The Wolf of Wall Street

Start with the title.  The animal metaphor runs throughout the movie.  Where is the humanity here?  That is the whole point, is it not?  A story detailing a hero's showdown with a villain is too easy.  The FBI agent would have been the hero if the adaptation had been in other hands.  Here he is shown as just another cog in the machine, waiting for orders from above and riding the subway home.

The likeness to Goodfellas is obviously intentional.  Who is more gangster?  Except for a couple instances, Goodfellas "wins" in the area of violence.  Otherwise, the difference in profession is in name only.  Even Belfort's "captains" start out as small time hoods.  No one had to be dangled from the top of a building for the comparison to be valid.

Sometimes the general response to a movie can shape one's perception.  The more objections there are, the more I am convinced that Wolf is a brilliantly constructed movie.  Whereas Goodfellas had a bleak ending, with Henry Hill's life uprooted and the threat of revenge hanging over his head, Belfort's ending suggests something different.  Some people have qualms with that last five minutes, as if movies are supposed to follow the old Hays Code (1930, though it was not really enforced until Joseph Breen took over in 1934, which is why movies released before 1934 are considered to be pre-code).  If the evildoer does not receive appropriate comeuppance, it is an offense to society.  Or, as the Hays Code enumerates, "the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin."  Even in 2014 people object to being told that crime pays.  I am reminded of the classic episode of The Simpsons where Bart learns that "crime doesn't pay" only to observe the line of limos owned by Fat Tony.  The main indictment in Wolf is not Belfort at all, but the system that propagates, encourages, rewards, and protects people like Belfort.  Some viewers evidently do not see it that way, but to me it is obvious.

The impetus for Scorsese to make this movie had to be The Great Recession of 2008 and its aftermath, which made the literally dated events relevant again.  The parallel between Belfort selling worthless penny stocks to lower class people and the bankers who sold mortgages to people who could not really afford them in the early 2000s is striking.  The lack of prosecutions by the Justice Department in the wake of the recession really point to the difficulty in prosecuting white collar crime cases of stocks and investments, even with the added regulations of Sarbanes-Oxley (2002).  Paper or digital trails do not seem to be enough, perhaps because much of the trail can be eliminated with the click of a button.  Consider also the top lawyers that millionaires can afford, and the case becomes very difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.  Better for the government to settle than embark on a costly prosecution.  These defendants have the bargaining chip of many millions of dollars, enabling them to buy their way out of jail time.  If that is not enough, then rat out your friends.  All of this assumes that the government has some kind of case.  The government did not have much on Belfort until the the flukey Florida bust, when they found someone willing to testify against him.  Eyewitnesses must be hard to come by.

While Goodfellas is also memorable for its music, the music in Wolf did not make much of an impression on me.  Or rather, it failed to enhance the viewing experience.  Maybe I need a second viewing to better appreciate it.  When I say music, I mean the multitude of songs that are used throughout the movie.  The songs reflect several genres, and their use is often anachronistic.  As far as I noticed Wolf does not have a score.  What it does have is "The Money Chant," which is almost as memorable as "Layla" was in Goodfellas.  By the way, "The Money Chant" appears to be a new creation from frequent Scorsese collaborator Robbie Robertson.

The Wolf of Wall Street is not the first movie with that title.  Go all the way back to 1929 for the first version.  Leonard Maltin provides plenty of details on his blog

Wolf has only played for about ten days, but already many critics have weighed in above and beyond "review" critiques:

Andrew O'Hehir-"The War over Wolf of Wall Street."  Plenty of links herein.

David Haglund-"How Accurate Is The Wolf of Wall Street?"-Not that it really matters for the purposes of the movie, but this is an interesting rundown of the real people and factual events.