The film is directed by Gavin Hood and it has an impressive cast including Ford, Kingsley, Viola Davis, Hailee Steinfeld and Asa Butterfield as Wiggin. Gavin Hood has tackled the sci-fi genre before as he directed X-Men Origins: Wolverine years ago. X-Men Origins had elements of sci-fi but it was still set in a fairly realistic world. Ender’s Game however has more traditional science fiction tropes including aliens and big space battles. It will be good to see how the director handles the material and how close the film is to the novel it is based on.

The cast are all capable of giving a good performance but it is unclear if Asa Butterfield is compelling enough to fill his role. The audience needs to believe in the character for the film to work. Unfortunately the trailer didn’t really do a good job of showing the viewer what makes Wiggin so special.  The trailer also doesn’t really stand out and is lacking a wow factor. The plot is interesting enough though and the film may remind older movie fans of The Last Starfighter which had a similar plot. The special effects also look good although the aliens are not shown and there isn’t much action. The trailer focuses on briefly explaining the story and introducing the main characters. Some of the information is delivered in a rather flat narration by Harrison Ford which is reminiscent of the one he did for Blade Runner. Ford, however is a reliable actor and it is nice to see him in a sci-fi set in space again. There is nothing wrong with the trailer from a technical point of view but it is just rather bland. There will also be some movie fans who draw inevitable comparisons between this film and Hunger Games. The  fact that both stories feature young warriors is apparent.

The good cast and fanbase of the novel should put bums on seats and ensure that some people will see the movie when it comes out. The film may struggle to attract people unfamiliar with the source material though especially if they are not fans of the cast. This year has a few big sci-fi releases including Pacific Rim, Elysium, Stark Trek Into Darkness and also the sci-fi comic book films like Man of Steel. The lackluster trailer for Ender’s Game will not help it stand out from the crowd and that is a shame.

Ender’s Game is based on rich source material so hopefully the story in the film can keep the viewer entertained. The story and good cast may be enough to make this film worth a look when it comes out. It is just unfortunate that the first trailer doesn’t captivate or make the most of all its positive aspects.

The film is released on November 1st so have a look at the trailer and share your thoughts.

In the first episode of the series to take a more narrative driven approach, Hannibal’s episode three, Potage, brings into focus a more lasting story for the series to follow, as the daughter of the premiere episode’s killer awakens from a coma. But the question is, how much of her father’s deeds did Abigail Hobbs (Kacey Rohl) take part in?

So far in Hannibal, there have been cannibalistic killers, brutal murders and even some imaginative horticulture, but now it seems that it is time for the plot to settle down into a more focused arc. With the guilt of Garrett Jacob Hobbs (Vladimir Cubrt), nicknamed the Minnesota Shrike, made certain in episode one, suspicion now falls on the daughter he tried to kill before being shot by Will Graham (Hugh Dancy). Potage turns its eye onto the complicated subject of “folie à deux”, meaning madness shared by two. Upon awakening, Abigail Hobbs is concerned that she may be as insane as her father, a worry shared by Jack Crawford (Laurence Fishburne) who insists that Abigail be returned to the scene of her father’s crimes in order to find out how guilty, or innocent, she may be. What follows is a complex episode of careful trust between Will and Abigail, growing suspicion on behalf of Crawford, and the menacing presence of Hannibal Lecter (Mads Mikkelson).

In appearance, Abigail seems like the perfect victim, unaware of her father’s crimes and now suffering the effects of this realisation. However, there is something just a little off about her, a fact that fails to escape the notice of Dr. Alana Bloom (Caroline Dhavernas). Abigail’s questions are dispassionately practical, her manner calm and controlled, and a stark reminder of Mikkelson’s Lecter. The interplay between these two characters builds throughout the episode, as clearly each recognises something in the other.  Mikkelson continues to show why he is a so well cast in the role, a quiet and unnerving presence in full control. Brief flashes of violence allow his sinister nature to be seen but only to a point, merely to prove the unknown threat that he poses.

