An interview with Mr. & Mrs. Walkout

[arnzilla]

Question: I understand that you walked out of "The Wolf of Wall Street." Why?

The Walkouts: The characters were vile... vulgar... disgusting. You name it. They glorified misogyny, condoned promiscuity, and celebrated illegal drug abuse. The film should have condemned these things with a moral center to stand up against the degradation, the reckless behavior, and the irresponsibility.

Question: But you found the people in the film to be vile, vulgar, and disgusting. The actions you list SHOULD be despised. Your response makes sense. But you're blaming the movie, not the characters, aren't you?

The Walkouts: We're not talking about people like us. We know the behavior in the film is immoral. There's no question about it for us. We're worried about how other people might get the wrong idea. They may see the abhorrent as fun and something to be craved and, god forbid, revered.

Question: So you left the theater because of how other people may interpret it?

The Walkouts: Yes... well, no. We were disgusted, but the filmmakers wanted us to feel the joyful exuberance of these detestable characters. Films should have an easily understandable point of view so everyone connects to it and feels it. I mean, we left because the filmmakers showed behavior that was just plain gross and we could never relate to it. The best films have easily relatable characters.

Question: So "gross" is what a filmmaker usually presents in a positive light?

The Walkouts: You're missing the point. The film was full of bad people doing bad things. Why not show good people doing good things?

Question: And pretend bad people don't exist?

The Walkouts: Yes... we mean no. Bad people should be punished in movies.

Question: Like in real life?

The Walkouts: No, no, no, no. Real life is different. We go to the movies to escape.

Question: What about art?

The Walkouts: We don't understand the question.

Question: Don't worry about it. Isn't the fact that you couldn't handle "The Wolf of Wall Street" an endorsement rather than a condemnation of the film? The immorality presented in the film isn't vilified in a movie-movie way, but shown for what it really is, isn't it?

The Walkouts: We don't know, we walked out.

Question: Thank you for your time.

[will]

You're right in highlighting this, because for me the appalled audience is equally frustrating. If it were just some of the critics pretending to be outraged by the supposed celebration of vulgarity, then I would chalk it up to awards season politics and be done with it. But it's true that a small (?) part of the general audience is tsk-tsk-ing the film. Was it only shocking for the first wave of "unawares" who were met with something unexpected? Is it only an American thing? I'm interested in hearing how audiences respond outside the US. I saw no walk-outs here and I've heard the film did very well.

[kim]

Eh, America is an extremely prudish country honestly. They prefer the nastiest and goriest kinds of violence but cannot stand sex and nudity. I have a feeling it would be better received in other countries.

[arnzilla]

A Fandango review

Wolf on Wall Street
by doeallen1

After one hour of this incredibly disappointing film, my party of three left. There were many reasons for leaving the least of which was the intense drug use, explicit sexual encounters and the endless gut wrenching language. Language that was disrespectful of woman and humanity at large. The scenes were graphic and would qualify as hardcore porn. The gifted actors were lost in the intensity and the shock. The most interesting reflection is that this film was released on Christmas day. Now I do not consider myself a self-righteous zealot or a person that has not enjoyed a depiction of a sexual encounter based on human connection in a respectful visual, but people this is way over the top and the reviews need to say so in graphic detail. At least provide the consumer with enough information in order to make a choice based on truth. NOT "wildly entertaining, Nudity and Language kinda of information just does not reveal what is in store. Thank you for the opportunity to express my self.

[will]

[piglet]

Jan 1, 2014 9:03:58 GMT -5 arnzilla said:

A Fandango review

Wolf on Wall Street
by doeallen1

After one hour of this incredibly disappointing film, my party of three left. There were many reasons for leaving the least of which was the intense drug use, explicit sexual encounters and the endless gut wrenching language. Language that was disrespectful of woman and humanity at large. The scenes were graphic and would qualify as hardcore porn. The gifted actors were lost in the intensity and the shock. The most interesting reflection is that this film was released on Christmas day. Now I do not consider myself a self-righteous zealot or a person that has not enjoyed a depiction of a sexual encounter based on human connection in a respectful visual, but people this is way over the top and the reviews need to say so in graphic detail. At least provide the consumer with enough information in order to make a choice based on truth. NOT "wildly entertaining, Nudity and Language kinda of information just does not reveal what is in store. Thank you for the opportunity to express my self.

"Hardcore porn"? I was surprised how much this movie lacked sex and nudity, after what I'd read about it.

[piglet]

Americans are very prudish. As has been said over and over, Americans don't mind watching graphically violent films but the squirm at the idea of sex and nudity. The scenes that bothered me the most were the most violent ones in the film, when the gay butler is punched and held over the railing and when Jordan punches his wife in the stomach.

Don't people read about films before going to see them? Don't they understand what an R rating? Gave they not seen a Scorsese film before?

[Zotyto]

I follow this board and read all the reviews. So I knew what to expect. When I saw the movie, I was a little disappointed it wasn't as shocking as I thought is would be. Some naked ladies and drugs, what's the big deal? It's not like it's Nymphomaniac.

By the way, I'm from Europe. Nobody in my theater walked out and almost everbody was laughing and found it a funny comedy. I don't think a lot of people in Europe are going to be offended by the nudity. People who call the nudity and sex scenes hardcore porn don't know what hardcore porn is.

[piglet]

Jan 1, 2014 21:00:11 GMT -5 Zotyto said:

I follow this board and read all the reviews. So I knew what to expect. When I saw the movie, I was a little disappointed it wasn't as shocking as I thought is would be. Some naked ladies and drugs, what's the big deal? It's not like it's Nymphomaniac.

By the way, I'm from Europe. Nobody in my theater walked out and almost everbody was laughing and found it a funny comedy. I don't think a lot of people in Europe are going to be offended by the nudity. People who call the nudity and sex scenes hardcore porn don't know what hardcore porn is.

Exactly! I went to school in England and even there sexuality is far more of an open topic than in the U.S. Half the states here don't even allow sex education. But that's another topic.

[kim]

I think part of this is also to blame on Paramount, I think they marketed it as a light comedy of sorts, something like "The Sting" but many did not expect it would be much darker and actually a satire. Still, I agree they could of looked up the movie before watching it.

[piglet]

I remember my grandmother went to see "Oh Calcutta!" back in the 1970's thinking she was going to see a musical about India. Boy was she surprised!