmal. Right above Tobey Maguire, who by the way, sleep walks through the movie, as if he was on tranquilizers.

by Anonymousreply 18005/10/2013

Carey Mulligan is a person of indeterminate sex. He/she is this generation's Jamie Lee Curtis.

by Anonymousreply 18105/11/2013

not pretty, but attractive with a great voice, and a cool quality about her. i can't describe it but it's there.

by Anonymousreply 18205/11/2013

In movies, acting isn't the most important thing for leading players. The most important thing first is sex appeal.

And muffin-faced Carey Muggle has all the sex appeal of a wet cabbage patch doll.

by Anonymousreply 18305/11/2013

Michelle Williams or Kirsten Dunst would have been perfect and the right age. If they want glamour and beauty, Amber Heard

by Anonymousreply 18405/11/2013

The absolute perfect storm of opportunity to cast this movie was 10 years ago with Gwyneth Paltrow, Leo Decaprio and Ed Norton.

by Anonymousreply 18505/11/2013

This entire movie was miscast starting with Leo. However, Michelle Williams would have been a perfect choice but being a great actress, she saw through the awful screenplay and notes and probably turned it down.

by Anonymousreply 18605/11/2013

"And muffin-faced Carey Muggle has all the sex appeal of a wet cabbage patch doll."

Eerie ... thats how I would describe di Caprio:

And muffin-faced di Caprio has all the sex appeal of a wet cabbage patch doll.

by Anonymousreply 18705/11/2013

I think if the movie was made 10 years ago, Cate Blanchett would be the definitive Daisy. Goops is a pale shade of Cate.

by Anonymousreply 18805/11/2013

I don't think Cate Blanchett would have been a good Daisy.

I like Cate but she's not pretty enough to play Daisy either. Too big of a nose. Too interesting rather than pretty looking.

The Rachel McAdams idea is interesting because we know she could play the Queen Bee popular girl ice princess, whereas Carey Mulligan just played Daisy as a pathetic bystander of events.

I still wonder what this would have been like with Jennifer Lawrence as Daisy. I mean isn't she from Louisville in real life? She has more of a happy-go-lucky flapper-girl attitude and would actually be about the right age of Daisy. Maybe she would be too vulgar rather than high society but I still think she would have done better than Carey.

by Anonymousreply 18905/11/2013

This thread gives me the creeps.

by Anonymousreply 19005/11/2013

Her face is so doughy. She also has the strangest coloring, like she has a serious nutritional imbalance. You can see it in candid photographs. I do think she's a good actress. I really liked her in Drive, Shame and An Education.

by Anonymousreply 19105/11/2013

Paltrow is not beautiful. Blanchett can play and be stunning - think of LOTR, she was magnificently beautiful in it. And yes 10 years ago she would have been perfect for it.

Paltrow, never. Mulligan just no, and I like Mulligan as an actress.

& who was in the other one with Redford? Mia Farrow? Please, another MISCASTING, she is not and was never a beauty either.

10 years ago, Angelina would have been perfect for the role, actually, and I'm not even an Angie fan, can't stand her but she would have been great in it 10 years ago.

by Anonymousreply 19205/11/2013

Gatsby is in love with wath Daisy represents. She doesn't have to be Helen of Troy!

I think Carey Mulligan fits the bill. Mia Farrow wasn't that sublime either, but if she represents old-money and a world Gatsby aspires to ? I don't think Gatsby really loves her. He is obesessed with her, but is she really worth it?

I always thought the tragedy is that Gatsby didn't realise that Nick was devoted to him and could offer real love... That's the real missed opportunity in this story.

by Anonymousreply 19305/11/2013

Where in the novel does it imply Daisy was prettier than Carey Mulligan?

by Anonymousreply 19405/11/2013

i thing mulligan is a good choice.

by Anonymousreply 19505/11/2013

Good lord, some of these casting choices!

Jennifer Lawrence's appeal is based on her everygirl likeability, she's the opposite of an upper crust personification and half Leo's age. Blanchette is actually the right age to play opposite Leo, but she's much too formidable to be a mere object of desire. Ditto Angelina, who made another 1920s movie a couple of years ago, and who proved she's much too angular to look good in the clothes of that era.