On the other hand, Will is continuing to only barely hold himself together. The contrast between Graham and his psychiatrist is one that propels the series forward, and yet in this latest episode the two are rarely seen alone together. This could be a slight failing of Potage, as this central relationship is put aside to allow each a chance to stand alone. Whilst Hannibal is becoming a tentative mentor to the enigmatic Abigail, Will is left to further contend with the obtrusive Freddie Lounds (Lara Jean Chorostecki).  Still apparently intent on sabotaging Will’s career, Lounds approaches Abigail, the brother of one of the Shrike’s victims, and anyone else she can to create a story. Whilst this motivation is somewhat narrow-minded, it does in turn lead to some memorable confrontations between her and Will, and allows the character to remain a force in the series.

However, it is the influence of Dr. Lecter that is made most clear in the episode. Whilst his attempts to gain the trust of Will are still ongoing, Hannibal’s ability to manipulate Abigail proves effective, and by Potage’s conclusion, the two are inextricably linked, a bond that may lead to discoveries that viewers are no doubt waiting for.

MF: The first thing that struck us about the film was the period setting, this was surely a very ambitious choice for any short filmmaker, let alone a final year university project. One is led to assume you must be very passionate about the time period in which it’s set?

RB: That’s the thing, when I was 14 I went on battlefields school trip and whilst doing that I read Micheal Morpurgo’s book Private Peaceful and loved it. It was the combination of this book and the school trip that lead me to getting hooked on the subject matter of the First World War. Coupled with my love of TV and film drama the project just kind of fell into place. Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers are obviously an influence here as well, their gritty and realistic representation of war is something I wanted to emulate.

The bulk of First World War dramas recently have had a more traditional period drama setting rather than a battlefield one and whilst Unto a Good Land certainly contains elements of Great Expectations and the like the cutaways to the trench scenes were my favourite moments because they were more realistic and that’s the scenes I am most passionate about recreating. These guys could spend a week in a trench and for six days be doing nothing before a battle so that boredom and living in awful conditions was something I wanted to show as well, someone having a cup of tea in a dirty hole for example is something rarely shown. I think it’s a juxtaposition that a lot of drama is missing.

MF: Were there any doubts that this film could be achieved on student budget?

RB: Absolutely, every single day!  We had previously done a drama/documentary Wilfred (about Wilfred Owen) and that was great because it gave me a taster for this kind of material. During the making of this we found that big part of doing this project was to get the locations right, the trenches, the manor house etc.  A lot of the thanks for this has to go to Tash, the producer on the film, she was key in securing a lot of the locations that really enhance the film. The trenches used weren’t actually built as a film set, they were built by historian Andy Robertshaw in his back garden!

MF: Andy Robertshaw? That’s not a name many of our readers will be familiar with…

RB: Well Andy has a big, illustrious career in being a military advisor for film and television, I think he used to be lecturer and then got into to film and TV work.  Starting on stuff like Time Team he worked his way up and was the military advisor on War Horse. So as well as having lots of great stories about Spielberg, he had a great sense of how filming works. It was because of his experience I didn’t feel pressured working around him.

MF: So what was it like working in the trenches?

The trenches themselves are built to scale so he also warned me that we wouldn’t be working on a film set and that space would be confined. Thankfully we only had a crew of fix or six people so this didn’t present much of an issue. The lack of space also added to the sense of realism I wanted to achieve as these trenches were built in exactly the same way as in the past. Weeds were creeping through the sandbags and it was muddy and dirty. Whether the viewer notices this or not isn’t always important, obviously I do hope people notice these things but this detail is also important as it convinces the actors more of the period setting as well.  Even whilst writing the script I stayed and slept in the trench for a full 24 hours just to get a better understanding of what is was like.  I prefer to put things into the first person because it’s difficult not to regurgitate old material on the same subject matter.

