Disgusting Saudi-funded movie with little artistic value that leaves you in a dark place

Rating: 1/10 (1 May 2016)

I must say I am becoming tired of freak show Martin Scorsese who, like Germany's Werner Herzog or Quentin Tarantino, is a repugnant movie-maker on a drug-fueled psychological black-holes of perversion in need of deep therapy rather than funding to create "art".
The Wolf of Wall Street describes the real life of a small-time cheap criminal, Jordan Belfort, in his "career" as a stockbroker (telesales man) in New York City. Belfort's firm Stratton Oakmont made millions not by any skill or knowledge, but by criminality in a rampant corrupt fraud on Wall Street that ultimately led to his downfall. In 1999, Belford pleaded guilty to fraud and related crimes in Stratton Oakmont functioned as a boiler room that marketed penny stocks and defrauded investors with the "pump and dump" type of stock sales. This man cheated millions out of people's income and is now made into some kind of hero by Martin Scorsese. Belfort spent only 22 months in prison for his scams as part of an agreement under which he basically threw the people he had trained under the bus to take the blame for his own crimes.
Marking the fifth collaboration between master filmmaker Martin Scorsese and leading man Leaonardo DiCaprio, The Wolf of Wall Street is nothing less than a nightmarish portrait of the face behind greed culture, which manages to disgust, nauseate, offend and outright terrify – often all at once.
Even during the most disgustingly raunchy or absurdly bizarre sequences in the film (see: those soon-to-be-infamous quaaludes scenes), there is some sort of visual or auditory evidence that this is all being done with clear purpose and intent. This film pushes things way past the point of decency – past the point of envy or admiration but never believability – and that's the entire point of the commentary.
For some reason Leonardo DiCrapio's acting is being hailed as the best of his career. Well, that should tell us what his other acting skills are then. This is not acting skills. This is basically a camera left running to follow a moral abyss of venereal disease around at a drunken frat party.
This film like many of Scorsese's past ones, is a pointless display of soulless characters of little value. I would not be surprised if these characters, who seem quite similar in film after film, are just Martin Scorsese himself under different names and wrappings. This is not the work of a talent or genius: it's the mind of a freak.
The issue with "directors" like Scorsese is that they appear to be in a permanent place of suicidal depression and negativity to which they have to constantly pull their viewers into. You leave the film feeling very low, disgusted and pulled down. The Wolf of Wall Street is described as a black-comedy. Except there's nothing comical about it. It's really a marvel that this C-list director has managed to make a name for himself when there is so much genuine talent out there.
It's interesting to note that the Government of Malaysia, through "investments" from Saudi Arabia, funded the film. Why would a government of a deeply conservative Sunni state fund a film that loves to promote America in such a negative and repugnant light? For those not familiar with Malaysia as a whole, the country is merging deep into Sunni-Wahhabi Islamic anti-America hate rhetoric. This film will certainly help them promote that kind of mindset within their country and beyond.