McAdams is actually a pretty good idea. She's quite lovely, she's old enough for Leo, and she does play shallow and frivolous well.

by Anonymousreply 19605/11/2013

McAdams has a very interesting voice and look for Daisy, but frankly, after four disastrous attempts, can we just all admit that Gatsby is not filmable.

by Anonymousreply 19705/11/2013

carey mulligan is a hip girl, she's attractive, that short haired gamine thing suits her, she can act and she's a cool update on a role that mia farrow (hardly a beauty, odd and fascinating) is known for. most of you guys are dicks. mulligan is pretty enough to be there. noomi rapace? now thats a dog. please keep her out of u.s. films

by Anonymousreply 19805/11/2013

And this is why America/Americans are so worried about how they look or who they should date. Thanks to people like you.

by Anonymousreply 19905/11/2013

R199, I don't think it's Mulligans looks that are the real issue. She was believable in Drive playing an everywoman and single Mom. While I have yet to see the film, from the clips she lacks the air of a lady born to wealth. That means she doesn't have the acting chops to pull off this role which would come more naturally to a different actress or model. Also if there isn't strong physical chemistry with Leo, then it's a total fail.

by Anonymousreply 20005/11/2013

I think she'd make a fine Sally Bowles in the revival of CABARET coming back this fall.

by Anonymousreply 20105/11/2013

No, she wouldn't.

by Anonymousreply 20205/11/2013

Re: r194,

"Gatsby is in love with wath Daisy represents. She doesn't have to be Helen of Troy!"


But the actress who plays Daisy should at least be attractive enough that Gatsby's obsession and Tom's desire to hang on to her is believable.

by Anonymousreply 20305/11/2013

Re: r197

"Good lord, some of these casting choices!

Jennifer Lawrence's appeal is based on her everygirl likeability, she's the opposite of an upper crust personification and half Leo's age. Blanchette is actually the right age to play opposite Leo..."

If Jennifer Lawrence is incapable of personifying upper crust then why exactly is she the face of Miss Dior?

As for the age stuff... Jennifer Lawrence is 22 years old. The character of Daisy Buchanan is 23 years old. Cate Blanchett is 43 years old!!! Leo is only 38 and his Gatsby character is supposed to be early 30s. Cate Blanchett, if she was every going to work in the part, would have to have been 15 years ago or earlier. Not nowadays!

Also, just curious if you also think Jennifer Lawrence was horribly miscast in Silver Linings Playbook? Because her romantic costar in that movie was the exact same age as Leo.

by Anonymousreply 20405/11/2013


But the actress who plays Daisy should at least be attractive enough that Gatsby's obsession and Tom's desire to hang on to her is believable."

Believable to intelligent people with imaginations and hearts, who understand that attraction isn't always based on Madison Avenue conventions; and who also realize that Mulligan's success in the role doesn't depend on her not living up to your standards of beauty.

by Anonymousreply 20505/12/2013

Beyond the fact that she's not very pretty, anybody who actually saw the movie this weekend can't say she got the part on her strong acting or chemistry with Leo, because there was none of that to be had.

by Anonymousreply 20605/12/2013

I was shocked when she won the role over Michelle Williams, Scarlett Johansson and Keira Knightly. It was a WTF moment. Now I see I knew better than Baz.

by Anonymousreply 20705/12/2013

Maybe the studio wanted him to use her...or her agent?

by Anonymousreply 20805/12/2013

"As for the age stuff... Jennifer Lawrence is 22 years old. The character of Daisy Buchanan is 23 years old."

Again, this is one story when it's appropriate to cast older than the book. Daisy and Tom have a marriage that's socially good, but they're bored with each other and are looking around, a situation you're more likely to find in modern thirty-somethings than in 23-year-olds.

Besides, Leo is looking pretty rough for 38, he looks like he's in his forties. Casting him opposite someone in her early 20s is never a great idea, but casting a 22-year-old as his "old flame"? That's just icky.

by Anonymousreply 20905/12/2013

I thought Leo looked pretty slim in the movie, and yes Carr is miscast. I woudl have loved Keirre in it.

by Anonymousreply 21005/12/2013

You know who would have been amazing as Daisy had she been 15 years younger? Winona Ryder!

by Anonymousreply 21105/19/2013

Mulligan was horribly miscast.

Her looks are the least of it. She lacks the charisma to carry off the attitude of Daisy Buchanon that has been, in previous posts here, described excellently.

I know he's hated here but LDC was superb. I loved his performance.

by Anonymousreply 21205/19/2013

I feel sorry for her because she had to act opposite DiCaprio and he terribly ugly! He also comes across like a real HW idiot. Poor Carey!

by Anonymousreply 21305/19/2013

The reason Leo wanted her cast was because he wanted to be the only beautiful one on screen. And it worked. It makes the audience love him even more knowing his life is destroyed over someone so unworthy of him!

by Anonymousreply 21405/19/2013

[quote]If Jennifer Lawrence is incapable of personifying upper crust then why exactly is she the face of Miss Dior?

