The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

[Jack Nevada]

It would fit just like it fit the trailer.

Tbf they cut out all the black stuff for the trailer. 

[Killimano3]

Fantastic movie. Great performances, great writing, great directing, basically just great all around. Could have been a tad shorter maybe but it didn't really bother me so it's not that big of a deal

[lab276]

Despite being almost an hour longer than AH, it never drags like that one does. It actually caught me by surprise when it ended. A-

[Fancyarcher]

Jordan Belfort is (was) a stockbroker who founded the Stratton Oakmont. Belfort was eventually convicted of fraud crimes of which related to stark market manipulation. 

 

Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street features a heavily fictionalized account of Belfort’s life, going as far as to create characters that were obviously based off people in Belfort’s life (just with the names changed). The film is detailed account of Belfort’s rise as a stockbroker and eventual fall. That however doesn’t stop the Wolf of Wall Street from being a genuinely almost brilliant and entertaining movie that despite running three times long goes by at a seemingly nonstop pace.

 

One of the best things about The Wolf of Wall Street is its tone. Despite being based off a true story, the film for the first two hours does not take it very serious. There are many laughs to be found in the Wolf of Wall Street, from the crazy things that go on in the Stratton building, such as a bringing a monkey into the building or the constant use of drugged up scenes. In essence this movie is a black comedy. The Wolf of Wall Street is full of laughs and the movie relishes this.

 

The acting on a whole is absolutely fantastic. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Belfort as a charmer, but also in other ways also an idiot, who takes dumb risks. From breaking the fourth wall (directly speaking to the audience) to his long and interesting monologues about life and money, to his Bronx New York accent, and to his drugged up scenes, DiCaprio shines all the way through the movie. One of the best scenes in the entire movie (which is helped by DiCaprio’s performance) comes when Jordan is at a country club near his mansion and is talking to his private investigator who is telling him that his house phone has been wiretapped. Jordan, whom he and his partner Donnie Azoff (based off Danny Porush) have just taken a large dose of Qualuudes, which apparently didn’t work and didn’t ease them of the bad news they had gotten prior, however Jordan learns that the pills took much longer to kick in then he expected. Jordan is who trying to talk on the phone, is now drugged up, on the floor. The scene is a great showcase for DiCaprio’s acting talent, as it allows him to do things that he hasn’t done prior.

 

As Donnie Azoff, Hill plays what could possibly be his funniest role to date. As Belfort’s optimistic partner and right hand man, Hill is terrific. Hill transforms into the role completely, right down to his voice and look. Matthew McConaughey (in his brief appearance at the beginning) is hilarious as Mark Hanna, Belfort’s mentor, and the man who inspires him to start his stockbroker company. McConaughey is clearly having a good time, and despite his limited screentime, he chews up the scenery quite well. Kyle Chandler appears an FBI agent, and the scene where he confronts on DiCaprio on his boat, makes you wonder why this actor isn’t getting more lead roles. There are also female characters and actresses in this film, Cristin Milioti (in a small role) plays Belfort’s first wife Teresa. Milioti (in her small screentime) plays her part more serious than a lot of the cast does and brings more of a down to earth feel to the film. However much more noteworthy, in what could possibly be a star making role (or just a role that gives her work for a few years, before she disappearances into lesser movies) is Australian actress Margot Robbie as Belfort’s second wife Naomi Lapaglia. Robbie doing a very good Brooklyn accent, and plays the part of an alluring, beautiful but clearly intelligent woman well. Rob Reiner (in his first acting role in a movie in exactly a decade) also has a small role as Jordan Belfort’s father. Reiner plays the role of a man who is described as being “quite angry on the phone, but completely fine when he’s off it”, with some good emotion, and even has a noteworthy scene.

 

Scorsese direction is in full force as ever. The way he shows us scenes is just as revealing as this movie reveals to the audience just how corrupt the stockbroker system is. The script by Terence Winter (known for being the created of the acclaim series broadwalk empire, which is produced by Scorsese), is full of witty and sharp dialogue, and the plot moves at a brisk pace inspite of its long run now.

 

Also of note is that The Wolf of Wall Street is the first film to be shot entirely digitally. That is unfortunate because it signals the end of regular motion picture filmmaking as we know it. Despite this though, The Wolf of Wall Street is an animal of a movie, and is glorious entertaining and a film as a whole.

 

10 / 10

Edited January 23, 2014 by Fancyarcher

[mattmav45]

I must say, what a great weekend for movies I've had.  Her yesterday, and now the powerhouse Wolf of Wall Street.

