Frat Boy Greed with an x-tra large helping of 80's Excess and Female Body Parts

Rating: 1/10 (24 April 2014)

There are spoilers in this review.
First off, only to mention it in comparison due to thematic issues, Wall Street, directed by Oliver Stone in 1987 is a classic. It depicted an era's mindset (the 1980's)of excess, in this case, Wall Street, where lots and lots of money is the only objective. The movie's famous line "Greed is Good" became a catch phrase. In the plot, the older male antagonist has no conscience vs. the younger male protagonist, who does. It's a finely done character study of a brilliant and at the same time sleazy individual. Michael Douglas was surely best actor worthy in the famous role of Gordon Gekko. Charlie Sheen, his younger protégé, proved to be a very promising actor. Darryl Hannah, not much more than the female trophy, wasn't portrayed as overtly sexual. Done in a mature, suspenseful way with an 80's ' having the most toys wins' mentality, Wall Street is a great snapshot of the time. It's very much worth seeing on many levels. And, It's a MUST see if you've paid(wasted)$5.99 like I just did to watch The Wolf of Wall Street.
The Wolf of Wall Street directed by Martin Scorsese, is what Wall Street the movie could have been if done from an Animal House (movie) point of view . Not only that- but God Rest his Brilliant Comedic Soul, John Belushi would've been the perfect Jordan Belfort. The Wolf of Wall Street depicts to the point of making no sense, the crudeness and immaturity of Mr. Scorsese's typical New York Male psyche. Come on, Enough already ! These men see themselves as heroes for no reason other then they are working for a creepy know it all(Belfort)who makes them rich by 'teaching' them to be exactly like him for all the wrong reasons. Thus, The Wolf Wall Street has no conscience. No redemption. No morals. No " See? that is what can happen if.." plot. "No money is the root of all evil" subplot. Even the protagonist FBI agent who brings Belfort's Stratford Oakmont business down, leaves the audience thinking perhaps he too realizes that Belfort was actually on to something good. But, the worst criticism for me is the way women are depicted in this film. There is not one positive, not too sexual, intelligent, compassionate, smart woman character in it. But, there are oh so many hanger-ons, cheap gold-diggers, strippers, hookers and tramps with no morals to fulfill the (a-hemmm) important needs of Belfort's 'company'. I've had this issue with many of the women in his past films, even main characters(Sharon Stone for instance in Casino who was terrific in her doomed drugged tramp for money role)in his films. And if we want to go WAY back ? Jodie Foster as the child prostitute that served to fuel Travis Bickle's angst in the infamous Taxi Driver) But this one? Simply so obviously over the top. If The Wolf of Wall Street doesn't make you realize that Scorsese sees women in 1 way for 1 purpose in cinema then I guess nothing will. I can only say this regarding the 2013 Oscars. Mr. Scorsese, if you are wondering why you haven't won any lately? The Academy isn't stupid, your unnecessary Animal house views have caused them to 'Depart' the building. It's 2014 not 1984. The party's been over for a while now, clean up the mess .......and grow up. PS Leo your muse is showing , find a new director