Didn't deserve any of the acclaim it got

Rating: 1/10 (17 April 2015)

This movie is comparable to a project x, or other teenage party flick. I am appalled that my generation, the generation of the future, considers this movie more deserving than the brilliant masterpiece, "12 Years a Slave". There are some films that can be riddled with profanity and still be great (case and point: ACTUAL Scorssese masterpieces such as "Raging Bull" and "The Departed"), but that profanity isn't what's great about the movie as is the case with "The Wolf of Wall Street". This movie is filled with nudity and drug and alcohol use as are the popular movies with my acquaintances today, however, those movies don't deserve Best Picture nominations, and they don't receive them. Just because this movie is set against the backdrop of Wall Street corruption, doesn't mean it deserves anything. There are great movies about Wall Street, such as "Wall Street", but this movie is a sorry excuse for an Oscar nominee. As for the acting, DiCaprio and Hill have done much better. The best acting job of the year for DiCaprio was as Jay Gatsby in "The Great Gatsby", and although that film was plagued by many of the same problems as "Wolf" (too much partying and modernization) and was, much like "Wolf" bogged down by the societal need for action that has lead to a detriment of the art of film, DiCaprio gave a performance that was superior to Robert Redfords in the 1970s version. Mr Hill has showed us that he can make the transition to serious actor, as he did in " Moneyball", this performance is more comparable to his performances in "This is the End" and "21 Jump Street", as those are the same quality as this film. Altogether this film is just a stupid party promiscuity drug film set against a "serious" backdrop. Scorssese, DiCaprio, and Hill have all done MUCH better, and hopefully will do better in the future. Don't waste your time.