 

Sure, it's bloated and is definitely excessive, but when portraying the exploits of the top 1%, not only is it expected, it's simply a lot of fun.  DiCaprio is already a master of his trade, but this is a career-defining performance.  Jonah Hill also only again shows that he has serious chops outside the comedy realm.

 

This character study/satire hybrid is the funniest film of the year, and just a 3-hour blast of debauchery and immorality.

 

Simply put, sit back and get bloated as fuck.

[DeeCee]

Fantastic film up until Brad gets arrested. Then it just drags. B+

[Goffe]

it is flawed, overlong and the eding is kinda underwhelming. I still enjoyed it a lot, the motherfucker amazing visuals and Jordan and Naomi's final fight were the standouts for me. B+ (85)

[Kevin Bacon]

The music choices in this were rather uninspired. In fact, I can't remember a single memorable musical moment in a Scorsese movie since the House of the Rising Sun scene in Casino.

 

This isn't computing with me, because The Departed had fuckin' rad music choices. "Shipping Up to Boston" in the opening credits, the "Comfortably Numb" cover in the love scene, and plenty of other songs I don't know by name.

 

Come to think of it, the flashback with the Nazi with his cheek blown off in Shutter Island had a really nice song too.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Seth Rollins

[Water Bottle]

B+

 

It was funny, it had it's moments, and it's the kind of movie Ayn Rand would approve of.

 

Still, it was a little too long and there were moments where it dragged. That I felt how long the movie was isn't a good sign and I never really connected with the movie on an emotional level.

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

This is the best film I saw last year, and one of the best films I've ever seen. I love nearly everything about it: from DiCaprio's insane acting to the hilarious dialogue (think about how many quotable lines there are in this film) all the way to Donnie's craziness. It was just an amazing experience.I doubt my comments here will convince anybody (since this is on page 10) but those who are suggesting that the film somehow glorifies Beltfor's cutthroat attitude to life should really watch it again. For starters, the movie makes it very clear what the repercussions are from living such a lifestyle. By the end of the movie, Beltfort loses his kid and his wife. In that one moment, Scoresese makes it clear how devastating Belfort's lifestyle has been to him. He's engaged in so much greed that he has become distant from his family (think, how few times does he talk to his kid in the film before this moment or consider how his wife doesn't want to make love to him anymore). Of course, Belfort tries to reclaim everything. He tries to have sex with his wife (her name escapes me at this moment) and he tries to take his kid away, but ultimately the sex he receives is more painful than erotic, and of course he almost kills his kid. There's no glorifying in that scene (which was arguably the best scene in the entire movie).I could point out other ways the movie wags its finger at the lifestyle Belfort has chosen, but for now, I'm content with this comment.Do I think the film's perfect? No, it's drags a little. But ultimately, it's so hilarious, so emotionally satisfying, and such an experience, that I'm bound to give it an A+

[Lordmandeep]

Beltfort is a well known person in the world of Fiance but the film did not glorift him..

 

This is not the Gordon Gecko of the future. 

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

I don't think Gecko was even glorified in Wall Street. That film made it clear through Charlie Sheen's character arch how bad their schemes were. However, people still celebrated Gecko (specifically on Wall Street), and they'll also celebrate Belfort. There's no control over that; the best that we can do to stop that is just explain where in the film Scorsese makes it clear that this isn't a guy worth cheering for.  

[Joel M]

There's no control over that; the best that we can do to stop that is just explain where in the film Scorsese makes it clear that this isn't a guy worth cheering for.  

 

I don't think that's necesarry. The movie's message is crystal clear, it just isn't dumbed down, obvious and preachy. As for Wall street douchebags it wouldn't make a difference to them if the movie was more obviously against Wall Street douchebags. They would have loved it anyway just like they loved 1987 Wall Street. But more importantly why Scorsese (or any of us) should care what people like them think of his movie?

[JohnnY]

I haven't found many people that share the same opinion as me so I decided to write a review.

 

First of all, I gotta praise Scorsese for holding my attention for 180 minutes, this is probably the longest movie I've ever seen that didn't feel boring or exhausting. Both the comedic and dramatic scenes work well and they didn't ruin the movie like it happens when some directors try to be funny and serious at the same time. Not hilarious, though, and the people in my showing also didn't react with lots of laughs.

 

For me it was fairly obvious that Scorsese doesn't condone Jordan behaviour, I have no idea why some people think his behaviour was glorified, it was heavily condemned, in my opinion. I just think the moral message wasn't enough, this could have been deeper and more meaningful and maybe that's just me complaining because I didn't get everything I wanted, but I did feel this movie just developed a far too simplistic moral lesson. Do movies need to have a message? No. But Wolf of Wall Street did try to deliver one.