MF: As well the film looking great, the story and the characters shone through for me, especially the German nurse. When writing the characters were there any influences you were specifically trying to evoke?

RB: It’s very easy to fall into genre stereotypes with this kind of material. Whilst this is not always a bad thing as some of the character types exist with good reason, this is something I wanted to eschew with at least some of the characters.  It’s about finding some kind of middle ground, going back to the German nurse briefly. OK, a lieutenant and a nurse having a relationship isn’t particularly realistic but then I found the concept of her being German fascinating and that decision came quite late in the day. It’s about showing the other problems caused by war other than the obvious death and injury.

In terms of filmmakers who inspire me, two really come to mind. Derek Cianfrance has an entirely unique style, the fact that he has a background in documentary translates so well to the screen.  Whilst I didn’t go to that extent, I did try and take influences from his directing and writing, where you write characters that are able to develop and breathe on set and outside of the script.  The scene in the doctors for example is something I didn’t script, the idea for the scene was there but we ran with it on the day, the characters ending up having sex was the planned outcome but how it got there was deciding whilst shooting. The scenes feel more natural if shot that way than if I had scripted the whole thing.

Also I hate storyboarding, if I use boards then drift away from them as shooting progresses then I feel like I have in some way failed. Whereas if I don’t use them at all I don’t have that problem and for me at least the process feels more organic. I’m not criticising those filmmakers that do use them and undoubtedly they work for a lot of people just not for me. I am a very much a fan of setting up a scene and letting things happen, have a loose structure but allow for change.

The ability of Paul Thomas Anderson is also something I respect and try to evoke, he has a way of filmmaking that can make characters interesting even if they just sitting on the sofa for two hours. There Will Be Blood and The Master are fantastic films and the characters within them just perfectly formed. Leaving the camera on characters and seeing the reactions (like the dinner table scene in There Will Be Blood) was something I tried to do with Unto Good a Land and I feel perhaps that next time this is something I will do even more. But I’m young and still learning what I need to embrace more and things that I need to leave behind as my work develops.

MF: Unto a Good Land appears to be perhaps the pilot or start of a potential series, is this something you are looking at continuing?

It is something I would like to go back to but perhaps in the future, whilst I am more than happy with how Unto a Good Land has turned out I am willing to accept that I am inexperienced and in my head not good enough yet to work on an entire series or to pick up funding to do it.  However if I get to the point a few projects down the line and have the money and the backing then yes I would go back to it and probably completely rework it.  Despite being happy with it, because it was a student project I couldn’t help but consider the marking criteria at every point in the writing process and also the like and dislikes of the lecturers. I am happy with it overall all and feel I have accomplished what I set out to do but without a doubt if the opportunity presented itself I would revisit it.

MF: What are the plans to get Unto a Good Land to a wider audience, any festival appearances lined up or plans to screen it elsewhere?

Well the interest shown already by websites such as Movie Farm and the reviews are hugely flattering especially for someone this early in their career. It’s great that people are showing an interest and want to take the time to talk to me about it.  Also it’s invaluable to have a more rounded understanding of the industry, for example it’s not on the festival circuit yet and I would like it to be but that’s not a part of the industry I’m yet familiar with. So fingers crossed it happens soon!

MF: Finally, what projects are on the horizon for you?

Well I’m good friends with Rebecca, one the actresses (the nurse) from Unto a Good Land and have learned so much from her. She has wanted to build her show reel over the past year and has a background in musical work so we are learning from each other.  I have some ideas but basically just working with her on a lot of things, project after project and see where it goes. If anything comes next it will be some kind of 1950s project inspired by The Master. At the moment I’m in a position where I’m not tied to anyone or anything and can make exactly what I want to make so for the time being that’s my plan. The script is in progress and hopefully should be done sometime in June.

Another project with Rebecca is a feature about a woman who contracts a rate disease and finds out she will lose her sight in 30 days and follow her and what she chooses to do with the last days of being able to see but do it in a realistic way. Due to my impatient nature I want to crack on with this early next year but we’ll see how it goes and if it’s not ready then we’ll wait as it’s something I really want to get right.

