The Wolf Of Wall Street- Review

I know this sort of thing is a little out of character for my blog, but bear with me. I can get a bit opinionated at times and I have nowhere to let out my opinions, but this blog can come in handy for this! PS. If you haven't watched it yet, don't read this because I don't want to spoil it.
Basically I just watched The Wolf Of Wall Street (and absolutely loved it by the way. And no, not just because Leonardo DiCaprio was in it) but then I went on to read some of the reviews. I had previously read an interview with Margot Robbie, so I knew her thoughts on the role she played. The thing that annoyed me most was that a few journalists who had reviewed this film appeared to be startingly naive about the film. Yes, they do know more about film technicalities than I do, and I am only a teenager in her bedroom and not a full-time journalist, but some negative points they made about the film I found to be integral to the plot. Let me explain:
Margot's interview had said that she was wary about playing the role she did as Leo's wife as she felt she was portrayed in a bad way. She wasn't a strong, independent woman. She was easy and foolish, she had no personality but was merely seen as a conquest. This is clearly disconcerting. As a female I can totally see how she would feel uncomfortable about this, it goes against everything feminism stands for. No woman wants to be defined by her gender. However, this is not a film about feminism: it's a film based on the book by Jordan Beaumont and I'm pretty sure he didn't give a damn about feminism while he was climbing to the top of corporate America. Also, in my opinion, many people who cry out at this type of thing, drawing attention to all anti-female slurs and championing acheivements of women tend to hurt the cause more than help it. If you make a list of "fantastic books written by women" or "brilliant films directed by women" I will most likely not read it. I like to choose my interests based the talent of the individual person as a human being, regardless of their gender. If my favourite director happens to be a man, then it's not because I see men as having superior talent in film-making but because this particular man has a superior talent in film-making over all other directors, both male and female. Many women have apparently expressed outrage at the fact that the only female characters in the film are all hookers, strippers, wives, girlfriends and sex workers (except for two female colleagues who get fleeting mentions) and this is unacceptable. However, like I said for me that wasn't important. The only women who mattered to Jordan at this point in his life were exactly those people, and in this way Scorsese has portrayed it perfectly. I just don't understand how people can get so outraged about how sexist a film is when in reality, it's this sexism that makes the film more true-to-life and, let's face it, more enjoyable. Sexism is an integral theme running throughout the film. If it leaves you filled with hate and rage and a sense of injustice, dont you think that's exactly what Scorsese was going for? The main character of the film was an anti-hero: his arrogance, cold-bloodedness and all-round bad personality was supposed to make the audience uncomfortable. So used to rooting for the protagonist and now the protagonist is an immature prat who most people would swing for.
Clichéd  as it may be to have a lengthy film about the opulent and obscene rise and inevitable demise of a rags-to-riches, mysogonistic corporate playboy, it doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. There are so many snobs these days who make you feel guilty for enjoying something because it's not cutting-edge or accurate or absolutely unique or PC but actually, just because the film doesn't portray everybody equally, doesn't that mean that it's doing its job? I saw someone write that with over 500 uses of the F-word, they found it ridiculous that the N-word was only hinted at, and went on to point out that the use of the N-word was anachronistic for the time period. Maybe it was the screenplay writer choosing to be PC as the reviewer put it (unlikely) or maybe it was to prove a point. Who knows? Maybe even these characters, who are shown to be outrageous, rowdy and uncaring, too have their limits, making them more true-to-life. Maybe it's for the added comedy factor, maybe it's due to circumstances in the film, but that part also stood out to me, but for entirely different reasons. And while we're on the subject, I'm fairly certain that it wasn't an achronism at all.
It seems to me that this film has truly divided people: some people absolutely hate it. It left them cold, it left them bored and it made them feel as though the film had exploited the roles of certain people. And I am not here to criticise those people, after all, it's their opinion, which I will always respect. However, then you have people like me, who adored it. Not only was it full of famous faces (all giving stellar performances), but Martin Scorsese once again managed to direct another instant classic, with incredibly emotive filming and soundtrack. Everything about the film, from the script to the cinematography stood out to me multiple times and I was left at the end of it feeling excited and thoroughly captivated. Personally I loved it, it was a good use of three hours, however I can totally understand why some people might not have enjoyed it so much. 
What did you guys think of the film? Is there any other girls out there who agree/disagree with me? Please feel free to share this rant with the world (or anybody you think should read it. Also if you know anyone with strikingly similar/polar opposite opinions to this)

Sorry, rant over. I always seem to get so het up over such things ;)

Damn that got intense, eh Leo?

No comments:

Thank you for commenting! I always read my comments and I love receiving them :')

Powered by Blogger.