Mark Kermode reviews The Wolf of Wall Street

I so cool that people cant just say "i disagree" with a critic and not just resort to insult him personally

I love all these people claiming Mark is a "prude" when he openly says he has no problem with the morals of the film whatsoever. The film portrays a hateful lead character and makes no bones about how hideous he is, Mark's issue with the film is that it doesn't provide any reason to become invested in said character, the film has nothing to do other than portray this guy being horrible and hateful for 3 hours. It's not a matter of being a prude, it's a matter of being bored.

This guy is so eloquent and his vocabulary is awe inspiring

I did not despise Belfort, but I didn't necessarily like him, either. I definitely saw him as a complex character, and at times I enjoyed him and at times I was appalled. he was fascinating. I think the film takes a pretty ambivalent approach and just steps back and shows you exactly what happened and lets you judge it for yourself in hopes that you have the conscience to recognize that what they did was wrong. Also, every scene in the movie needs to be there because the film very intentionally portrays their excess IN excess, just like how Inherent Vice made the plot increasingly convoluted and confusing in order to mirror Doc's hazy, drug-addled mind.

Kermode and I have a 100% aligned viewpoint on movies so far. Would love to get a beer with this dude.

If I hosted a dinner party, Mark Kermode would definitely be invited. 

I've not seen fully eye to eye with a lot of Mark's reviews recently but I think he hits the nail on the head in this one. I do feel like their are a few too many parts of the film that come across as unnecessary.

Yes! I'd been having trouble elaborating on what my problems with the film were, but you crystallized my feelings perfectly, Mark

This film don't need a "victim representation" , because the victim is us the lawful citizens. To me this film is more of a "look what we have created (this monster)" rather than a depiction of a complex character. (that is not to say the character have no depth, just not the most important part) it is crucial to only have the view of the main character, for there's lots of people dislike him just because they are not the ones who made the money. the film puts us into his view, so we can question "if I am the guy, do I feel sorry about it ?"

This is why I love Kermode. He absolutely nails it. I loathed Scorceses treatment of that story as well as every character in it.

By the way, I urge people to watch Paul Thomas Anderson's recent interview with Scorsese and their shared first assistant director (for Inherent Vice and The Wolf Of Wall Street), and also mentioned briefly in Simon Mayo's interview with DiCaprio too for why they never really condemned Belfort's (or his colleagues') actions or tried to make you sympathise with them. Basically he said what I assumed - that he's not going to spell it out for you, and the inherent satirical nature of the film should be enough to carry the message. He's trying to only show the excess and greed and hedonism to provoke a reaction within the audience - some won't get it, but some will, and hopefully it will have a gradual effect on the public consciousness and we will see how it's not a healthy way for a culture to be like. If anything, even on paper it's a call to arms against the recklessness of Wall Street culture.

I think Mark got it pretty much spot on here, to me this film is just unnecessary, and to top that, I can't even enjoy it on entertainment value alone because it is so god damn long, and the whole time you are being reminded that this is alot like Goodfellas, just not at all as good.

I agree with Kermode, i felt a revulsion towards Jordan Belfort that i didn't even feel disposed to try to overcome...

Mark didn't like a film, get over it guys, in case you haven't been paying attention, quite a few critics have critiqued WOWS for the same things Mark has.

Scorsese has that amazing ability to make a 3 hour film feel like a 2 hour film. Every scene is interesting and brilliantly paced. If i learned anything from this film is this - don’t invest in Wall Street.

On the trailer alone and the hype around it, this is exactly how I thought i'd feel about the film. Catching 10 minutes of it when my parents were watching it further confirmed it.

I think the problem is that it was just a straight adaptation of Belfort’s autobiography; it was never meant to dive into the moral questions or critique the life of these people. I’d be interested to know why Kermode thinks we feel sympathetic for Henry Hill but not Belfort

If nothing else, this has probably set the record for the number of times the word "chauvinist" was used in a film review.

Agreed with everything you said. Great performances, 45 mins too long, hateable characters. Was well shot and the soundtrack was fine but overall not a masterpiece

"Omg wtf lol, stupid critiques always overanalyse these types of movies! You just don't get it, its a masterpiece! I'm going to hang myself if Leo doesn't win an Oscar!!!" ....... Seriously though. I'm SO happy that mark didn't just take part of the global circle jerk that has been surrounding this film, and actually addressed some of its major flaws.