<p>WoWS isn't meant to be a fairy tale where good triumphs over evil in the end. Movies like that went out with the Hays Code.
I think it's appropriate to be outraged at Belfort and his behavior. It's also appropriate to be outraged at people high-fiving each other over this behavior. But I'm sure there are guys who high-five each other at the sight of Geena Davis' breasts in <em>Thelma & Louise </em>(or who "cheer at the wrong moments"). Does that mean the film shouldn't be made?</p><p>I'm sure Scorsese and DiCaprio knew that some people would take the film the wrong way. But isn't the "infuriating industry double standard" another example of people (this time the mainstream) taking a film the wrong way (thinking they appealed to "prurient interests")? It seems like the argument is the same one that says, since a few people cheat and receive food stamps, we should end the food stamp program.</p><p>I agree that Scorsese appears to have little interest in making films with significant feminine energy. So the alternative perspective proposed is never going to be a Scorsese film. I also agree that the only boundary being pushed is making a film where people will sit through three hours of bad taste.</p><p>I'd much rather there be films like WoWS than go back to when every film had to reflect conventional morality.</p><p> </p>
<p>WoWS isn't meant to be a fairy tale where good triumphs over evil in the end. Movies like that went out with the Hays Code.
I think it's appropriate to be outraged at Belfort and his behavior. It's also appropriate to be outraged at people high-fiving each other over this behavior. But I'm sure there are guys who high-five each other at the sight of Geena Davis' breasts in <em>Thelma & Louise </em>(or who "cheer at the wrong moments"). Does that mean the film shouldn't be made?</p><p>I'm sure Scorsese and DiCaprio knew that some people would take the film the wrong way. But isn't the "infuriating industry double standard" another example of people (this time the mainstream) taking a film the wrong way (thinking they appealed to "prurient interests")? It seems like the argument is the same one that says, since a few people cheat and receive food stamps, we should end the food stamp program.</p><p>I agree that Scorsese appears to have little interest in making films with significant feminine energy. So the alternative perspective proposed is never going to be a Scorsese film. I also agree that the only boundary being pushed is making a film where people will sit through three hours of bad taste.</p><p>I'd much rather there be films like WoWS than go back to when every film had to reflect conventional morality.</p><p> </p>