# The Wolf of Wall Street



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

This movie is incredible, but not without controversy. The main character is a real psycho-or-sociopath, if you look up pics of the real Jordan Belfort, his eyes are fucking scary.

The movie however is mostly hilarious. Criticism of the film primarily revolves around the hyperreality and comic absurdity of the film, but frankly I think it's attempting to portray the world the Wolf lived in through his own twisted, drug addled, non-empathetic eyes. I am alarmed actually by one blogger,a college professor, who apparently isn't subtle enough to grasp that, and instead focuses on the debauchery of the film, as though Scorsese was recommending we behave like these people.

I couldn't stop laughing at the sequence that began at the country club and ends in his kitchen. Comic genius, I am not sure I knew DiCaprio was capable of such physical comedy.


----------



## downsowf (Sep 12, 2011)

I saw the movie this week and thought it was fantastic as well. 

It was hilarious. 

Jonah Hill and DiCaprio were pure gold together. 

I couldn't help but think that the movie, seen through the eyes of Belfort, could be described as the adventures of the most unhealthy Type 7 you could imagine who had no conception of "where to draw the line" and got away for the most part living in excess.


----------



## Emerald Legend (Jul 13, 2010)

The book is probably worse. He comes off as a materialistic douchebag speed-freak salesman womaniser etc.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

I thought the movie itself was pretty good as far as Hollywood movies go, and I thought the country club/kitchen scene was fucking hilarious and original. But I wasn't really sure where the movie stood on the line of abhorring this guy and everything he stands for, vs. being envious of his lifestyle. It seemed more like a combination of both to me, especially considering it's based on something Belfort wrote himself, and he is going to make a boatload of cash from this movie.

Also, did the movie have to be quite so misogynist? I don't mean the characters, I mean the movie itself. None of the female characters were developed AT ALL, to the extent that when Belfort's first wife divorced him I was like "I know I SHOULD be feeling something about this scene, but I don't, because his wife has been portrayed as a stand-in stock relationship character, not a person." Not only did this movie not pass the Bechdel test by having two women have a conversation about something other than a man...there were not even two women having a conversation with each other at all in this movie! And let's not even get into the completely unremarked-upon date-rape scene between him and his wife (he keeps fucking her even though she's saying no).

Plus there could have been fewer party montages and "look how wild we are!" bullshit. It was kind of like listening for three hours to that one annoying friend that everyone has who just goes on and on and on about their "crazy" exploits and how awesome they are. It got boring after a while. There's other angles of Belfort's story that could have been explored more deeply rather than just the "hookers and blow" standard stuff that is way oversaturated in the media anyway.

I think most of these problems could have been solved if the movie was presented in third person instead of first person. There's really no reason to use a voiceover if your protagonist has absolutely nothing interesting to say.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

I was actually thinking of going to see this tonight after work. I'll report back if I do see it. it does look very interesting.


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

I just saw it tonight. That movie is fucking insane. Powerful, provocative, and completely over the top in the best ways possible. 

I agree that he was a total psycopath though, and yeah his eyes are pretty fucking creepy. The movie actually kind of reminded me of American Psycho. SUPER unhealthy 738 Sx/So.

And yeah there was alot of misogyny going on, and some of those scenes like the date rape scene and the scene where he hits hit wife were pretty hard to watch, but I think they served to focus on how completely fucked up the guy is. 

There was so many good scenes in that movie though, I wasn't expecting it to be that funny. I was laughing throughout most of the movie, and that's pretty rare for me even with comedies. Country club scene was fucking hilarious. So was the storm scene where they're about to die and he's screaming for them to grab the quaaludes. 

Being in sales, familiar with stocks, as well as partying and excess, I actually could appreciate it in more interesting ways too. Overall, a solid movie. Dicaprio at his finest, and possibly his best role of his career. Easily one of my favorite films. Solid from start to finish.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Emerald Legend said:


> The book is probably worse. He comes off as a materialistic douchebag speed-freak salesman womaniser etc.


Im fairly certain he is either a psycho or sociopath...they all aren't mass murderers, and they are commonly CEOs of companies.

I have a hunch Scorsese read the book and lol'd at what a self congratulatory db this piece is, and then got a brilliant idea to make a funny film out of it. It would be so disturbing if it had been done seriously.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

thismustbetheplace said:


> I thought the movie itself was pretty good as far as Hollywood movies go, and I thought the country club/kitchen scene was fucking hilarious and original. But I wasn't really sure where the movie stood on the line of abhorring this guy and everything he stands for, vs. being envious of his lifestyle. It seemed more like a combination of both to me, especially considering it's based on something Belfort wrote himself, and he is going to make a boatload of cash from this movie.
> 
> Also, did the movie have to be quite so misogynist? I don't mean the characters, I mean the movie itself. None of the female characters were developed AT ALL, to the extent that when Belfort's first wife divorced him I was like "I know I SHOULD be feeling something about this scene, but I don't, because his wife has been portrayed as a stand-in stock relationship character, not a person." Not only did this movie not pass the Bechdel test by having two women have a conversation about something other than a man...there were not even two women having a conversation with each other at all in this movie! And let's not even get into the completely unremarked-upon date-rape scene between him and his wife (he keeps fucking her even though she's saying no).
> 
> ...


