Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street arrived in cinemas amidst a storm of awards buzz and Oscar nominations, elevating anticipation for what was already a highly anticipated Scorsese and DiCaprio collaboration. Even without the accolades, a new Scorsese film with a star-studded cast would naturally command attention. However, the film also landed with a degree of controversy, facing criticism for what some perceived as a glorification of the excessive lifestyle funded by Jordan Belfort’s illicit gains. This impression wasn’t helped by the studio’s decision to submit the film for Golden Globe consideration in the Musical/Comedy category – a move that, while likely strategic, inadvertently highlighted the film’s undeniably comedic and often unbelievable portrayal of rampant excess. Indeed, much of The Wolf of Wall Street unfolds with such outlandish and over-the-top scenarios that laughter becomes almost involuntary. It’s a film that, for a significant portion of its runtime, is undeniably engaging and even enchanting in the intoxicating rush of its narrative.
For the first two hours and more, the film sweeps the viewer along on a tide of vibrant energy and audacious behavior. In this respect, The Wolf of Wall Street functions effectively, immersing the audience in Belfort’s world and illustrating the seductive allure of ambition, wealth, and status. We witness firsthand how easily one can be seduced by the pursuit of success and material riches. To the film’s credit, it doesn’t explicitly endorse or glamorize Belfort’s lifestyle, but it certainly dedicates a significant amount of screen time to showcasing its enticing aspects, arguably without offering sufficient counterbalancing perspectives. This imbalance forms the crux of the critique leveled against the film.
Echoes of Goodfellas: Structure and Moral Ambiguity
The structural and thematic parallels between The Wolf of Wall Street and Scorsese’s earlier masterpiece, Goodfellas, are undeniable and frequently discussed. Anyone familiar with Goodfellas will recall its jarring opening scene: a brutal act of violence abruptly juxtaposed with Henry Hill’s now-iconic narration, “As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster,” set against the upbeat strains of Tony Bennett. This opening encapsulates the film’s essence – the simultaneous appeal and inherent cost of the gangster lifestyle, presented in a single, potent scene. The Wolf of Wall Street lacks a similar balancing act, and this absence is keenly felt. While one interpretation suggests the film aims to critique the inherent flaws within our financial systems and highlight the chasm separating the ultra-rich from the average person, particularly evident in its somewhat sobering final scenes, this message becomes somewhat diluted by the preceding hours of seemingly celebratory excess. If the intended point is a condemnation of the system, the film’s gleeful depiction of Belfort’s world often undermines this message, inadvertently suggesting, “If the system is broken, why not exploit it for personal gain?” This lack of a clear moral compass or explicit agenda creates a curious vacuum, which the film inadvertently fills with a sense of implied endorsement.
Comedy of Excess: Laughing All the Way to the Bank?
However, perhaps The Wolf of Wall Street should be viewed primarily through the lens of comedy. The infamous Quaalude scene, for instance, is not portrayed as horrifying or tragic, but rather as a darkly comedic and absurd spectacle. Similarly, the film’s depictions of excess and criminal behavior, while certainly not presented as morally righteous, lean heavily into the appealing aspects, often sidelining the consequences and the victims of Belfort’s schemes. Brief glimpses of an FBI agent on the subway feel perfunctory and fail to adequately counterbalance the overwhelming portrayal of opulent indulgence, further reinforcing the ambiguous message: “the system is rigged, so might as well get rich.” Setting aside the moral quandaries, The Wolf of Wall Street is undeniably a well-crafted film. Scorsese, in what could be seen as a recurring theme in awards season (along with American Hustle), demonstrates a clear stylistic debt to Goodfellas, directing with characteristic energy and dynamism. The soundtrack is expertly curated, as one expects from Scorsese, and the editing is sharp and propulsive, contributing to the film’s overall vibrancy.
DiCaprio’s Charisma and a Stellar Supporting Cast
Leonardo DiCaprio delivers a powerhouse performance in the lead role. While he may not delve into the character’s emotional depths or search for a hidden moral core, the film doesn’t demand it. Instead, DiCaprio embodies Belfort with captivating charisma and boundless energy, drawing the audience into his intoxicating world and serving as the film’s driving force. The supporting cast is equally impressive, populated with recognizable faces and established actors. The sheer number of familiar faces, however, never becomes distracting, a testament to the film’s immersive quality. Interestingly, some viewers might notice a casting overlap with HBO’s Boardwalk Empire, as was also the case with American Hustle, adding a layer of cinematic familiarity. Jonah Hill’s performance is intentionally over-the-top and comedic, a choice that works effectively within the film’s exaggerated tone, although his Oscar nomination in a competitive year might raise eyebrows for some.
Final Verdict: Entertaining Spectacle, Moral Vacuum
The Wolf of Wall Street has garnered widespread acclaim, and this praise is likely to persist through awards season and beyond. On a personal level, the film is undeniably enjoyable as a darkly funny, energetically told, and excessive true story. However, in direct comparison to Goodfellas, The Wolf of Wall Street arguably falls short in one crucial aspect: it lacks a discernible moral center. This absence extends to its characters and its overall message. While some might find the film’s seemingly nihilistic “it’s all corrupt anyway, so who cares?” message provocative or even liberating, the film’s almost gleeful embrace of this perspective might leave some viewers feeling uneasy, questioning the ethics of laughing along with such morally bankrupt behavior.