The premise is interesting even though it is a concept that has been done before in other movies. Plenty of films set in space have a set-piece where an astronaut is somehow cut loose from their tether as they hurtle into space. Gravity is probably one of the first movies to focus on this dilemma however which gives it an edge. The pairing of a grizzled veteran with a newcomer is also a well worn trope but it can be effective.

Alfonso Cuarón is a reliable and talented director so it will be interesting to see what he can do with a movie like this. Clooney and Bullock are also reliable and they should be able to captivate the audience in a movie like this that focuses on just two characters. Naturally, fans of the genre would need to also be fans of both George Clooney and Sandra Bullock to enjoy the film. Both actors have a likeable on-screen persona so it shouldn’t be too difficult to sell a film with just the two of them.  There is also something breathtaking about seeing humans floating above the planet in the vast blackness of space. Films like this are usually a delight to watch at the cinema. The trailer itself boasts some nice special effects which only add to the spectacle of seeing the two astronauts floating around the shuttle before it is destroyed. The classical score that plays in the trailer is also effective and may remind the viewer of films like 2001: A Space Odyssey. It creates a feeling of tranquility that is quickly interrupted when disaster strikes.

This year will see the release of a few science fiction movies where space flight is a prominent feature. Star Trek Into Darkness, After Earth and Ender’s Game are the most well known examples of that. Gravity stands out because it is set in the present time not the future and it has a smaller scope than Star Trek and Ender’s Game in particular. The film should also provide some edge of your seat tension as the main characters try to survive such a hazardous situation. There are no fancy gadgets than can save them and this makes the situation desperate. The oxygen in the space suits is also a rather limited supply so time is of the essence. It is difficult to see how the astronauts can survive such a dilemma. The film would be a rather depressing affair if the viewer has to watch them slowly die over two hours.

Gravity should do well when it is released later in the year.  The trailer does enough to intrigue the audience and create a buzz. The director and actors are also all on top of their game and more than capable of putting bums on seats in the cinema.

The film is released on October 4th.

Have a look at the trailer and share your thoughts.

ngelina Jolie was back in the news this week, but there wasn’t a film to promote. Wasn’t a good cause to highlight either. She had undergone surgery, a double mastectomy to be exact.

When Jolie revealed news about her double mastectomy to the world, you could see the confusion all over the faces of those hearing the news. Not necessarily because of the surgery itself, but how she had managed to keep it a secret. In a day and age where social media rules and the paparazzi are omnipresent, how did she conceal this?

You’ve heard it a million times, throwaway comments about a woman turning into their mother, but in this case genetics can bring more than an obsession to iron socks and to co-ordinate cushions and ornaments. Jolie’s mother Marcheline Bertrand died in 2007 after a lengthy battle with ovarian cancer, and the BRCA1 gene has been passed to Angelina. It’s an inheritance that has given her an 87% chance of being diagnosed with breast cancer in the future. The BRCA1 gene is a tumour suppressor and its presence in a mutated state can indicate an increased risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. It is the same gene that Liberty X star Michelle Heaton carried and she also chose to have both of her breasts removed last year. It’s not over for Angelina though, as she is still to have an oophorectomy, removal of the ovaries.

According to reports it was Brad Pitt’s mother, Jane, who prompted Angelina to have the revealing blood test. The test cost a whopping £1,900 and was allegedly taken over  the Christmas period on a family getaway. After receiving the news about the gene and making the decision to be pro-active and take the preventative measures, the full process began in February. The process is called nipple delay and in Angelina’s words ‘rules out disease in the breast ducts behind the nipple and draws extra blood flow to the area. This causes some pain and a lot of bruising, but it increases the chance of saving the nipple’.

A couple of weeks later the actual procedure of removing the breast tissue took place and temporary fillers were put in place. Nine weeks later the reconstructive surgery was complete. All while this was taking place, Jolie was still working and although the physical effects were taking their toll, she had Pitt to lean on throughout the process. She said ‘I am fortunate to have a partner who is so loving and supportive.We managed to find moments to laugh together. We knew this was the right thing to do for our family and that it would bring us closer. And it has’. Brad himself echoed the sentiment saying ‘Having witnessed this decision first hand, I find Angie’s choice, as well as so many others like her, absolutely heroic.’There have been reports that they will now take the final step in their eight year relationship and get married.

The procedure has reduced Jolie’s chances of breast cancer from 87% all the way down to 5% and the next step will be the oophorectomy. The journey has not yet finished, but by speaking out she is bringing to the fore a subject that affects far too many people across the world. 458,000 people die each year through breast cancer alone and early detection is the key. Of course not everyone has the same resources at their disposal, but it’s the detection that is paramount. You can follow Angelina’s regime at http://pinklotusbreastcenter.com/

Our TV Review:

The title of this episode is a telling one; Second Sons focuses on the oft overlooked spare male heirs of Westeros, and perhaps suggests that they shouldn’t have been so easily discounted. Tyrion (Peter Dinklage), the despised dwarf offspring of Tywin Lannister (Charles Dance) is married against his will. Samwell Tarly (John Bradley-West), who is in fact a first son shunted aside due to his cowardice, is forced to show his quality. Sandor ‘The Hound’ Clegane (Rory McCann), brow-burned younger brother of Gregor ‘The Mountain’ Clegane (Ian Whyte), also rears his disfigured head, and Stannis Baratheon (Stephen Dillane), possibly the most high profile second son of them all, throws his fire-worshipping hat back into the ring.

The big happening of this episode is the wedding between Tyrion and Sansa (Sophie Turner). This event is masterfully played by both actors, with Dinklage coming back onto form after his character has taken somewhat of a back seat this season. The wedding is a strategic alliance, a political power play, and a cruel punishment rolled into one. The wedding scene in the gigantic Sept at King’s Landing (one of our favourite majestic sets) is cleverly filmed, emphasising Tyrion’s short stature as well as Sansa’s teenage lankiness.

When watching the seventeen-year-old (and rather tall) Turner, it’s very easy to forget that Sansa herself is only fourteen, which lends yet another level of creepiness to a wedding which is already creepy enough. The bizarre cruelty of this forced marriage makes it almost unwatchable. Joffrey (Jack Gleeson) doesn’t help matters by rather gleefully leading Sansa up the aisle, taking it upon himself to be chief sniggerer during the service, and then later reminding Sansa that because he’s the King (and also a sociopath) he can decide to rape her pretty much whenever he chooses, and no-one can stop him. Despite this, Sansa is now in a much safer position than she was before; being married to Tyrion makes her a technical Lannister, after all.

The Hound, who nabbed Arya Stark (Maisie Williams) last week while she was on the run from the Brotherhood without Banners, has decided that his best course of action will be to take her to her mother and brother at the Twins, where they have gone to attend the wedding of Edmure Tully (Tobias Menzies) to one of Walder Frey’s (David Bradley) many daughters. It seems as though Arya might actually make it back to her family after an entire season and a half wandering in the wilderness, which is great for her – but then again, do we really want wild, fierce Arya to be once again fenced in by family, duty and honour? That’s a resounding no.

Thankfully we were spared another half hour of riveting torture starring Theon Greyjoy (Alfie Allen), although the hapless sailor is presumably still languishing in a dungeon at the mercy of Iwan Rheon (who is conjectured to be Ramsay Snow, the rather unhinged Bolton bastard). Instead we were treated to a few more lengthy scenes involving Dany (Emilia Clarke), who was left out of last week’s ep. The Mother of Dragons considers procuring the services of a band of sell-swords called the Second Sons; things turn a little sour when two of the three leaders of said band plot to kill her. Luckily the third leader, Daario Naharis (Ed Skrein), takes it upon himself to chop the heads from the shoulders of his two comrades, and pledge himself to Dany. Why? Because he values beauty above all things – or so he claims. Also, it’s clear that he and Dany fancy the leather desert pants off one another.  Lovesick Jorah (Iain Glen) will not be best pleased.

