Despicable Him

I usually reserve my posts for movies I like, so I debated writing about The Wolf of Wall Street. The exception I make is for films directed by someone I admire and Martin Scorsese, who directs this film, is prominent among directors I like, so here goes.

The movie is based on the true story of Jordan Belfort, a corrupt stockbroker who overindulged in drugs, sex and stealing other people’s money. I wish I could say that the movie is loosely based on this white collar criminal, because seeing the debauchery, the cruelty and downright insanity of that lifestyle, it’s hard to believe such things occur, again, with other people’s money; hard-working, middle class people’s money, but the movie is based on the autobiography of the same name. In an interview, Leonardo DiCaprio, who plays the Belfort criminal on screen, talked about: “This hedonistic lifestyle, this time period in Wall Street’s history where Jordan basically gave in to every carnal indulgence possible and was obsessed with greed and obsessed with himself essentially. He was so unflinching in his account of this time period and so honest and so unapologetic in this biography, I was compelled to play this character for a long period of time”.  And play him to the last detail is what he does, which kind of makes you wonder about this rich, model-dating, fast-living actor.

There are many disappointments here. First and foremost is the fact that Belfort, who only did 22 months prison for the theft (fraud) he committed, the truly despicable main character of this film, received a million dollars for the rights to make the film based on his autobiography and will receive royalties from the movie. I wish I hadn’t paid to see it! A warning would have been great as you entered this movie: “a portion of your ticket payment will be directed at keeping Belfort rich”. I don’t understand why seemingly progressive people, like Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio, who supposedly made this film as a “reflection of everything that’s wrong in today’s society” wouldn’t see how contradictory –if not downright stupid- this ends up being.

Jordan Belfort is not only the man who scammed millions off working class people, but also a man who allowed his co-workers to throw short people at a bulls eye as sport, and spoke of them in the most demeaning and dehumanizing way; a man who humiliated a female co-worker shaving her head (for money); who brought sex-workers to his office, on planes, in his home on bacchanals that rivaled the romans at their worst; who in his drug-addled state risked the life of his child and many others who crossed his path, on land and sea. In an interview, DiCaprio talks about how Belfort has turned his life around. Hmm. He still owes millions of dollars to the working class people he ripped off with his penny-stock trading scam, something that was part of his agreement to get a reduced sentence; he has neglected his payments, despite the money he is making. And he still is making money by telling people how to get rich. So much for change.

Trying to forget that incongruous aspect of this film, which is really, really hard to do, and looking at it from the perspective of the directing, acting, screen writing and all, this film is still a disappointment. The movie is three hours long, cut down from four, but it could easily have been cut down to two for all it had to say; it draws out scenes incessantly and unnecessarily and ends up being incredibly repetitive. If the point was to make us sick of seeing such depravity, that might have worked if the movie wasn’t so Hollywood-Life-of-the-Rich-and-Famous in style; extreme debauchery and cruelty have been used as a way to cause rejection from the audience, such as with Pier Paolo Pasolini’s anti-fascist film Saló, from which you leave downright sick, but The Wolf of Wall Street is not, I believe, having that effect on the audience, in particular, not the modern, young, male audience. From comments overheard and the guffaws, it would seem that males, quite used to pornography these days, are seeing past the sex in the movie and probably focusing on how fast the guy made his money, how great his yacht with a helipad was, how cool Leo dressed and how funny and fun the frat games and partying at that office were.

Nothing remarkable about the acting either.  Leo DiCaprio doesn't have the range to embody a complex character. He comes off much like a modern day Jay Gatsby, which he also played this year, but with no love for anyone but himself. Jonah Hill is still pretty much the Jonah Hill of Superbad, 21 Jump Street and the like, but raunchier. And one can’t help but think about the graphic sex scenes (the infamous candle scene) that these actors did not use body doubles for and wonder about how that differentiates them from the man who did them first time around and wrote about them, who is supposedly being criticized in the film (or is he?).

 If the point was to raise awareness about what happens on Wall Street, the swindling and the excess of Wall Street at the expense of millions of Americans, in the most realistic way possible, I have two words for the people who made the film: Inside Job. That movie has been made and won multiple awards.

Some say this is part of a trilogy of Martin’s, one that includes Good Fellows and Casino, both about the mob. It does share with those films the greed, the depravity, the criminality of an underworld that we wish did not exist, but does; it exposes it. However, the criminals in those movies were either killed or locked up for good. The most despicable one in this film is receiving royalties from the movie. What does that say about the film and our times?