I wonder if Oliver Stone regrets this movie

Yeah this was a real snoozer...i think the biggest goof was making Gekko an anti-hero rather than the straight up villain (Josh Brolin isn't terrible but his character is so limp in this compared to 80s Gekko) but other goofs include casting Shia and showing the audience literal PowerPoint presentations (I go to the movies to ESCAPE my job, not relive it).

Still haven't seen this because I love the original and was disappointed that Stone sold out to do a sequel. But, yeah, Wolf of Wall Street is the type of movie I would have expected from Stone but since Any Given Sunday, his last good film, he seems washed up.

It's a shame because from 86-99 he had an incredible run of movies and has done nothing but mediocre trash ever since. Maybe it's because he sobered up but something happened from 99-2004 (Any Given Sunday to Alexander) that knocked him off his axis.

Poor directing and editing for sure. The movie could be 20 minutes shorter easily.

Agree with everyone on the board.

I didn't care for the premise at all. Casting Shia LeBeef seemed like a studio cash grab as he was the "It Boy" wonder at that time but his character and the whole plot line felt forced. The same can be said for Carrie Mulligan's Winnie character. It seemed to me that Oliver wanted to revise the legacy of Gordon Gekko because he had become an iconic Hollywood character when his original intention was to show what a lecherous and self-serving asshole he was suppose to be.

He missed an opportunity to either capture the zeitgeist of the Housing crises or to revisit Gordon Gekko's re-entry into the Wall Street game with him and Bud Fox on a second collision course. Giving a Bud a silly cameo looked like a rejected Beer commercial for Miller lite