CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Movies › The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

Started by Patrick Martin · · 👁 6 views · 33 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Patrick MartinNoah Roberts46Jack Murphy5Grace EdwardsMatthew Kernsilvergardener6Mark Gray3Walter Grant5Amanda Robinson4Brandon Evans5northerndriverEmily Morris77Raymond Anderson4Richard Wilson4Nancy Williams58
Patrick Martin Patrick Martin RegularOP
702 messages
joined Aug 2015
#1 ·
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

Basically, this whole thing is built around the crazy true story about how J. Paul Getty's grandson got snatched.

Release date: December 8, 2017 (USA)

Directed by Ridley Scott

☕
Noah Roberts46 Noah Roberts46 Regular
407 messages
joined Jun 2021
#2 ·
He shot a solid movie with Matt Damon, so now he’s convinced he can pull off another hit. The trailer doesn't really grab me, but the cast is strong enough, and maybe he'll actually deliver something decent once he moves on from Alien.
Jack Murphy5 Jack Murphy5 Active Member
59 messages
joined Feb 2014
#3 ·
Patrick Martin has already staked his claim on this thread. 😁
Grace Edwards Grace Edwards Active Member
184 messages
joined May 2023
#4 ·
What the hell, what kind of joke is this, calling him the richest man ever? John D. Rockefeller absolutely crushed him when he was actually alive, let alone if you factor in inflation today 🤦

It wouldn't be Ridley Scott without some serious data manipulation.
Matthew Kern Matthew Kern Newcomer
3 messages
joined Sep 2017
#5 ·
Noah Roberts46 said:He shot a solid movie with Matt Damon, so now he’s convinced he can pull off another hit. The trailer doesn't really grab me, but the cast is strong enough, and maybe he'll actually deliver something decent once he moves on from Alien.

I mean, look at Matt Damon in this thing
I just can't quite figure it out.
Noah Roberts46 Noah Roberts46 Regular
407 messages
joined Jun 2021
#6 ·
Haha, I actually swapped him out for Marky Mark. 🤦
Grace Edwards Grace Edwards Active Member
184 messages
joined May 2023
#7 ·
Noah Roberts46 said:Haha, I actually swapped him out for Marky Mark. 🤦

Honestly, this kind of reminds me of that whole situation where you're not the only one 😁
Patrick Martin Patrick Martin RegularOP
702 messages
joined Aug 2015
#8 ·
Grace Edwards said:What the hell, what kind of joke is this, calling him the richest man ever? John D. Rockefeller absolutely crushed him when he was actually alive, let alone if you factor in inflation today 🤦

It wouldn't be Ridley Scott without some serious data manipulation.

And does anyone else just happen to have a billion or two extra lying around in their pocket?

Jack Murphy5 said:Patrick Martin has already staked his claim on this thread. 😁

☕
Grace Edwards Grace Edwards Active Member
184 messages
joined May 2023
#9 ·
Patrick Martin said:And does anyone else just happen to have a billion or two extra lying around in their pocket?

☕

It’s probably closer to 328 billion when you factor in inflation (or just call it billions, if you want to sound like an Englishman).
It’s like trying to claim the American GDP is somehow bigger than Switzerland's.
silvergardener6 silvergardener6 Member
49 messages
joined Feb 2014
#10 ·
Grace Edwards said:It’s probably closer to 328 billion when you factor in inflation (or just call it billions, if you want to sound like an Englishman).
It’s like trying to claim the American GDP is somehow bigger than Switzerland's.

He founded Standard Oil, and in 1957 Fortune magazine named him the richest living American,[3] while the 1966 Guinness World Records named him as the world's richest private citizen, worth an estimated $1.2 billion (approximately $8.9 billion in 2016).[4]
Grace Edwards Grace Edwards Active Member
184 messages
joined May 2023
#11 ·
silvergardener6 said:He founded Standard Oil, and in 1957 Fortune magazine named him the richest living American,[3] while the 1966 Guinness World Records named him as the world's richest private citizen, worth an estimated $1.2 billion (approximately $8.9 billion in 2016).[4]

So we're just going to Wikipedia this? Fine, whatever...
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1911 that Standard Oil must be dismantled for violation of federal anti-trust laws. They split it into 34 different companies, some of which turned into ExxonMobil, Chevron and others. A few of those still pull in massive revenue, mostly because the individual parts ended up being worth more than the entire original company. Since those shares basically doubled or tripled during the early years, Rockefeller actually became the first billionaire in the country, sitting on a fortune that was almost 2 percent of the entire national economy.[3] I think his peak net worth was pegged at around $336 billion (in 2007 USD, adjusted for inflation) back in 1913.
Patrick Martin Patrick Martin RegularOP
702 messages
joined Aug 2015
#12 ·
HOLD UP! HOLD UP! HOLD UP! HOLD UP!

