Talk:The Last Tycoon

Comments

This entry is seriously faulty, particularly in its summary of the plot; it contains many errors, omits major sequences, appears ignorant of Fitzgerald's well-estabished plot line, and, most extraordinarily, seems to think the book ends, or would have ended, with Stahr marrying Celia when in fact it would have ended with Stahr's death in a plane crash, with a coda concerning children who plunder the wreckage. Total rewriting is urgently called for. (2006)

This entry is god-awful. Reads like a seventh-grader wrote it. (2007)

Agreed. (2008)

I love the way that 7th grader redirected to a title that's not even officially recognised (or officially used) and then states - without citation - that it's generally agreed that FSG actually wanted another title. We might as well redirect again to 'Revenge of the Killer Tomatoes' and make the same claim. Can no field expert clean this up? We saw the movie yesterday and came here - typically in vain - to find out more. Good old Wikipedia.

An embarrassingly bad entry

Even in its unfinished state, The Last Tycoon is regarded by many as Fitzgerald's masterpiece. It deserves a first-rate article. This one is really, really bad. Its interpretations verge on the frivolous and many of the paragraphs appear to have been written by someone for whom English is not his or her native language. 96.232.28.15 (talk) 16:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Fix

OK, so after 3 years we may now have a more decent article. i have not read the book, cannot vouch for the summary provided here, but it was poorly structured and didnt seem to describe the overall story very well. I think it can safely be removed, and a better summary written in good time. unfortunately, that wont be me.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

'

Title

Per WP:Name, this article should be The Last Tycoon, as that is the title under which it is best known. The comment in the article itself that justifies the longer title isn't even cited.128.151.71.16 (talk) 20:02, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 17 November 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move the page as requested per WP:Name. (non-admin closure) -- Dane2007 ^talk 22:17, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

---

The Love of the Last Tycoon → The Last Tycoon – Novel only has one edition using this title. Most editions refer to is simply as "The Last Tycoon", and that is the name by which it is best known. Per WP:Name, this article should move. Rhindle The Red (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

• Support move per nominator. (Why did it take 3 years for this request to be made?)  ONR  (talk)  03:57, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support, and move The Last Tycoon to The Last Tycoon (disambiguation). The novel is definitely the primary topic in terms of significance, and the page views point to it and it's adaptation being far away the most popular topics as well.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:15, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose original proposal. Statistics prove that the novel is not the primary topic. In fact, it is less viewed than the upcoming web series. Instead, move to "The Last Tycoon (novel)" instead and have the dabpage retain the base title. George Ho (talk) 05:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Benet's Critical Response to The Last Tycoon

As the article states, Edmund Wilson completed the last chapters of The Last Tycoon using Fitzgerald's notes, roughed-out scenes and outline. The novel was published in 1941, and Stephen Vincent Benet wrote a famous review championing it for The Saturday Review of Literature. In part, he wrote: "The Last Tycoon shows what a really first-class writer can do...it shows the full powers of its author at their height and at their best... The evidence is in. You can take your hats off now, gentlemen, and I think perhaps you had better. This is not a legend, this is a reputation--and it may well be one of the most secure of our time." The Saturday Review of Literature, 1941 Younggoldchip (talk) 16:09, 5 June 2021 (UTC)