Defamation is the ruining of one’s reputation by false statements or accusations.
According to an article
by Hollywood Reporter,
Andrew Greene sued Paramount Pictures, along with other co-defendants for the
release of the movie The Wolf of Wall Street.
Greene accused Paramount Pictures of depicting him in a negative light in the
film.
The movie was inspired and based on the real-life
fraud and corruption activities in the stock market on Wall Street in the
1990s. According to Greene, the movie "contains
various scenes wherein Mr. Greene's character is portrayed as a criminal, drug
user, degenerate, depraved, and/or devoid of any morality or ethics."
However, Paramount Pictures moved to dismiss the allegations based on grounds
that the film had nothing to do with Greene’s character.
It is hard to believe that Greene
really felt that the movie defamed his named. As a matter of fact, the main
character, Jordan Belfort,
whom the movie was inspired by, stated that although the movie’s depiction of
him was accurate, he was actually worse than the movie showed. In light of this
statement, I am not convinced that Greene’s reputation was ruined enough to
file this lawsuit.
Whether Greene felt that his
character was portrayed in a negative light, what was his point in pursuing a
lawsuit against this movie? In doing so, I believe he painted an even bigger
and worse picture of himself. Instead of filing a defamation lawsuit, which is
usually done to give someone the opportunity to defend him or herself against
false statements, Greene set a disadvantage for himself. What opportunity would
filing this suit give to Greene? I hope Paramount Pictures’ motion to dismiss is granted.