The key to your understanding why it was so misogynist and date rape as well as loads of other things went unacknowledged is BECAUSE IT IS TOLD IN FIRST PERSON, THROUGH THE EYES OF THE SOCIOPATH.

See, to Belfort, women aren't human, no one particularly matters, and everything is kind of a parody of real life. I once read that being a psychopath is like watching real life from a distance, like it's a movie, there's no feels, that's part of why they get bored so easily.

That's why this film is controversial. Some people think it should have a more explicit message. It does have a.message though. He fails the end, hits rock bottom, almost kills himself, gets into a wreck with his daughter, rapes and beats his wife and goes to prison.


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

Agreed @fourtines The man is a fucking sociopath. That's what made the movie more disturbing for me, because it's actually more of a comedy than a drama. I really thought that was a powerful contrast, using humor to highlight a very dark reality. It's an amazing dichotomy that Scorsese pulled off brilliantly.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Scorsese is an artist. His films are mainstream but yet have the artistry to refrain from spoon feeding a moral to the story. The film is rated R. Children should not be watching it without parental guidance. He has no responsibility to spell out any more slowly that it's first person narrative from the eyes of an abnormal person.

I personally felt "let down " of the end, the sort of crash of reality Belfort experienced. And I thought the final scene was depressing and ominous, like yeah see the wolf is still out there. I thought he illustrated well enough too how society itself enabled Jordan Belfort.

I loved the humor, I wanted to watch it again the next day. Maybe the humor isn't some people's taste so it wears thin for them.

I just felt it was obvious to anyone with a normal EQ that Jordan's narrative is crucial to seeing how sick he is, ranting about people's ugly wives and such, with all the obliviousness of a narcissistic person or someone who has aspd.

I wonder why some people think it should be an after school special. Taste? Function order? Social conditioning? Taking every work of art to be a literal preaching of the values displayed?

Remember folks, this is the same man who directed Taxi Driver.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

It was a pretty good movie overall. Basically a way more dramatic Wall Street (Gordon Gekko).


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

fourtines said:


> I personally felt "let down " of the end, the sort of crash of reality Belfort experienced. And I thought the final scene was depressing and ominous, like yeah see the wolf is still out there. I thought he illustrated well enough too how society itself enabled Jordan Belfort.
> 
> Remember folks, this is the same man who directed Taxi Driver.


The wolves will always be out there. There are wolves right now living that lifestyle while America is suffering through the greatest economical hardship since The Great Depression. Technically in 2008 it was a recession just as it was in 1987. The wolf is out there right now. The wolf will never die. 

That's what makes that movie scary to me. It's a comedy, but I've met people and ran in circles that were not far off from that lifestyle, You can think it fiction if that will ease your mind, but those people exist and I've seen them first hand. 

That being said, the only message I got from the movie was the best way to sell a pen.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

fourtines said:


> The key to your understanding why it was so misogynist and date rape as well as loads of other things went unacknowledged is BECAUSE IT IS TOLD IN FIRST PERSON, THROUGH THE EYES OF THE SOCIOPATH.
> 
> See, to Belfort, women aren't human, no one particularly matters, and everything is kind of a parody of real life. I once read that being a psychopath is like watching real life from a distance, like it's a movie, there's no feels, that's part of why they get bored so easily.
> 
> That's why this film is controversial. Some people think it should have a more explicit message. It does have a.message though. He fails the end, hits rock bottom, almost kills himself, gets into a wreck with his daughter, rapes and beats his wife and goes to prison.


...and then the prison turns out to be basically a 3 year vacation, and he has another comeback and resumes his career once more. And his wife and children are never shown or mentioned again in the movie.

And I didn't mean the movie didn't acknowledge it as date rape, I mean nobody did. Nobody in the audience seemed to be offended and it wasn't mentioned in any of the reviews of the movie I read.

I get what Scorcese was trying to do, especially with the closing shot of the "average Americans" in the audience, but I just don't really get why this story needed to be told, or especially, why it needed to be told in the first person perspective of a person who was empty inside. Everyone in America already knows that Wall Street is full of hard-partying psychopaths who pillage and steal from everyone else and get away with it.

Plus there was way too much partying-glorification and bro-bonding compared to what little bit of consequences and bad things he threw in there.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

fourtines said:


> I just felt it was obvious to anyone with a normal EQ that Jordan's narrative is crucial to seeing how sick he is, ranting about people's ugly wives and such, with all the obliviousness of a narcissistic person or someone who has aspd.
> 
> I wonder why some people think it should be an after school special. Taste? Function order? Social conditioning? Taking every work of art to be a literal preaching of the values displayed?


I never said it should be an after school special. I guess I just didn't particularly feel like watching the adventures of a sociopath for 3 hours.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

It worked because it was true yet illustrated his depredations through humor. Being too moralistic makes some people feel as if they're being beaten over the head with a brick.


----------



## nádej (Feb 27, 2011)

Ugh I hated it.

I think I understand on an intellectual level what the movie is supposed to be, and why it is supposed to work, but...no thank you. I didn't think it was funny; wasn't interested in the characters at all; it dragged on way too long for me; I hated the portrayal of women (I get that they are seen as one-dimensional due to the movie being told via the perspective of someone who likely saw women as one-dimensional and more objects than anything else, but I can still hate that); and and and. On so many levels I just couldn't get on board, though I really wanted to. I love the idea of playing up something despicable in a totally straightforward way so that the audience comes to the conclusion on their own that the thing is despicable, and I think to some extent that was done here, but I don't think it was done well.

It's really wild to me that the movie is getting as much praise as it is.



Also, this article is pretty spot-on, in my opinion: http://bitchmagazine.org/post/women...treet-movie-review-feminist-leonardo-dicaprio


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

nádej said:


> It's really wild to me that the movie is getting as much praise as it is.


Because in most cases, it's pretty accurate on how things were\are on Wall Street.


----------



## Lemxn (Aug 17, 2013)

I saw this one last week. (I'm fan of Dicaprio movies). I reallly enjoyed it! It even last like three hours but doesn't have a single boring moment. It didn't have a "final" of course because it based in a real story.


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

nádej said:


> Ugh I hated it.
> 
> I think I understand on an intellectual level what the movie is supposed to be, and why it is supposed to work, but...no thank you. I didn't think it was funny; wasn't interested in the characters at all; it dragged on way too long for me; *I hated the portrayal of women (I get that they are seen as one-dimensional due to the movie being told via the perspective of someone who likely saw women as one-dimensional and more objects than anything else, but I can still hate that);* and and and. On so many levels I just couldn't get on board, though I really wanted to. I love the idea of playing up something despicable in a totally straightforward way so that the audience comes to the conclusion on their own that the thing is despicable, and I think to some extent that was done here, but I don't think it was done well.
> 
> ...


People see that as entertainment, especially men, for women to be treated like second class citizens in tv shows and movies under the facade that it shows what people 'used to be like'. That's why Mad Men was/is probably so popular, because alot of men probably desire to live like that and treat women like shit like the good ol' days. That's also why Scorsese movies do so well at the box office.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> People see that as entertainment, especially men, for women to be treated like second class citizens in tv shows and movies under the facade that it shows what people 'used to be like'. That's why Mad Men was/is probably so popular, because alot of men probably desire to live like that and treat women like shit like the good ol' days. That's also why Scorsese movies do so well at the box office.


I think it's a bit more than that. I don't think men specifically watch it to see how women are treated. I think there's a lot more elements to it. I will admit it's cool fantasizing about how things were back then. Usually my friends and I do it about old muscle cars and lax enforcement and penalties of other laws like drunk driving and racing that were prevalent back in those days. Basically being able to have a nice muscle car for somewhat cheap and being able to hit up the bar and drink a few beers without worrying about a drunk driving. Also, being able to race a little bit and not literally face jail time.


----------



## Doom (Oct 25, 2010)

Haven't seen it yet but I do enjoy Scorcese's movies, shame that the SJW idiots have already got to it.


----------



## Subtle Murder (May 19, 2012)

fourtines said:


> I couldn't stop laughing at the sequence that began at the country club and ends in his kitchen. Comic genius, I am not sure I knew DiCaprio was capable of such physical comedy.


That has got to be one of the best scenes in a movie that I have seen recently. It was brilliant and horrible at the same time, and DiCaprio did such an amazing job of getting that across.


----------



## The Scorched Earth (May 17, 2010)

I loved it. The most delirious and hilarious film I've seen in recent memory. Probably Leo DiCaprio's best work yet, after Django Unchained.


----------



## miss. potato (Jul 10, 2013)

Yeah...all I heard was that the f-bomb was used over 500 times in like 3 hours. That basically means people were swearing every minute, you literally couldn't show a clip of it to your dying grandma without possibly killing her. I'm good...I'm good..


----------