Celebrity trumps everything

by Anonymousreply 21505/19/2013

She is fucking brilliant. Saw that Inside Llewyn Davis trailer and didn't even know it was her till I read it afterward. This is an actress. She may not beat Keira Knightley in looks but she can act circles round her.

Am now looking forward to this Llewyn Davis film, nice that Oscar Isaac is getting a showcase. But I just know Timbertwat will take me out of the movie again. Why is he getting all these good roles?!

by Anonymousreply 21605/19/2013

In the book they all read mid-to-late twenties. Gatsby should be about 28, I think, and Daisy maybe 24-26. I don't recall her age being mentioned in the novel, but then it's been a while.

by Anonymousreply 21705/19/2013

She has been good in other stuff but she was absolutely not good in The Great Gatsby.

by Anonymousreply 21805/19/2013

She was terrible in it, first her daisy always looks on the verge of tears, but the worst part is the two other girls, the one who play jordan is absolutely breathtaking and actually looks like she come from money(something that none of the other actors portray) and the one who play myrtle sister who looks exactly like mulligan, making the whole think even harder to understand.

In short, the casting is off, the picture looks ugly and the soundtrack is very distracting.

by Anonymousreply 21905/19/2013

Maybe the studio wanted to cast her?

Look what Stone did...he cast Colin Farrell as Alexander. Kind of dumb. Colin is a good actor but the died hair looked ridiculous.

by Anonymousreply 22005/19/2013

I don't think Jennifer Lawrence would have been right for Daisy. Not at all. I was pretty surprised that Carey was chosen, it simply didn't seem like good casting.

by Anonymousreply 22105/19/2013

Oh please enough with Jennifer Lawrence.

by Anonymousreply 22205/19/2013

Men often fall for women who just aren't "pretty" enough. I'm sure it's happened to all of us that we went loco for someone with average looks. It's not an issue for a woman not to be "pretty enough".

by Anonymousreply 22305/19/2013

[quote]Am now looking forward to this Llewyn Davis film, nice that Oscar Isaac is getting a showcase. But I just know Timbertwat will take me out of the movie again. Why is he getting all these good roles?!

He has a bit singing part and that's it. He's barely in the movie.

by Anonymousreply 22405/19/2013

"In the book they all read mid-to-late twenties. Gatsby should be about 28, I think, and Daisy maybe 24-26."

Again, this is one story where it makes sense to cast a little older than the book. Tom and Daisy are long married, settled, and getting bored with each other, something modern people do in their thirties.

As far as the miscasting... since actors are no longer reliable box-office draws, Hollywood has become terrible about actor fads. Someone hits town, all the producers and directors decide they're the Next Big Thing, and they're offered every damn role in town, however inappropriate. Mulligan was the Flavor Of The Month for a while last year (between Emma Stone and Jennifer Lawrence), and this is the result. It's a terrible system for both the actors, and the resulting films.

by Anonymousreply 22505/19/2013

They should do a mash-up where the characters go on an ocean liner trip and meet the characters from *Brideshead Revisited*.

by Anonymousreply 22605/19/2013

R226, Thanks for your post. It doesn't help an actor to be miscast; just makes others believe that they're totally lacking. Lucky for Jennifer Lawrence that she wasn't convinced to take the role.

If Leo and Baz were the real initial draws, why would they need to cast a "name" anyway? I'd still have gone with a top model who could act and had a reasonably correct upscale American-sounding voice. What females represent Armani or any of the top designers? Who models for Neiman Marcus or Saks? (Yes, I have admitted West Coast biases.)

by Anonymousreply 22705/19/2013

Does she have a stylist or does her stylist just hate her?

by Anonymousreply 22805/19/2013

She will age terribly.

by Anonymousreply 22905/19/2013

She resembles wee Jimmy Krankie!

by Anonymousreply 23005/20/2013

Big drop in the stats of movie goers this week, right?

by Anonymousreply 23105/20/2013

According to Box Office Mojo, the audience went up by +15.

