The Wolf Of Wall Street (2014, Martin Scorsese)

There are copious amounts of drugs consumed during The Wolf Of Wall Street. At one early point the titular Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio) boasts of his day-to-day consumption that makes his job as a successful stockbroker possible. His everyday is a whirlwind of cursing, stress, and complete expenditure only made possible by the counteracting cocktail of drugs swooshing through his veins at all times. Of course, when he says with utter hubris of his favourite drug while snorting up a line of cocaine, he isn't speaking of the narcotic itself but the instrument used to consume it - money. This epic tale of greed and mayhem is directed by the 70+ year old Martin Scorsese with the same youthful vigour and passion he's always brought to the fold, written with the same attention to detail we'd expect from Terrence Winter (The Sopranos, Boardwalk Empire) and acted so fearlessly by DiCaprio this might well be his finest performance to date.

When Jordan Belfort shows up in New York City in the late 80s to make his way up the financial ladder, he's not so much baby faced and full of innocence, no. Such broad strokes of character would be dishonest but the young professional who clearly wants to make a dollar and a cent in life is earnest enough. He's married and wants to provide, admirable, but as he ascends the corporate ladder thanks to the 'kind' jump start of a higher stockbroker played by Matthew McConaughey, whatever moral code lived by before gets destroyed almost over night.

McConaughey's Mark Hanna gives Belfort a prep-talk over lunch, or rather Martinis; this perfectly pitched scene reveals the inner workings of a stockbroker's mind, the environment they inhabit, their code of conduct. This scene echoes throughout the film and acts so well as an anchored reference point so effectively thanks to McConaughey's remarkable screen presence. He impacts on us as much as Belfort, he impresses with his hypnotising speech, lulling us in with a twisted poetry of sorts like a charming devil.

For all of The Wolf Of Wall Street's narrative vigour that continues the trademark sweep of Goodfellas and Casino, not to mention its mammoth run time, the film is perfectly pitched while it drastically changes tone and speed. Scenes such as Hanna's prep-talk feel at ease in a film that constantly pushes forward to match the overbearing ambition of its characters. Other lengthy dialogue scenes such as Belfort and his new employee Donnie Azoff (Jonah Hill) are equally well placed despite not actually moving the 'story' but by setting us uneasily in the psyche of the film's players. This has always been one of Scorsese's main strengths. They talk about Azoff's marriage to his first cousin, a humorous conversion set in disbelief and perversion before ending with the two smoking crack cocaine round the back of a bar. Like so many of the film's unsavoury acts it causes awkward laughter because in cases such as these you've got a choice to do either that or cry instead.

 As Belfort's own enterprise flowers with the help of Azoff and an assortment of streetwise cronies from Belfort's own past, he rises to great fortune and power in an almost Charles Foster Kane like ascension, losing bit-by-bit his perception of the real world outside of great wealth, falling into delusions of grandeur. There's a moment in Goodfellas when after living the high life and losing everything, Henry Hill looks into the camera to complain to us how horrible his working class life has become, how he misses fine food, women, drugs, and power. That seminal crime film was Scorsese's guilty pleasure as despite its rise and fall structure it doesn't actually provide redemption as Hill is only sorry for getting caught and nothing else. This attitude and radical point of addressing the audience is where TWOWS jumps off from, with Belfort at one point even stopping mid-sentence as he explains one of his scams doubting we the audience can follow him, so he dumbs it down. This cocky demeanour flows throughout as Belfort serves as our guide through this epic, sordid affair, but never does it itself talk down to its audience. This is fine filmmaking from a master director still with gas in the tank; the film is about detestable people which on this occasion doesn't equate a detestable film like some detractors have put forth. With La Dolce Vita, Fellini delved into the shallow lives and excesses of the paparazzi, the film's moral centre left aloof as finding one amongst the rising rubble of postwar Italy seemed impossible to Fellini within that time and subculture. This was the film's point and it doesn't make it any less of an important work for it.

Belfort's downfall comes not only in his ego, his belief that he's a king, but in the form of FBI Agent Patrick Denham (Kyle Chandler), and as the film descends into anarchy as the seams of Belfort and Co's company comes apart from this added heat and their inability to function on the cocktails of drugs do we really see the film for what it is - a story of addiction.

The film leaves a bad taste in the mouth but remains wholly worthy perhaps only due to the creative team behind it. It's a shameless divulgence into the lives of the shameless as Belfort's memoirs are re-inacted on screen, giving us a snapshot into his absurdist excess through success. How reliable these accounts are can be left up to the reader or viewer, though one thing is sure, it's one hell of a ride and one that has left many irate. It's been argued that the film grants Belfort and his many cronies a pardon of sorts as their lives are explored (the press have been arguing this about crime pictures since Howard Hughes's Scarface 1932), but its purpose is to look into the dark heart of money (the root of all evil) and if anything The Wolf Of Wall Street is one of the more affective representations of addiction of recent years. 

As well as an historic snapshot into the precursive events that helped the economic crash of 2007-08, and the inner mechanical workings of those who helped these events transpire through sheer greed, TWOWS acts as well as any film i've seen in recent years as a looking into addiction. For all the drugs taken they only truly serve as a platform to accomplish the real insatiable accomplishments of the stockbrokers. These are shark-like men after blood, always hungry, never content with what they've got. Belfort tries to justify the lifestyle of the rich, saying that the rich can live well while helping charities; he seems to believe these words but we never see him help anyone but himself and whatever money (if any at all) is given to the poor will be nothing on the excess riches lavished on themselves. 

