The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 Film) Martin Scorsese

Use of animals

The Wolf of Wall Street uses animals, including a chimpanzee, a lion, a snake, a fish, and dogs.[89] The chimpanzee and the lion were provided by the Big Cat Habitat wildlife sanctuary in Sarasota County, Florida. The four-year-old chimpanzee Chance spent time with DiCaprio and learned to roller skate in three weeks. The sanctuary also provided a lion named Handsome because the trading company depicted in the film used a lion as its symbol.[90] Danny Porush denied that there were any animals in the office, although he admitted to eating an employee's goldfish.[91]

In December 2013, before the film premiered, the organization Friends of Animals criticized the use of the chimpanzee and organized a boycott of the film. Variety reported, "Friends of Animals thinks the chimp ... suffered irreversible psychological damage after being forced to act."[92] The Guardian commented on the increasing criticism of Hollywood's use of animals, writing, "The Wolf of Wall Street's use of a chimpanzee arrives as Hollywood comes under ever-increasing scrutiny for its employment of animals on screen". PETA also launched a campaign to highlight mistreatment of ape "actors" and to petition for DiCaprio not to work with great apes.[91]

1MDB scandal

In 2015, Red Granite Pictures and the film's financing became implicated in the 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal, a major international corruption scandal that began in Malaysia.[93] The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) alleged the film was financed by money producer Riza Aziz stole from the Malaysian 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) sovereign wealth fund. Aziz is the stepson of then-Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak. Aziz was arrested in connection with the scandal and pleaded not guilty to money laundering charges in July 2019.[94] According to court filings, a company owned by fugitive businessman Jho Low gave the film's producers a $9 million advance.[95] Low was given a "special thanks" in the film's credits.[93]

The film is part of a broader investigation into these illicit monetary movements, and in 2016 was named in a series of civil complaints the United States Department of Justice filed "for having provided a trust account through which hundreds of millions of dollars belonging to the 1MDB fund were illicitly siphoned".[96][97][98] To settle the civil lawsuit, Red Granite Pictures agreed to pay the U.S. government $60 million with no "admission of wrongdoing or liability on the part of Red Granite".[99] This settlement was part of a more expansive U.S. effort to seize approximately $1.7 billion in assets allegedly purchased with funds embezzled from 1MDB.[99] In January 2020, Belfort sued Red Granite for $300 million, also wishing to void his rights deal; he said that he would never have sold the rights to Red Granite if he had known how the film was being financed.[100][101] Aziz was discharged in May 2020 on a 1,000,000 Malaysian Ringgit (US$240,000) bail.[5]

Thematic controversy and debate

Various people have criticized the film as materialistic, encouraging greedy behavior, extreme wealth, and advocating for the infamous individuals portrayed in the film. Christina McDowell, whose father, Tom Prousalis, worked in association with Belfort, accused the filmmakers of "exacerbating our national obsession with wealth and status and glorifying greed and psychopathic behavior". She emphasized the gravity and significance of Belfort's crimes, saying that Wolf of Wall Street is a "reckless attempt at continuing to pretend that these sorts of schemes are entertaining, even as the country is reeling from yet another round of Wall Street scandals".[102]

After DiCaprio defended himself from criticism, Variety journalist Whitney Friedlander called the film "three hours of cash, drugs, hookers, repeat" and argued that the film is a "celebration of this lifestyle" and implies that short-lived extreme wealth and extraordinary experiences are superior to normal behavior.[103]

Nikole TenBrink, vice president of marketing and membership at Risk and Insurance Management Society, has said the film is a "cautionary tale of what can happen when fraud is left unchecked". She describes Belfort's business acumen, his talent in communicating and selling his ideas, and his ability to motivate others as offering "valuable lessons for risk professionals as they seek to avoid similar pitfalls".[104]

Belfort's reaction

Belfort said of the film's depiction of himself and Stratton Oakmont that it did an excellent job at describing the "overall feeling" of those years, adding, "the camaraderie, the insanity, that was accurate". Of his drug use, Belfort said that his actual habits were "much worse" than is depicted in the film and that he was "on 22 different drugs at the end".[105]

Belfort also analyzed the inaccuracies in the film's oversimplification of Stratton Oakmont's gradual transition from advocating for "speculative stocks" in order to "help build America" to committing crimes. He said he "didn't like hearing" overly simplified and blunt depictions of his crimes because "it made me look like I was just trying to rip people off". But Belfort did acknowledge the cinematic benefits of these oversimplifications as "a very easy way in three hours" to "move the audience emotionally".[105]

Nadine Macaluso's reaction

On September 28, 2022, Nadine Macaluso, Belfort's ex-wife on whom the character Naomi was based, said that the depiction of Belfort and their relationship was accurate and that she hopes to educate people on signs of domestic abuse and toxic relationships.[106]