Metascore
56

Mixed or average reviews - based on 16 Critics What's this?

User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 44 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: ,
  • Summary: Bud Fox has his sights set on conquering Wall Street. When legendary broker, Gordon Gekko, takes him under his wing, Fox figures he's on his way. But the road to success is paved with all sorts of corrupt acts that compromise his integrity and sense of self. Will he be able to get out before it's too late, that is, if Gekko will let him out? Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 16
  2. Negative: 2 out of 16
  1. Reviewed by: Mike Clark
    100
    It's slick, melodramatic, even inherently trashy - but a blue-chip moviegoer investment. [11 Dec 1987, p.1D]
  2. Reviewed by: Angie Errigo
    80
    As with Platoon, Stone captures the horrific essence of an environment and transfers it to us without the need for prior knowledge. Dazzling filmmaking.
  3. Reviewed by: Staff (Not Credited)
    75
    Stone intentionally set out to make a good old-fashioned liberal drama about the evils of unchecked capitalism. This approach results in a film with few shades of gray and lots of moralizing speeches, but Stone nearly pulls it off through his usual visual verve and keen casting instincts.
  4. Reviewed by: Desson Howe
    60
    The film is best when Gekko and Fox power it up, but Wall Street falls into the red when Stone's heavy-handed moralizing takes over.
  5. Wall Street is a silly, pretentious melodrama that panders to the current fascination with insider trading. [10 Dec 1987, p.1]
  6. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    40
    The entire film is in fact a ferocious meditation on the dilemma of a son choosing his father. Which one will Bud emulate: the noble failure or the triumphant sleaze? The outcome is never really in doubt, so streamlined and predictable are the characters. [14 Dec 1987, p.82]
  7. For all its hip, rat-a-tat dialogue and a sharp photographic look that give Wall Street a feeling that something exciting is happening, the movie's a bankrupt deal. [11 Dec 1987, p.E1]

See all 16 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 5
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 5
  3. Negative: 0 out of 5
  1. Jan 11, 2014
    9
    Esta pelicula me gusto mucho, tuvo drama."Wall Street" es una pelicula que tiene un excelente guion y un excelente argumento, con buenos personajes y con excelentes actuaciones de Charlie Sheen y Michael Douglas. Expand
  2. CRL
    Jul 28, 2011
    9
    Wall Street combines one of the most interesting and deepest villains ever in Gordon Gekko with an interesting and emotionally-charged plot as well as a great performance by Charlie Sheen to make one of my all-time favorite films. Expand
  3. Mar 18, 2011
    7
    I had heard a fair amount about Wall Street in the past and had dismissed it as likely being more or less what it did end up being: interesting, but not absorbing. I wanted to have watched it, though, to provide context for when I eventually watch Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, and the fact that it stars Charlie Sheen made it all the more relevant and fascinating. Charlie, as Bud Fox, is in nearly every scene of the movie, and given recent events it was hard to watch for anything other than his performance. Having watched and enjoyed Platoon last year, though, I wasn't really surprised that he performed quite well. He was dark and brooding and very intense, and more or less nailed the role, even intermittently causing me to forget that I was watching Charlie Sheen. Michael Douglas also did a fantastic job at embodying the ruthless, unscrupulous character he was portraying. That character, in turn, embodied the tone and the overarching theme of the movie, most notably with his famous "greed is good" speech. In fact, Michael Douglas was awarded the Academy Award for Best Actor for this role, and I would say deservedly so, although I haven't seen any of the other performances that were nominated that year. Martin Sheen was also great as Bud's father, but his casting made it so that, again, examining the acting - in this case Charlie and Martin's father-son dynamic - was more interesting than watching the actual movie. Add that to Charlie's mere presence, Darryl Hannah's lack of charm, wit, or sexiness as Bud's love interest, and the laughable 80's-style art, decor, fashion and technology that featured in the movie and it made for an overwhelming number of distracting factors that precluded any real immersion in the movie itself. In the end though, the main distracting factor - studying Charlie Sheen - is also the most compelling reason to watch, at least at this point in time. Combine that with Michael Douglas' performance and Wall Street becomes quite a worthwhile viewing experience. (http://diversionary-tactics.blogspot.com) Expand
  4. Jan 15, 2012
    7
    It was an interesting movie but overall it had quite a bit of flaws. I still enjoyed it though and thought Michael Douglas was an amazing lead. Worth the watch imo. Expand
  5. Jan 24, 2012
    7
    I liked the film. It was driven by Douglas's amazing performance through out and the rest of the cast was solid as well. I did not like Charlie Sheen at all in this film and thought he was terrible for this kind of role. The film is interesting and definently worth the watch but dont expect it to be the greatest film you have ever seen. Expand

Trailers