When Denham's FBI look set to take Belfort down he threatens to go legit on the advice of his father (Rob Reiner), he announces it to the company and in this scene it looks for a second like the film is siding with 'The Wolf' himself, feeling pity as he steps down from his throne as others weep. But Belfort cannot leave, denounces his retirement and puts on an egotistical show as usual. Unsurprisingly this leads to his downfall as a result. It's in this moment that you see the addict, not to a substance but to a lifestyle. In the film's remarkably powerful final scene, now out of prison and supporting himself in tours of 'how to get ahead' like business seminars, he hands out a pen to his audience and asks individual members to sell it back to him. Echoing an earlier scene in which he did the same to his cronies before their business venture, DiCaprio's sad and sullen eyes reflect the disappointment of this audiences's pathetic attempts. His time as king has past, he walked (or so he thought) with the best of them, lived like the best of them. He's desperate for that high again, that inspiration, that energy to lead to that rush of riches but now he's surrounded by schmucks. 

Hugo (Martin Scorsese, 2011)

Martin Scorsese's first venture into family friendly material is a pure cinematic delight that sees America's greatest living filmmaker out of his comfort zone but at his blinding best.

The story takes place in Paris during the 1930s - a small boy named Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) is an orphaned boy who lives within the confines of the cities' train station. He spends his time stealing odd bits of food to survive while avoiding the unsympathetic station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) , he also runs the stations' clocks - a job that the inspector still thinks is performed by Hugo's alcoholic uncle (Ray Winstone). Hugo was left an orphan after his father (Jude Law) was killed during a fire at the museum where he worked, the two of them were fixing a broken automaton that was left at the museum and gathered no interest from the public. They however, found the mysterious invention very interesting and dedicated themselves to figuring out its purpose; Hugo sees the world as one big machine, in the opening breathtaking sequence we actually see the city literally represented as one, Hugo says that machines never come with extra parts and so if the world is a machine he has a place and a purpose in it. He is convinced the static automaton can show him what that purpose is.

[Hugo and his father with the mysterious Automaton]

Through the intervention of a young girl named Isabelle (Hit Girl - Chloe Grace Moretz) they embark on an adventure to figure out the history of the broken automaton, a history that involves Isabelle's own Godfather George Melies (Ben Kingsley).

Hugo is a film lover's film through and through and perhaps only Martin Scorsese could have made it; one only needs to see Scorsese talking about cinema during interviews to see that his knowledge and passion for the medium is unmatched and awe inspiring. The film traces back to the birth of cinema and works as a love letter to the early pioneers who saw their invention as just a passing phase that wouldn't catch on. Over a century later and Hugo hits theatres proving that not only that cinema still has a place in our lives but that the magic is not lost and as enchanting as ever. I recently blogged about my anticipation and worries for Martin Scorsese's decision to shoot his film in 3D - a format which is too often forced and far from an enjoyable viewing experience. I wrote that if anyone can bring out the benefits of 3D it would be Scorsese and I'm happy to say I was right because he uses it so wonderfully and incorporates the format into a story that is about cinema thus making it a fitting addition instead of a money making spoiler.

Young lead actor Asa Butterfield is extremely impressive here as the Oliver like Hugo, a fruitful career surely lies ahead for him. Ben Kingsley provides the films emotional weight and is just as a pleasure to watch as always. Sacha Baron Cohen's slapstick performance as the station inspector is borderline 'Allo 'Allo! but manages to stay in sync with the rest of the film, young viewers will be filled with joyous laughter at his failed attempts to catch Hugo, not that it stopped the adults roaring with laughter too! Scorsese's composition is just as interesting and assured as you'd expect from a master filmmaker and his ongoing collaboration with DP Robert Richardson has produced yet again another stunning film.

For all of the films merits (performances, visuals, music ect) Hugo is the perfect film to see over the festive period but above all worth seeing to witness Martin Scorsese's heart on the screen during every frame.

Scorsese in 3D. If he can't do it, can anyone?

On the 2nd of December Martin Scorsese's new film Hugo will open in UK theatres. This marks the legendary director stepping into unknown territory for two reasons; for one, this will be his first family friendly film about the fantastical adventures of a homeless boy set in Paris during the 1920s, Another would be that it's Scorsese's first foray into 3D film making, a side to film making that seems to excite him more than most of us.

Scorsese's reasoning is that "We are in 3D. We see in 3D, so why not?". This is a fair point from a filmmaker as assured and passionate as Scorsese, a director who even as he approaches 70 still has the passionate spark he had from when he was producing master works such as The Age of Innocence. Scorsese views 3D as a new dawn for cinema, a new way of telling stories and an incredible chance to take cinema further than ever imagined. I appreciate his emphatic joy at the possibilities for 3D, perhaps Scorsese is the one to show us how it can be used and abused to heighten the cinematic experience, perhaps it was just a shame that James Cameron got there first, that lazy greedy studios retrofitted their releases at no extra cost but with diminished results. Perhaps only now it will take America's greatest living filmmaker to show the others who have tried before him what they had failed to achieve.

I can only whole heartedly agree with critic Mark Kermode when he states that 3D is only good for moments when characters point things into the audience. Think of the spears in Avatar for example, beyond tiny moments like this 3D end up rather redundant and a waste of money. This plus the 30% colour loss applied with 3D features and you wonder why you're paying more for what seems like less.

My hope for the upcoming Hugo is that Scorsese famously likes to move his camera. Like Max Ophuls and Francois Truffaut before him, Scorsese has been part of a long line of filmmakers who can't seem to keep still and with Hugo he will hopefully pull off some compositions that will be aided by the 3D format and blow us away, for now we can only hope. The film is also very much about the history of film; George Melies the French innovator of cinema in its earliest form features in Hugo's story.

So let's hope that through Hugo Scorsese gives us a tour of how cinema began and the possibilities of where it can still go in 2011 and beyond. After all, if Scorsese can't prove 3D as a viable format, name me a filmmaker who can.