 

Since the first few minutes, these stockbrokers are depicted as selfish individuals and the ending tries to show how that unjustifiable behaviour led to a self-destructive and lonely life. What bothered me is that it was too focused on the social and physical consequences of a materialistic life, never engaging in a philosophical point of view, we couldn't identify with the protagonist, not because we're not as rich and exaggerated as him, but because Scorsese wanted us to reprove him since the very beginning. This hedonistic behaviour is part of our daily life (in a minor scale, of course), but I felt this movie was trying to say something about the 1% only, and not about each one of us, it was about a bunch of jerks, not we hard working righteous people, only about those jerks. And no, it wouldn't be necessary to turn this into an overly-dramatic patronizing movie to achieve that.

 

There was one really subtle moment that I loved, it was when they arrested Jordan because Donnie collaborated with the FBI. At that moment he realized he was alone, he realized that greediness and narcissism turned his friends into self-centered people that would do anything to fulfill their own needs, even if that means ruining other people's lives. I wanted more of this, I wanted people to identify themselves with the characters and maybe reflect on this issue, but the movie was focused on a simplistic view of the problem.

 

What happens when you have non-stop orgies? You may get DSTs.

What happens when you incessantly drug youself? You may crash your car and hump innocent ladies.

 

Always like this, always making us feel that there is no message for us, only a message for rich assholes. And this really goes on with unnecessary "money is the ultimate goal" speeches and characters screaming "Fuck America!", making it even harder for the public to identify with the evil characters problems.

 

I really wanted that final scene of agent Denham riding the underground to make everyone wonder if the unfairness showed in this movie only happens because of us, because we idolize rich succesful people and desperately seek a life filled with momentary pleasure and useless material goods. Didn't Jordan suceed because other people were also doing anything to get rich? This issue is quickly discussed in the restaurant scene ("Don't all people wanna get rich?") but not properly developed, and in the end it just seemed like this is definitely not our fault, because the viewers are only judging the egotistical stockbrokers.

 

7/10, for wasted potential and touching people's feelings in a simplistic and non-engaging way.

Edited March 9, 2014 by JohnnY

[CoolioD1]

 

 

 

I really wanted that final scene of agent Denham riding the underground to make everyone wonder if the unfairness showed in this movie only happens because of us, because we idolize rich succesful people and desperately seek a life filled with momentary pleasure and useless material goods. Didn't Jordan suceed because other people were also doing anything to get rich? This issue is quickly discussed in the restaurant scene ("Don't all people wanna get rich?") but not properly developed, and in the end it just seemed like this is definitely not our fault, because the viewers are only judging the egotistical stockbrokers.

 

 

funny, i felt as if the final shot of the movie of the audience staring in wide-eyed wonder at jordan was scorsese pointing the blame at us very explicitly.

[JohnnY]

funny, i felt as if the final shot of the movie of the audience staring in wide-eyed wonder at jordan was scorsese pointing the blame at us very explicitly.

 

Maybe the movie did deliver what I wanted but for some reason I didn't feel it was enough.

[Omario]

 I dont see what the fuss is about though. Seemed like an average movie with some cool parts thrown in.

 

Leo and Jonah were amazing though. Incredible actors. 

 

B-

Edited March 17, 2014 by Omario

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

 

I haven't found many people that share the same opinion as me so I decided to write a review.

 

First of all, I gotta praise Scorsese for holding my attention for 180 minutes, this is probably the longest movie I've ever seen that didn't feel boring or exhausting. Both the comedic and dramatic scenes work well and they didn't ruin the movie like it happens when some directors try to be funny and serious at the same time. Not hilarious, though, and the people in my showing also didn't react with lots of laughs.

 

For me it was fairly obvious that Scorsese doesn't condone Jordan behaviour, I have no idea why some people think his behaviour was glorified, it was heavily condemned, in my opinion. I just think the moral message wasn't enough, this could have been deeper and more meaningful and maybe that's just me complaining because I didn't get everything I wanted, but I did feel this movie just developed a far too simplistic moral lesson. Do movies need to have a message? No. But Wolf of Wall Street did try to deliver one.