I liked the movie but she was horribly miscast. She's not convincing as someone's obsession. She would be good as the plain sidekick. As someone posted, she was the Flavor of the Month and it backfired. Would have been a whole different movie with better casting (Tobey is too old to play naive young man). But I really liked Leo as Gatsby..

by Anonymousreply 23205/20/2013

I agree that Carey Mulligan is not pretty enough for the role of Daisy Buchanan. I saw the Robert Redford and Mia Farrow version and I would say Gwyneth Paltrow should have been perfect for the role of Daisy. She looks the part plus she have great acting chops. Carey Mulligan is not well known plus her face is not recognizable and likable enough. Sorry, but that is just my opinion

by Anonymousreply 23305/21/2013

R234, On what planet is Paltrow considered attractive or appealing? Cast a high end model, the type that used to model furs or expensive jewelry. The role does not require acting as much as great physical chemistry with the lead male. Wake up Hollywood.

by Anonymousreply 23405/21/2013

What model? There is acting scenes, you know.

A prettier actress with acting abilities--Scarlett or Michelle Williams.

by Anonymousreply 23505/21/2013

Why didn't they cast January Jones? Seriously.

by Anonymousreply 23605/21/2013

Daisy doesn't have to be a walking pin-up. She just needs to be pretty enough for you to buy that she was the belle of Louisville and just enough IT to be that unattainable golden girl Gatsby obsessed about. Paltrow in her younger years could portray flighty, upper crust, selfishness in her sleep.

Gatsby wants to win her, but he doesn't understand that she is an empty and unworthy dream.

by Anonymousreply 23705/21/2013

Paltrow would have been ideal for the role had Baz made Gatsby around the same time he made Romeo.

by Anonymousreply 23805/21/2013

R236, Most high end models must portray wealth and privilege to "sell" luxury goods and diamonds. It's a look and an attitude that needs to quickly come across in a pic, on the runway or on film. I like Michelle Williams as an actress; I don't know if she can easily convey "from the manor born." ScarJo is not an actress. She was the worst thing about Avengers. Paltrow rates a zero as far as sexual desirability. I can't believe she'd have intense physical chemistry with a man on screen. That's also a requirement for the role. Mia Farrow was more of a cipher than a femme fatale as well.

by Anonymousreply 23905/21/2013

Yes, R235, studios would be smart to gamble 100s of millions of dollars on an unknown fur model instead of an in-demand, young, recent Oscar nominee.

by Anonymousreply 24005/21/2013

[quote]Most high end models must portray wealth and privilege to "sell" luxury goods and diamonds. It's a look and an attitude that needs to quickly come across in a pic, on the runway or on film.

Film requires you to say lines, not just stand there wearing diamonds and pearls. A non-acting model would be a disaster if they couldn't get the role right beyond just standing there posing in glamourous clothing.

Also, Daisy is not a femme fatale nor is she supposed to be overtly sexual.

by Anonymousreply 24105/21/2013

[quote]I can't believe she'd have intense physical chemistry with a man on screen.

I thought she was electric with Joseph Finnes in Shakespeare In Love.

by Anonymousreply 24205/21/2013

Gwyneth Paltrow IS Daisy Buchanan in real life.

by Anonymousreply 24305/21/2013

R241, Do you really think people are going to see Gatsby because of Mulligan? I was asked that by the studio in a survey over a month ago.

R242, Of course a high-end model cast as Daisy must be have more talent than the laughable performance of ScarJo in the Avengers. If Daisy's sexuality and chemistry with Gatsby's is not prioritized, than the bombastic music and overdone production will completely overwhelm the basic romance. You need far stronger emotional resonance for the film to make sense.

R243, I didn't see Shakespeare, although I like Finnes as an actor. I didn't see Paltrow as sexually desirable or believable in Ironman I or II. Like ScarJo, the audience kept snickering after her line readings.

by Anonymousreply 24405/21/2013

FYI tall, gawky, scrawny women look terrible in 1920s fashions, so stop talking about models. 1920s fashions were designed for girls who were short and soft.

by Anonymousreply 24505/21/2013

R246, Since when are high end jewelry models gawky and scrawny? Tall and then girls look good in anything. Everyone has been posting that Mulligan doesn't have the elegance to pull off her period outfits, and that the clothes look that they're wearing her, instead of the reverse. Again she's good in drive playing a struggling single Mom.

by Anonymousreply 24605/21/2013

Would Gone With The Wind have been so wildly popular without Viv? No. People want to see someone more attractive than themselves when they spend $$$ for a movie. Not someone one can relate.Someone otherwordly. Hollywood doesn't get that. They hire relations and connections.

