“Leonardo DiCaprio had to immerse himself in the world of glamour and greed,” said BBC Breakfast this morning in reference to the actor’s latest Golden Globe award for his performance in Jordan Belfort’s The Wolf of Wall Street screen adaptation.
In an interview for BBC1’s Breakfast show, DiCaprio said of Belfort’s book that it was written as a cautionary tale and that it reflects something within our very culture. He denied, when prompted by the interviewer, that his attitude to life is in any way comparable to that of his character, although he did allow that “the lifestyle is attractive.”
The film broke records for the amount of swearing in it, and has an 18 rating. David Austin from the British Board of Film Classification was invited on the show to give some insight into the BBFC’s decision to update its guidelines to give “greater weight to the overall tone or theme” of a film.
In commenting on The Wolf of Wall Street’s record-breaking amount of swearing, BBFC’s David Austen claimed that: “In the classification of that film swearing is not the key issue. (…) There were several sex scenes which featured group sex and sadomasochistic sex, and the film also contains quite a lot of drug use as we just heard from Leonardo DiCaprio, including snorting cocaine from naked bodies. So those on their own put the film to 18.”
I have to admit that does not surprise me, although I was somewhat perplexed that this particular subject made it onto BBC screens at 9am in the morning. Presumably most children are expected to be in school by that time. Just hope that those who stayed behind with a cold were promptly redirected to CBBC.
How quaint too that in the context of discussing sadomasochistic sex, group sex and drug abuse, the guest was still aware of the no-swearing rule, as exemplified by the remainder of his comment: “There was a lot of use of the F-word, and there were three uses of even stronger language, including one directed from/by a man to a woman. So the language contributed to the 18 rating, but the 18 rating was already secured by sex and hard drug misuse.”
Hard drug misuse? It made me wonder whether there are such circumstances when hard drugs are deemed to have been used appropriately. Perhaps if characters were satisfied to snort cocaine off mirrors, like any self-respecting celebrity, then it would cut the mustard with the BBFC’s expectations.
No wonder the presenter, Susanna Reid, felt the need to apologise for the excess of information at such an early hour.
All I know is that I’ll have my “foul language” and “extreme sex” checklist at the ready for my next cinema stint.
The Wolf of Wall Street is due in cinemas across the UK on Thursday, the 16th of January.
vic briggs 
Interesting point, the topic is unsavoury for before the watershed, but as long as nobody drops the F-Bomb it’s all aboveboard. Great article 🙂
Thank you, Nicola. It was one topic I did not expect to have for breakfast this morning. 🙂
I think they say too much, too early, these days. I hate swearing too.
Thank you, Richard. I agree. I don’t think the guest had been briefed on where to draw the line and I presume that the presenters were as surprised, but to be honest I don’t know what they expected considering the nature of the film. The BBFC representative was just doing his job – a little too well, granted.
A little! LOL
It will probably have a huge audience due to the publicity beforehand. Personally I think I will give it a miss.
You are right. These days publicity makes the film, although I assume that once it is released, it has to live up to the hype.
Oh God! I watched that movie in theatre and had black blood oozing from my ears. I definitely did not expect that much swearing and sex in it. Was a little overboard and I am not sure how it got into oscar nominations. It definitely needed a whole lot of editing.
Thank you for letting me know, KG. It’s coming here on Thursday. I wasn’t sure whether to go and see it or not. Your comment has made me rethink it. May let this one be.
It was a little awkward for me, even though I am no stranger to such movies. It actually beat Pulp Fiction in that cadre, but then Pulp Fiction had more meat than this 🙂 If only they concentrated on the main story a little bit more and a little more better editing it would have been much much better, according to me.
And definitely not a movie to discuss in the 9 AM news for sure 🙂
Understood. I loved Pulp Fiction (watched it when was still a young ‘un 🙂 ) Thank you, KG.
I just saw this movie in Dubai and they had censored half of it. They even had a notice saying there was going to be a lot of censoring for this movie.
Interesting. I didn’t realise that it was done elsewhere. What did you think of it? Or was too much cut out to be able to form an opinion one way or another?
I thought it was crazy even after all the censoring.
Wow – it must be very full on indeed if even censoring didm;t manage to mellow it down. Thank you for letting me know.
hard drug misuse lol as if there is a right way to use hard drugs 🙂
glamour and greed? surely most actors have experienced glamour and greed?
i love the way you tell it 🙂
I imagine that actors – in Hollywood at least – have had their fair share of this lifestyle. Would not want to put all in the same basket, but it does seem to be the norm: at least from an outsider’s perspective.
i remember Juliette Lewis gave up a fame and money to join a punk band,
obviously can’t stereotype but ye 🙂
Quite right 🙂
PS: Thank you, TwinCentaur. 🙂
Here’ across the pond, where the author of the book lived his over-the-top life at the expense of many people who trusted him with their hard-earned money and his own wife and children were left with stigma and shame, there is a minority who refuse to see this picture, no matter what the rating or the accolades. It glamorizes the complete absence of regard for anyone but himself. “The lifestyle is attractive..” Indeed.
I think you are right, Derby. I have not read the book, and have not watched the movie, so I do not know the story, but I can guess it. The recession was caused by systemic failure and the protagonists of this tale were at its epicentre. I fully understand why those who have suffered at the hands of those who gambled away the world’s wealth, would not want to promote or support such attitudes in any way. Thank you for your comment. It made me want to go away and do some more research on this.
http://www.laweekly.com/informer/2013/12/26/an-open-letter-to-the-makers-of-the-wolf-of-wall-street-and-the-wolf-himself?showFullText=true
here’s another perspective!
Thank you!
All right, now I’m intrigued to watch the movie. See how that works on the human psyche?
Perhaps they are right after all that all publicity is good publicity 🙂
That’s my view 🙂 Though I hope I do not have to endure that type of publicity for my own work, but it’s out of my hands, and in the hands of my characters. I wonder what they’ll do next. 🙂
Although universal popularity is unlikely for anyone, you are quire right: it is out of our hands and we have better things to do than worry about it. More worlds to create, more characters to adventure with 🙂
And what an adventure it is 🙂
Pingback: January’s Jousters | vic briggs