 

Since the first few minutes, these stockbrokers are depicted as selfish individuals and the ending tries to show how that unjustifiable behaviour led to a self-destructive and lonely life. What bothered me is that it was too focused on the social and physical consequences of a materialistic life, never engaging in a philosophical point of view, we couldn't identify with the protagonist, not because we're not as rich and exaggerated as him, but because Scorsese wanted us to reprove him since the very beginning. This hedonistic behaviour is part of our daily life (in a minor scale, of course), but I felt this movie was trying to say something about the 1% only, and not about each one of us, it was about a bunch of jerks, not we hard working righteous people, only about those jerks. And no, it wouldn't be necessary to turn this into an overly-dramatic patronizing movie to achieve that.

 

There was one really subtle moment that I loved, it was when they arrested Jordan because Donnie collaborated with the FBI. At that moment he realized he was alone, he realized that greediness and narcissism turned his friends into self-centered people that would do anything to fulfill their own needs, even if that means ruining other people's lives. I wanted more of this, I wanted people to identify themselves with the characters and maybe reflect on this issue, but the movie was focused on a simplistic view of the problem.

 

What happens when you have non-stop orgies? You may get DSTs.

What happens when you incessantly drug youself? You may crash your car and hump innocent ladies.

 

Always like this, always making us feel that there is no message for us, only a message for rich assholes. And this really goes on with unnecessary "money is the ultimate goal" speeches and characters screaming "Fuck America!", making it even harder for the public to identify with the evil characters problems.

 

I really wanted that final scene of agent Denham riding the underground to make everyone wonder if the unfairness showed in this movie only happens because of us, because we idolize rich succesful people and desperately seek a life filled with momentary pleasure and useless material goods. Didn't Jordan suceed because other people were also doing anything to get rich? This issue is quickly discussed in the restaurant scene ("Don't all people wanna get rich?") but not properly developed, and in the end it just seemed like this is definitely not our fault, because the viewers are only judging the egotistical stockbrokers.

 

7/10, for wasted potential and touching people's feelings in a simplistic and non-engaging way.

 

I'm with Coolio on this one, and not with you as much. The movie made it clear how our own greed for money helps the Belforts of the world thrive (IDK if we create them, but we certainly enable them). Outside of the last shot, and the scenes that you pointed to, there are other moments. Those commercials that you saw Belfort in where he was advertising how much money he could make people were perfect examples of Scorsese showing us how we're at least partially at fault. When you think about it, those commercials are like so many commercials and TV shows that we constantly see that tell us that we can make lots of money at a quick rate. And when we see those commercials in real life, we never question how ridiculous that assertion is. We never ask ourselves if the process that is being sold to us is illegal. Moreover, we never stop and think "you know, I always learned the I should work hard for my money, isn't it partially wrong for me to expect to make money at such a rate." Yet, most of us don't stop and think that way. We instead buy into that entire mindset. And the result is that we get duped or we create an environment where duping is possible. Scorsese brilliantly captures how ridiculous and baseless such commercials are when he has Belfort arrested in the middle of filming one. It's a moment where the ideal that is being created (the commercial) is broken up by the reality of this guy's ruthless lifestyle (the cops arresting him) and it shows us how this industry that we all think can help us get rich quickly is also big on duping us, and part of the blame for that belongs to us. I won't go through every other scene that helps develop this point, but I'll include another one, which occurs way earlier in the film. Do you remember how Donnie was right before he joined the company? Well, we never really saw his character. But we knew one thing about him: he was just an average guy. He lived in the same apartment complex as Belfort, which we are clearly told isn't for rich guys. And do you remember why he joins? Because Belfort shows him a check for a large amount. In other words, Belfort promises him a dream of making money at  a quick rate. And Donnie, who isn't rich or part of the 1%, grabs on to that dream as quickly as possible. In my mind, such a scene, the commercials, the last shot, and other examples show that Scorsese didn't shy away from the fact that average people can be just as corrupt and greedy as anybody on Wall Street and that this mentality only helps those on Wall Street pull of their schemes. In fact, Scorsese's willingness to show all of this is why I think this is a masterpiece. Another film about a greedy rich guy would have been a good movie at best. But I'm tired of those films. This had something new, something brilliant. I suggest you give it another shot. 

[DAR]

I thought after months of people talking about this movie that it couldn't be as good as people say. I thought DiCaprio and Hill performances would have been overhyped. Or that Scorsese would just be going through the motions. But holy fuck everyone was right. This was easily the best movie from last year and one of the funniest I've seen in sometime. How did this walk away empty handed at the Oscars, especially DiCaprio will be one of the great mysteries. This is a solid bonafide A+

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

I hope that when the dust settles, people look back on this film as a classic and one that critics overlooked. A 75% on Rotten Tomatoes? Really?