Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.

The Similarities And Differences Between The Wolf Of Wall Street And Goodfellas

Isn’t it a pleasure to see Martin Scorsese igniting controversy again? The Wolf of Wall Street has inspired some lively debates over its morality, its depiction of women, its glorification of greed and corruption, and its unfettered vulgarity. It had almost seemed as though the director had either veered into safe territory with a family-friendly film like Hugo (over which the closest thing to controversy was Scorsese’s decision to make it in 3D) or had established himself as enough of a credible artist that his work would be met with only fawning enthusiasm, a result of earned respect that can sometimes move filmmakers beyond the reach of criticism.
This article is over 10 years old and may contain outdated information
[h3]Differences:[/h3] [h2]1) Amped up energy[/h2]

The Wolf of Wall Street

Recommended Videos

For its time, Goodfellas possessed an energy that was relatively unprecedented. It was snappy. Not only was the pace of the editing beautifully manic at times, but the energy exuded by its performers made the gangster life seem like one we’d all want to have, and by the end, that same energy made the results of that life even more devastating.

Wall Street is an even higher energy environment than the 1960s and 70s mob scene (or most anywhere else for that matter), and The Wolf of Wall Street had to reflect that. This was the 80s after all, and one of the first pieces of paternal boss advice Matthew McConaughey’s character gives to the young Jordan Belfort is to use cocaine (also: masturbate more). So of course this story is going to have an even more manic energy than the child’s play that was Henry Hill’s crew—the financial stakes are higher, the drugs more plentiful, and the cultural and legal regulations seemingly inapplicable. The energy expended in the highs, though, also leads to the lows reaching far greater depths.

Scorsese experimented far more with improvisation in this film than any he has made before, so he says, and it’s one reason Jonah Hill’s contribution can’t be understated. Both Scorsese and DiCaprio cite Hill’s improvisational prowess as a driver of the film’s spontaneous flow. It also gives it an incredibly contemporary (you could say Apatow-esque) feel to its humor.

Continue reading on the next page…


We Got This Covered is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy