The debate over what constitutes a Great American Novel never ends, but The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald always finds his way into this conversation. It may be tempting to simply reduce the author's work to a permanent depiction of the Roaring Twenties, but Fitzgerald's book also cuts through the illusions while maintaining the enthralling mystery surrounding its titular figure. After the fog clears, and both Jay Gatsby and his (only) friend Nick Carraway are revealed for who they are, what remains is a deep sense of emptiness. Don't get me wrong: The Great Gatsby is a story for the inherent hollowness of the spectacle, the obscene richness and the relationships of convenience that have the illusion of depth. However, once we're confronted with the rare flashes of moving honesty in a story so terribly tragic, the empty lure of the green light at the heart of the novel takes on a terribly haunting glow.

Surely such a complex, beloved book has spawned at least one screen adaptation that comes close to capturing its elusive essence...right? Well, there are no easy answers, because some film renditions of The Great Gatsby are really worth it, despite their fundamental flaws. On the most recent (and popular) rendition is Baz Luhrmann's 2013 version with Leonardo DiCaprio and Tobey Maguire, which has been criticized for losing itself in the loud hedonism it is meant to critique, leaving little room for subtlety. I would argue that Luhrmann carves out enough space for tense, internal momentsespecially as he explores the crumbling myths that surround Gatsby when he is on the verge of losing everything. That said, the film doesn't come close to doing justice to the complexity of the source material, though it never pretends to be something it's not.

If we consider Rotten Tomatoes as a metric for determining the best Gatsby adaptation, then The Great Gatsby from 1926 is the winner with 52% score. Yes, it's the highest aggregate ever, and every other direct film adaptation of the novel — as opposed to loosely inspired ones — has a "rotten" platform score.

Before we talk about the 1926 version, let's touch on another one a well-remembered adaptation of The Great Gatsby that was released in 1974, starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow taking on the respective roles of Gatsby and Daisy Buchanan. Director Jack Clayton stayed true to Fitzgerald's novel (too faithful to the point of bleakness), bringing memorable excerpts to life with dedicated performances and vibrant costuming. But despite those earnest efforts, which included a competent screenplay by Francis Ford Coppola, the film fails to capture the hypnotic power of the themes that still fascinate us, resulting in an adaptation that never dares to find its footing.

Returning to the silent play of 1926 by Herbert Brannon ("Peter Pan", "Neptune's Daughter"), of course we have to admit only how much departs from the original novel. Despite being a direct (and ostensibly first) film adaptation of the novel, it changes key aspects of the central characters, including Daisy's (Lois Wilson) motivations for rejecting Gatsby (Warner Baxter) and the underlying circumstances surrounding the fatal car accident to the end. However, the basic rhythms of the story are retained, with young Nick Carraway (Neil Hamilton) gradually seeing Gatsby for what he really is, and also recognizing the callous cruelty and hypocrisy of the Buchanans. However, in a rather odd departure from the novel, the film ends with an idyllic shot of the Buchanans and their newborn, with no lasting hints of the tragedy they directly contributed to (or the man at the center of it).

The reason Brannon's film rarely comes up in conversations about Gatsby is because it is now considered lost media, and only the trailer and a few short clips from the film are available for viewing. It's also worth noting that Fitzgerald loathed this adaptation, describing it's "rotten, horrible and terrible," though he didn't elaborate why. In case your search for a serviceable film adaptation of The Great Gatsby remains unsatisfactory, you can always give Robert Markowitz's 2000 version a fair shot. It may not be much, but the film stars Paul Rudd in an impressive turn as Carraway, which is, perhaps, his only redeeming quality.