JUST STOP!

I need to set the record straight before everyone starts jumping on this fake accusation being thrown around by Grace Edwards, who claims—and I quote:

Ridley can't do anything without fudging the data.

For crying out loud, you guys are watching movies—or just trailers, apparently—way too superficially. In the trailer, Getty's grandson is speaking in the first person (that opening monologue), explaining how his grandfather used to be the richest man in history. He’s just recounting the situation as it stood back then, those actual events from the past during the kidnapping, all through his own perspective as a member of that clan.

The fact that someone else turned out to be richer later on is a completely irrelevant and totally missed point. ☕
Grace Edwards Grace Edwards Active Member
184 messages
joined May 2023
#13 ·
Look, if the book actually cites Getty's grandson, fine. That's his mistake.
If he never actually said that and Ridley and the crew just took some creative liberties, then it’s a blatant, intentional lie—because back then (somewhere between the 50s and the 70s), he was the wealthiest man on the planet. Not of all time, not in all of history, just for maybe twenty years or so.

Sorry if I'm obsessing over this specific detail, but the movie is literally called "The Wolf of Wall Street," and the grandson insists his grandfather was the richest man in history.
We’ve wasted pages and pages on much stupider trivialities in "the" threads, so I guess we can spare a few posts for this lie.
It’s like in the Gatesov biopic, where his daughter just casually claims her dad was the richest man to ever live.
Patrick Martin Patrick Martin RegularOP
702 messages
joined Aug 2015
#14 ·
Grace Edwards said:Look, if the book actually cites Getty's grandson, fine. That's his mistake.
If he never actually said that and Ridley and the crew just took some creative liberties, then it’s a blatant, intentional lie—because back then (somewhere between the 50s and the 70s), he was the wealthiest man on the planet. Not of all time, not in all of history, just for maybe twenty years or so.

Sorry if I'm obsessing over this specific detail, but the movie is literally called "The Wolf of Wall Street," and the grandson insists his grandfather was the richest man in history.
We’ve wasted pages and pages on much stupider trivialities in "the" threads, so I guess we can spare a few posts for this lie.
It’s like in the Gatesov biopic, where his daughter just casually claims her dad was the richest man to ever live.

The thing is, the grandson is speaking in the first person during the prologue, right? So those are HIS thoughts. He could be totally wrong for all we know. He isn't some official historian or the keeper of the world's encyclopedia, so what's the big deal?

And besides, saying "The Wolf of Wall Street" is coming from the perspective of those "hungry and bloodthirsty" kidnappers. It's not an objective fact; it's just some euphoric paraphrase.
Noah Roberts46 Noah Roberts46 Regular
407 messages
joined Jun 2021
#15 ·
How many ridiculous excuses can this guy cook up while trying to defend such a total hack of a director? 🤣
Patrick Martin Patrick Martin RegularOP
702 messages
joined Aug 2015
#16 ·
Noah Roberts46 said:How many ridiculous excuses can this guy cook up while trying to defend such a total hack of a director? 🤣

It’s the exact same nonsense you'd use to defend SAF if I called them a bust just because they didn't win every single championship ever. ☕
Mark Gray3 Mark Gray3 Newcomer
8 messages
joined Aug 2014
#17 ·
This doesn't happen often—apparently, Christopher Plummer is stepping in to take over Getty's role from Kevin Spacey. They’re going to have to reshoot all the necessary scenes from scratch, effectively kicking Kevin out of the movie entirely. (They might just simplify some scenes or find other ways to fix it.) All this is happening after the film was basically finished and was originally scheduled to hit theaters in just a month and a half. Theoretically, they might still make the deadline since Spacey's role was supposedly pretty minor, with him only being on set for about 10 days.
Noah Roberts46 Noah Roberts46 Regular
407 messages
joined Jun 2021
#18 ·
From what I can gather, they were dead set on building an entire movie around him, but Ridley Scott basically blew him off after this happened.
Grace Edwards Grace Edwards Active Member
184 messages
joined May 2023
#19 ·
What an absolute joke, unbelievable 🤦
Patrick Martin Patrick Martin RegularOP
702 messages
joined Aug 2015
#20 ·
If you ask me, based on the tiny bit I actually watched, he wasn't even right for the part anyway ☕

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads