The Wolf of Wall Street

When it comes to something being controversial, you’d be surprised how often that can be more beneficial to something rather than detract from it. While in the modern era, a person or company will get punished for doing something that could be dangerous or insanely unlawful, this has been a slow burning process (its even still not perfect with several companies getting away with unlawful or unhealthy work ethics), and when it comes to media, often times bad behavior or ‘controversial thoughts’ can be glorified and made to look much more approachable and enjoyable than it arguably was. Case in point, a very intense and morally corrupt environment, Wall Street, had plenty of exposure for its selfish and money-grubbing attitude, but what if a movie showed something similar in a less negative manner, which is what the film of discussion today, the 2013 film, The Wolf of Wall Street, did. This movie follows the story of Jordan Belfort (played by Leonardo DiCaprio), a man who wishes to make it big in Wall Street, and soon finds out that doing it cleanly is not effective (or satisfying) enough, which leads him down the road of rampant corruption, fraud and heavy drug usage to further escalate himself in his own business and in the world of the stock market. Becoming a highly successful business with his partner, Donnie (played by Jonah Hill), Jordan is slowly eaten alive by the environment and constant drug and sex to the point where it puts him on the watch-list of the FBI and the threat of being imprisoned for all his wrong doings. Based on the memoirs released by the real Jordan Belfort, The Wolf of Wall Street proved that a movie about self-destructive awful people laundering and scheming innocent people out of their money to use for their own means like prostitutes, drugs, and using people for life-sized darts could not only be a successful movie, but also do incredibly well at the Academy Awards (with seven nominations in total).

The movie, though definitely leaning towards the positive side in terms of people’s response to it, did still have its fair share of controversies, mainly targeted towards the morally grey actions of the characters, the strangely optimistic portrayal of this lifestyle, and its lack of care for the victims of the crimes as well as its lack of a filter on its extreme showing of sexual content, drug use, and its large amount of swearing. A majority of these attributes are elements that will turn people off to it as it is incredibly forward and open about not only showing them off, but making them look appealing to these crazed people, but one of the benefits is how it helps build an environment. This movie is directed by famed director, Martin Scorsese, who has a habit of putting in incredibly shocking and controversial elements into his film as a means of either shock tactics, driving home a message or political agenda, or just for the sake of it, and while it can often times be more of a hindrance and poorly utilized in his other films, here it does work out much better. Showing off the stock market business in this hyper-energized manner that makes it look like its run by frat boys and girls who somehow have the potential to be very savvy and good with words is a great idea, and it’s a job and environment that really benefits and arguably even needs this uncomfortable, dirty, and wrong tone to make it feel unfortunately authentic. Even if it does strangely point out some of the ‘’good’’ things that come with it, it does also show how its incredibly wrong and will lead to being broken and without clear direction, so it isn’t as one-sided as expected and it feels like it matches the tone of storytelling for screenwriter, Terrence Winter, who was attached to projects like Broadway Empire and The Sopranos, which are definitely more subdued in nature, but have a similarly anarchistic nature to them. On a technical level, a lot of the movie is well done; its well-directed, it has a great feel and tone, the actors have great deliveries, it’s a visually pleasing movie despite its content and while it doesn’t necessarily feel like it fully works as a biopic on a person, it does work as a biopic on an occupation and the pros and cons that come with that occupation. One of the downsides is that it is an overly long movie and one that doesn’t need to be either. Since its not really about plot or trying to go in depth into this man’s life, the experience of the movie is more important than the narrative, but it feels stretched out in parts where the rush of the film doesn’t have enough power to keep going for so long

Considering the number of movies and roles he had already been nominated for, this was the one that people were so certain Leo would get the Oscar win for. Even though it didn’t come to fruition (going to his performance in The Revenant in 2015), people still stand firm that this is the role that he should have got the win for. Leo is a popular name for Scorsese, used in at least five of his films, and considering what the role had to offer, Leo felt like the best choice for him. Leo’s acting style has always been very particular; never truly feeling like a separate character but rather Leo himself, trying to be older when he looks like he’s in his mid-twenties, and a LOT of shouting. To his credit in this role, half of his performance turns out pretty strong and it’s the part where he has to be quick, zippy, and convincing in his work. When he talks like an actual stockbroker, he has the passion and the clever energy to make him sound credible and like he knows what to say to make it sway to his favor. On the other side, anytime he has to be loud, obnoxious or give a speech, it’s the typical over-the-top annoying screechy Leo formula, which is just standard, dull, lacking personality and gets old really quick. Whether this is a consequence of this being his usual portrayal or from actual flaw with the movie is unclear but it is a flaw either way. Other cast members like Jonah Hill, Margot Robbie, Matthew McConaughey and Jon Bernthal are pretty good and works nicely in this crocked world where they’re allowed to be a little crazed and dramatic without feeling out of place. While everybody is good in their roles no matter how small and can manage the comedic and even the serious stuff okay, they are written as pretty flat roles, so it comes down to whether you like the actors or not if you will stomach them in this film.

The movie doesn’t hide its filthy nature and it thrives in being shocking and not shying away from visually detailing every dirty, graphic thing that it can (there are a lot of frontal sex scenes in this movie), but it is a movie that does somewhat require it. This environment, atmosphere and topic feel like its mocking and bringing to light what is wrong with being a part of that corrupt part of stock brokering, and with Scorsese’s ability to handle that kind of graphic content with at least a sense of understanding, it works out a lot better here because it feels a bit more intended. This isn’t always the case as after a while the constant showing of these shocking elements stop being shocking after the twentieth time and instead feel forced and unneeded. Another factor that contributes to things getting stale is how the movie feels dragged out and overly long, and this comes from adapting the original source. Being a set of memoirs, it could work in detailing out the main pieces (which this film does pretty decently), but it also limits what to show and how long you can show it for, and it’s clear that there are several scenes in this movie where the point could have been gotten across in the span of a few minutes, but is instead dragged out to usually over ten, needlessly stretching out conversations that don’t factor into anything outside of making it even wilder, crazier and more graphic.

The Wolf of Wall Street is about nothing but awful people doing awful things to good people and getting away with it in the most frat boy way possible, and for the most part, that actually works pretty well. It highlights the crazed lifestyle (while also mocking it) and bringing to light a person that, while not someone to aspire to, is still a nice insight into what it can be like going from a no-name to a big name in a business like that. Its well-directed and acted, and it utilizes its tone much stronger than other Scorsese films of its type. It isn’t a perfect film as it struggles with pacing, intriguing narrative and showcasing too much of something to the point where it stops being shocking, but there’s still some stuff worth checking out in this flick. Decide for yourself if this rich life is something you’d fancy and whether this film is worth all the sex, drugs and crazy shenanigans that come with it.