For once, the Stannis section of this episode was one of the more exciting. Not only did we get a nice little scenelet between Stannis and Davos (Liam Cunningham), who is finally let out of his cell, but we also bore witness to another dastardly magical plan. Using the blood of Gendry (Joe Dempsie – Robert Baratheon’s bastard, and yet another second son of sorts), Stannis and Melisandre (Carice van Houten) conjure up a curse on three of their enemies: Joffrey Baratheon, Balon Greyjoy (Patrick Malahide) and of course, Robb Stark (Richard Madden). Now, Joffrey, most of us actively want dead. Balon, we couldn’t really give two hoots either way. But Robb? He’s the King in North, a son of old dead Ned, and (for some of us) our cuddly little fluff bunny. But we don’t believe in this ‘fire god’ and his magical baloney anyway, right? Right?

Game of Thrones, with these final scenes, you are really spoiling us. Like something out of Hitchcock’s The Birds, a Weirwood tree slowly filling with chattering ravens clues Sam in to the fact that a White Walker is closing in on him, Gilly (Hannah Murray) and the baby. A self-proclaimed coward, Sam finally finds a reason to be brave, and succeeds in stabbing the frozen zombie in the back with his strange obsidian blade, simultaneously saving all their lives and discovering the secret that may prove the undoing of the entire frozen zombie invasion: the White Walkers don’t like it when you stab ‘em with Dragonglass. They don’t like it at all.

Many GOT fans have turned sour towards Sam recently (he can be a bit whiny), but after this? After this Samwell Tarly, the pudgy blubbering coward from Horn Hill, is king of the zombie killers. Only two episodes now remain of Game of Thrones season three, and one of them is purported to be this season’s ‘event’ episode, the game-changer that will have us all taking to our social network of choice quicker than you can say ‘Winter is Extremely Nigh’. In the last two seasons, this has traditionally been episode number nine – which means that for next week, we’d all better start circling the wagons.

Gerard Butler has fulfilled his dreams. In Playing for Keeps, he gets to star as a former Celtic football – sorry, “soccer” – player, who has accomplished almost every accolade in the sport. And one of those just so happens to have been tackling Beckham. With this extraordinary achievement, you have an idea of the level of quality this film has to offer.

George Dryer (Butler) is a former sports star living on hard times by struggling to get a job and still getting over the separation from his ex-wife Stacie (Jessica Biel) and son Lewis (Noah Lomax). After spontaneously giving his son’s soccer team a few tips, he is soon persuaded into being their full-time coach. This leads to all sorts of doors opening, most notably numerous advances from “soccer moms”.  However, spending more time with his son and the possibility of getting back his wife is what really matters to him.

First of all, there’s nothing here we haven’t seen before; loveable loser father, cute responsible child, remarrying mother. Butler plays the ‘it’s-not-how-it-looks’ loser dad adequately enough; unfortunately the same can’t be said for remarrying mum Jessica Biel. She’s probably the blandest woman in Hollywood, and it’s only the energy of the other actresses, Judy Greer, Catherine Zeta-Jones (ironically looking like Victoria Beckham) and Uma Thurman, which create any sort of buzz. Although what Thurman is doing here is puzzling as it is worrying for her career.

Sadly such female talent doesn’t help when they are portrayed in such an old-fashioned light – desperate married and single mothers swooning over the handsome coach and jumping in the sack with him at will. That isn’t the main problem with this film though; a lot of the time situations occur which can’t be explained, the main one being Dennis Quaid’s wealthy, obnoxious character Carl throwing an extravagant party and giving him the keys to a Ferrari, all because he’s his son’s soccer coach.