Brad Pitt hoped he'd get this out of Gwyneth until he realized his good looks could transcend any connections. He dumped her. She didn't dump him or do anything to make him leave. He just moved on.

by Anonymousreply 24705/21/2013

Carey Mulligan is a private school head girl type. She gets work because she is not going to overpower the male star with any sex appeal or charisma. She will never be a true movie star and has very few fans, why would she?

by Anonymousreply 24805/21/2013

[quote]Do you really think people are going to see Gatsby because of Mulligan? I was asked that by the studio in a survey over a month ago.

OK, you obviously don't understand how this all works. To clue you in with one example, however, she's on the cover of Vogue. That gets the eyeballs of a lot of women who may then decide to see the movie. Anna Wintour isn't going to put some unknown fur model on the cover of Vogue no matter what.

Also - NO ACTORS can guarantee box office these days - it is all about the concept. That is especially true of female stars.

by Anonymousreply 24905/21/2013

R250, If what R249 says is true, and magazines don't hold the power that they once had, then why spend so much on an actress that isn't really suited for a role? You could create a massive pap campaign for a total unknown "fur model" and probably do just as well, especially since the concept et al is the draw for Gatsby.

by Anonymousreply 25005/21/2013

[all posts by ham-fisted troll a removed.]

by Anonymousreply 25105/21/2013

The focus is on Mulligan because the desire for her is what drive Gatsby passion and ambition to accumulate wealth so fast even by illegal means. Daisy should be beautiful, sexy and desirable but Cary just doesn't reach that level.

by Anonymousreply 25205/21/2013

I think that the casting of Detox as Jordan was a bold move.

by Anonymousreply 25305/21/2013

Kiera Knightley wasmborn to play Daisy B

by Anonymousreply 25405/27/2013

Am I going to have to start a "Carey Mulligan just isn't pretty enough to play Hillary Clinton" thread?

Carey Mulligan has emerged as the frontrunner to play Hillary Rodham Clinton in Rodham, Temple Hill and the Arlook Group’s biopic of the former first lady, New York senator and Secretary of State.

The Great Gatsby actress is the producers' top choice to play Clinton during the formative years of her storied career in public service, according to several sources. Several American actress' names have been bandied about to take on the widely admired but often polarizing figure including Scarlett Johansson, Jessica Chastain and Emma Stone. Ironically, the British actress, who was nominated for a best actress Oscar for her starring role in An Education, has never been mentioned.

Sources tell The Hollywood Reporter that the actress will have a sitdown with director James Ponsoldt (The Spectacular Now) but sources say both sides are eager for it to work.

However, insiders close to the production caution that no decision has been made and that others actresses are still in the mix.

by Anonymousreply 25506/05/2013

Who is the most intelligent young actress working in Hollywood? Hillary strikes people as strong willed and savvy; the actress chosen must be able to immediately portray these qualities. To bad Streep is too old for the role.

by Anonymousreply 25606/05/2013

It should be Juno Temple:

by Anonymousreply 25706/05/2013

googling photos of "Juno Temple," maybe that would work, but I have never seen her in anything

Back to Carey Mulligan as Hillary. At first I thought, ugh completely wrong, but looking at the other possibilities, she is the best choice out of the bunch:

Scarlett Johansson (what - are they joking?), Jessica Chastain (no!) and Emma Stone (no, no!)

Hilary was a serious, intelligent, and determined young woman - out of that group, Mulligan can portray this the most

by Anonymousreply 25806/05/2013

what does a "head girl type" mean?

Serious? studious? obedient? conservative? establishment? intelligent? snobby? nerdy?bossy??? What?

by Anonymousreply 25906/05/2013

If any young actress is going to play Hillary Clinton, it should be Michelle Williams.

She's American, talented, serious, and plain.

by Anonymousreply 26006/05/2013

Michelle Williams cannot bring seriousness, determination and intelligence to it. Mulligan can.

by Anonymousreply 26106/05/2013

I think Mia Waskk;iifnneoaska would have worked

by Anonymousreply 26206/05/2013

As silly as it is, I feel relieved to find other people thinking that Carey Mulligan is not pretty enough to play Daisy.

I was looking for Baz comments on this.

I haven't found yet.

But I wonder... could it be on purpose?

Indeed, it makes sense for many reasons.

For the play itself = as someone here said, Gatsby has always been prettier than Daisy in movies, but why? I think it helps see that Gatsby is more in love with what represents Daisy than the girl herself.

Also, for the actor Leo = it enhances his beauty, to play with someone less prettier. He seemed to have some power of decision in the choice of the Daisy, at least, he was already chosen before her...

by Anonymousreply 26303/06/2014

karen karpenter would of bin better.

by Anonymousreply 26401/24/2017
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!