![]() ![]() Even with an elaborate runtime of around three hours they couldn’t fit in much scenes to show us what really changed him. The only hitch I could feel was in the transformation phase. Numerous such lengthy sequences are there in the film which you can shorten as LMAO. The scene where Mark Hanna explains the dark truths about the broker world along with his insane tips is hilarious. The place where the movie scores is in the visualisation which is packed with that juicy energy. By the early 1990s, while still in his 20s, Belfort founds his own firm, Stratton Oakmont. The frequency of all those words uttered is too much (necessarily) but to create the persona of our leading character it is required. In 1987, Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio) takes an entry-level job at a Wall Street brokerage firm. Well if you can’t tolerate the F word beyond an extent, you may not want to get in for this one. How he manages to find a way out of it and how the new idea and his natural ability to convince people with his damn good speech takes him to that unbelievable fortune, and how the illegalities in this swift growth takes him into trouble is what this biopic all about. Some unfortunate stock market fluctuations makes his life miserable. The man aspired to be a millionaire and entered the business after getting married. And he’s never been one to speed his films up when they weren’t working.The story is about the Wall street stock broker Jordan Belfort. He’s used narration before, but never in such a way that the narration wound up feeling like an encumbrance. Scorsese may have his weaknesses or indulgences as a filmmaker, but he’s always let his films play at their own pace and allow them to be true to themselves - their own tempo, themes, moods. My guess is that Harvey’s mitts are all over this puppy. Wells added, “I don’t believe Scorsese for a second when he says the theatrical version coming out this Friday is the one that bears his personal stamp of preference. It also lacks a musical score, with only some drums and temp music.” The main distinction for me is that it’s plainer and therefore more cinematic, as it doesn’t use the narration track that, in my view, pollutes the official version. “The work-print version is longer by roughly 20 minutes, and more filled out and expressive as a result, but that’s not the thing. This was in response to Scorsese being asked about his four-hour cut of “ The Wolf of Wall Street,” (Scorsese’s editor Thelma Schoomaker has spoken highly of it) which is the only director’s cut known to exist of any of Scorsese’s movies - although I bet that original cut of “ Gangs of New York,” which was shown to a few journalists in 2001 including Hollywood-Elswhere’s Jeffrey Wells, must still be hidden in a vault somewhere.Ībout that ‘Gangs’ cut, Wells claimed that the behind-the-scenes battle between Scorsese and then Miramax head honcho Harvey Weinstein ended with “a polished, cleaned-up version of the ‘Gangs’ being released in December of 2002” and not the one he saw in 2001. Martin Scorceses high-rolling Wall Street drama is based on the memoirs of stockbroker Jordan Belfort. But I do think once the die is cast, you have to go with it and say, ‘ That’s the movie I made under those circumstances.’” Sometimes, ‘I wish I could go back and put it all back together.’ All these things happen. ![]() There could be money issues, there could be somebody that dies the picture, the studio changes heads, and the next person hates it. “ has made their decisions based on the process they were going through at the time. “The director’s cut is the film that’s released - unless it’s been taken away from the director by the financiers and the studio,” Scorsese said. 'The Wolf of Wall Street' succeeds in exploring Wall Street culture thanks to its epic runtime, which gives Scorsese the freedom to tell the story over several decades. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |