--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > > Oh, but that would be taking "other people's money" which we all know > they "worked so hard for.":-D > > Actually I suspect Scorsese probably would say he got his desired effect > with you. I haven't seen the film yet as I relegated it to the BD > rental phase.
I'm not convinced of this. As the daughter of one of the real-life protagonists in this scandal pointed out in her open letter, *most* of the film consists of glorifying their actions and their lifestyle. It is not surprising, therefore, that one of the business editors of a large Wall Street publication reported going to see the movie a few blocks from where he worked, finding the theater full of traders, and hearing them laughing and applauding at all the "wrong" moments. That is, whenever the people onscreen got away with something illegal, whenever they screwed somebody over for money, and whenever someone "made a sale" to some retiree and managed to steal their life savings. I honestly think that although Scorcese says *now* that he was trying to be satirical, he was really still kinda impressed by all the macho, misogynist buddy-buddy shit, just as he has been in the past by similar behavior on the part of gangsters. Otherwise, there wouldn't have been so much of it in the film. And there might have been one -- even one -- scene or bit of dialog dealing with the *effect* these narcissistic assholes had on the people they stole from. I think Scorcese and DiCaprio got carried away with the buddy-buddy shit and lost sight of the true nature of the people they were trying to portray onscreen. > You are not alone in your reaction to the Oxfram study (which I posted > here yesterday) as I heard several radio commentators say the same > thing. Just take their money and redistribute it. As I see it the the > rich, like dogs, have so soiled their capitalist beds that the penalty > should be global socialism for the next 400 years. Doesn't have to be > mean, authoritarian or totalitarian. Could be very transcendental and > pleasant. I still like the "bus off the cliff" approach. > But looking at the weather, the coming drought and famine there might > not be anyone around in 40 years let alone 400. With Share's post in mind, "let them eat ants." > On 01/21/2014 05:58 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > I'd ride with 'em, I ain't prejudiced agin rich folk. > > > > */Personally, I suspect that the planet would be better off if we > > managed to get all 85 of these people on one bus, and then threatened > > them with driving the bus off a cliff with them on it unless they > > signed over all of their money to the poor people they fucked over to > > get it. After they signed, then we'd take the signed papers, get off > > the bus and push it over the edge anyway, and then redistribute the > > funds. > > > > But that may just be how I feel today, after having been forced to sit > > through "The Wolf Of Wall Street." I now completely agree with > > everything said in the open letter > > > > written by /**/Christina McDowell, daughter of one of the real-life > > scumbags who worked with the real-life Jordan Belfort. I think that > > Martin Scorcese, Leonardo DiCaprio, and all of the other producers who > > glorified greed and immorality in this film should be sentenced to > > spend the rest of their lives doing "community service" by making > > movies about the "little people" these real-life scumbags ripped off, > > and whose lives they ruined. > > > > Those of you who mouth off about misogyny, you really haven't even > > *seen* misogyny until you've seen this movie. There is not a woman in > > the film who isn't portrayed as a bimbo, a hooker, and just one more > > rube to be fucked and fucked over. I literally had to take a shower > > after watching it. > > > > The experience made me rethink Martin Scorcese's work as a whole. Yes, > > he has made the occasional film that *doesn't* celebrate greed, > > corruption, and misogyny (although the only ones I can think of right > > now are "Hugo," "The Last Temptation of Christ," and "Kundun"), but > > those subjects have been the focus of and the preoccupation of almost > > *all* of his other films. Only 3 films as a director out of 55 *not* > > about slimeballs. And his next film is going to be about Frank > > Sinatra. What a fuckin' waste of creative talents. > > /* > > > -------------------------------------------- > > > On Tue, 1/21/14, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@ wrote: > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] New meaning for Kesey's "Are you on the bus > > or off the bus?" > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2014, 8:19 AM > > > > > > According to a recent > > > OXFAM report the 85 people who own *half of the planet's > > > wealth* could all fit onto this bus: > > > > > > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/17/oxfam-bus-wealth_n_4616103.ht\ ml > > > > > > > > > >