Playing for Keeps is not particularly funny or romantic, instead made up of plenty of clichés and banality. Gerard Butler has a kick out of this role (with constant compliments from beautiful women and having a back-history of netting against England, why wouldn’t he?) but ends up scoring an own goal of a predictable tale of a father needing to sort out his life. If only someone had the right mind to sort out the script then the only laughable thing wouldn’t be how a Scottish person would constantly refer to football as “soccer”.

ill Smith is contemplating the lead role in Warner Bros. remake of Sam Peckinpah’s classic western The Wild Bunch, which is to be set in the modern-day.

Peckinpah’s bloody original saw a team of outlaws looking to take on one last heist job on the Texas-Mexico border. The film was set in 1913 as the Old West was disappearing into the dust.

The remake will, according to the Wrap, move the events to contemporary America where a former DEA agent forms a team of badasses to take on a Mexican drug cartel. Presumably Smith will play the DEA agent, though we’re sure Warner Bros. will assemble a big name cast around him.

The studio has been trying to get this one off the ground for years. Tony Scott was set to direct a Brian Helgeland (L.A Confidential) script before his death in 2012.  The studio is now looking for a new director and writer for the film.

If Smith signs on he will also be producing through his Overbrook Entertainment banner. Overlook have recently produced Smith starrer and M. Night Shyamalan directed sci-fi After Earth, which also stars Smith’s son Jaden. Smith’s company is also producing Sony’s Annie remake, starring Quvenzhane Wallis and Jamie Foxx.

Well let’s hope Smith can wipe his western slate clean after the ill received Wild Wild West. After Earth lands in UK cinemas on June 7.

The Great Gatsby, from the opening sequence until the finale, is undoubtedly a Baz Luhrmann film. Luhrmann’s signature style oozes from every scene, with all its glitz, glamour and gusto.

An adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel, The Great Gatsby is the story of Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), a naïve Midwesterner who moves to Long Island. Soon after his arrival, Carraway is befriended by his elusive neighbour, Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio), a wealthy eccentric with a penchant for wild parties who happens to be in love with Carraway’s married cousin, Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan). After enjoying the lavish and frivolous lifestyle offered to him by Gatsby, it’s not long before Carraway begins to see the cracks in Gatsby’s perfect existence.

The Great Gatsby is like one huge party from start to finish. It is absolutely jam-packed with stars, right down to the modernised soundtrack (a Lurhmann standard) that features Jay-Z, Florence and the Machine and Lana Del Rey. Although not one of Leonardo DiCaprio’s most challenging or groundbreaking roles, he is the star of the show alongside Carey Mulligan’s brilliant portrayal of Daisy Buchanan, a woman superficial to the very core. Meanwhile, Tobey Maguire, with his typical wide-eyed naivety, is really a non-character. Nick Carraway seems to be little more than a plot mechanism to bring the other characters together and keep the momentum going with the help of some cheesy narration.

With such a talented cast, it is a shame that Lurhmann didn’t abandon a little of the needless glitz to focus more on the characters and their complexities. DiCaprio, arguably one the greatest actors in Hollywood at the moment, was wasted in this film; his acting ability exceeds the demands of the role by miles. Perhaps to distract from the film’s lack of depth, Lurhmann goes heavy on the style. The swanky lifestyle of the Long Island elite is echoed in the vibrancy and spectacle of every shot, and the excessive use of sweeping slow-motion and stylish editing; not to mention the pointless use of 3D.

Gatsby is really a story about attainment – Jay Gatsby has devoted most of his life to attaining status and wealth, to the extent that the grit of 1920s New York is reduced to a blur as he speeds past in his bright yellow motor-car on route to the next exclusive party. The downfall of the film is that Lurhmann may have taken this superficiality too seriously – so much so that the film is lacking in depth and, in the end, it is difficult to feel much for any of the characters. Lurhmann’s Gatsby may be energetic, colourful and fun; but essentially it is a shallow film about shallow people.