3 hrs of Scorsese getting no where.

Rating: 2/10 (23 June 2014)

I don't understand how the overall rating for this film is 8.3/10 when most of the reviews I read gave it a 1.
I would have given this movie a 4 out of 10 (below average). But I gave it a 2 because its a Martin Scorsese's film and the expectations were pretty high and he did a very sub-par job. If I had to give him a benefit of doubt, I would say this is Scorsese trying to tell the world about life on wall st and unable to come up with a succinct story line.
I don't like spoilers. So I read the reviews after watching the movie. Many folks were turned-off with the endless debauchery presented in the especially long film. I think Scorsese tried to show us the reality of wealthy low lives on wall st, where most folks go from being middle class to uber wealthy and don't know how to handle life, on the upper end of the wealth spectrum. But he din't have to over-do it to drive home the point. To be fair to him, the over-the-top portrayals are a reality on wall st. I know this from close observation and a lot of ex-wall st folks on these reviews board support my view. A lot (not all) of people on wall st have scant regard for fellow humans.
A real low is, Scorsese not even making an effort to explain the fraud happening in the script, even though he had DiCap doing a voice over narrative. Worse, he insults our intellect at one point by telling us (through Belfort's character) that we won't get it and that its irrelevant. So, he wouldn't go into details. Again to be fair, he does show (without explaining much) Belfort smooth talking an investor into putting money on some penny stock. These stocks (called pink slips) are very risky investments. Esp. since all the risk is on the buyer and the broker makes extremely high commissions. He also shows us how Belfort takes a shoe making company to IPO and makes a lot of money off of the deal, including buying the stock for himself which is a federal securities violation. (the moral hazard!.
One has to understand that this story relates to the times (the 90s) when investment firms on wall st took any and every .com companies to IPO. Hilariously some of these .com companies had no real product or service and brought no real value to the market place. Gullible investors bought into the hype generated by selfish brokers and lost their fortunes.
For folks who are not aware of the schemes on wall st, this movie would seem like a reckless and boring frat party.
I was not looking for any moral take home points. We don't need Scorsese to school us. But if you make a movie about a 'wolf' on the wall st, please explain to us how exactly the character fits that narrative along with a clear explanation of the crimes.
My main complaint is the length of the movie and the needless and endless sex and drug filled crazy scenes. Waste of time.