The Wolf of Wall Street (Oscar list 8/9)

Hieronymus Bosch was a famous 16th century Renaissance painter who created large, busy imagery that conveyed religious and moral concepts. A typical Bosch painting can be compared somewhat to a Where’s Waldo poster, as they often seem busy, over populated and feature overwhelming amounts of detail. What does any of this have to do with Wolf of Wall Street? Actually nothing, but Hieronymus Bosch is the analogy Leonardo DiCaprio used to describe this Oscar nominated film. DiCaprio goes on to point toward the complexity, chaos and the debauchery depicted in many of Bosch’s paintings. In the middle of it all, sometimes you’ll see an emperor, a man who is the ruler of his own destiny. This is the layer of reality from which Wolf takes place. The Wolf of Wall Street is the true tale (honestly) of Jordan Belfort, the unscrupulous stock trader and salesman extraordinaire who became nearly untouchable as he built an empire around him. This sex-laden profanity driven 3-hour drug journey chronicles Jordan’s fight to save himself and the world he created around himself.

— Hieronymus Bosch, The Garden

Length

If you know anything about Martin Scorsese, you know that his movies typically have some length to them. Wolf does not disappoint in this regard. While the final version ended up being 2 hours, 59 minutes, I have read that they have cut about an hour’s worth of footage out of the movie already. Some long-winded directors in the past have dealt with this by splitting a movie into two parts to better tell the story (Kill Bill vol. I and vol. II); while others simply split mainstream (less artistic) films up to make more money (Twilight, the Hobbit, Harry Potter, Hunger Games). I have to applaud Martin in this record, because while the film is long, I never once found myself thinking, “when will this be over”. No, Wolf is a film that captures your attention and doesn’t want to let go. Just make sure you are well rested before you begin!

Language

If you haven’t already heard, Wolf of Wall Street has a few swears in it. Actually more than a few. The exact number seems to be debated depending on which source you consult, but the number that comes up the most is 506 uses of the F-world, which, divided over 2 hours 59 minutes is about 2.81 uses per minute.
Here is where I am going to be controversial. 506…567—whatever the real number is—the language in Wolf of Wall Street was used in a smart way, that it is genuine and true to the characters. It is not contrived or put on needlessly. There are many movies out there (Bad Boys II anyone) that have a lot of needless swearing, and it all seems artificial and fake (needlessly inserted into situations that didn’t need or warrant it). As if the writers had a quota to fill, many times it can feel that the language is carelessly and awkwardly inserted into sentence structures that don’t warrant it. This is where Wolf differs. I am not trying to justify anything, but what I am saying is that the use of profanity is genuine, real and true to the story.
500 is a large number, but I doubt you will sit there counting them as the movie plays on.

Acting

You cannot talk about this film without speaking about the career-transforming role by Jonah Hill. Reports state that Jonah so badly wanted the part, that he agreed to film it almost for free ($60,000 technically, but in Hollywood that basically is free work). The super bad star will never be judged the same as we saw him become his own, and shatter our prior type cast expectations of him. Next to Jonah, there is, of course, Leonardo, who many film critics are saying gave his best performance since Titanic.

— Jonah Hill

Moralistic implications.

“The Wolf of Wall Street isn’t a celebration of bad behavior: It’s a condemnation.”
Rene Rodriguez — Miami Herald

While Wolf may seem like an exciting yet empty comedy, its moral implications hopefully transcend its entertainment value. DiCaprio has said that Wolf is the first movie of his career to raise significant controversy. Some people no doubt are disappointed that Wolf didn’t show the other side of the story, the part about the people who were hurt and scammed out of hundreds, thousands and millions of dollars. But maybe that’s the point. Seeing an unchanged Jordan as the opulence, lavishness and swank is taken away, we learn about his character and of human nature. We are slapped in the face with the realization of the sad and perverse nature of human greed, savageness and desire for more.

“Scorsese has pulled off something tricky with Wolf: He’s given us a thrilling cautionary tale about a guy who never for a second seems the slightest bit sorry for what he’s done. If anything, he just had the bad luck to get caught.”
Chris Nashawaty — Entertainment Weekly

Conclusion

As a whole, taking all of the parts into account, Martin has created something amazing. The culmination of visual experience, the fantastic stylistic use of narration, the best acting in Leonardo’s career and Jonah’s Hill’s type-cast shattering role. Wolf of Wall Street is both entertaining and meaningful as it sheds light on the darkness of humanity. We see Jordan grew up, we learn to love him, we see him as a success story, and then the villain. Is Wolf a sex crazed drug journey through all the satisfactions of life? Yes, it is. But at the end, we look back and see that it was all for loss.
Wolf may win an Oscar, but it probably won’t, which is too bad, because this is a meticulously well crafted narrative of one man’s vain ambitions.

— Martin Scorsese