CriticSociety- film reviews

Review

Gangs of New York

Director

Martin Scorsese

Year

2002

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Tuesday, February 04, 2003

In the middle of the 19th Century, as the City of New York is being built day by day along with the whole country, massive brawls define who’s who in the streets, who’s welcome and who’s not, and who rules. This movie focuses in the particular conflict generated by the arrival of Irish immigrants, unwelcome my American “Natives” who feel that such invaders shouldn’t steal the jobs and benefits that they have worked so hard to get. To be more particular, the movie focuses in the story of Bill the Butcher (Daniel Day-Lewis), a charismatic gang leader of the Natives who becomes the leader of the Five Points by preaching his patriotic savagery and destroying all who oppose. One true opponent he once meets is ‘Priest’ Vallon (Liam Neeson), leader of the Irish. The Butcher kills this man and after many years, meets Amsterdam Vallon, the Priest’s son (Leonardo DiCaprio), a vengeful soul who might be able to forget, if only circumstance helped… But when Bill takes Amsterdam under his wing and the latter gets intimate with sexy thief Jenny Everdeane (Cameron Diaz), he finds out more about his new mentor, and so does Bill about his protégé, and the inevitable occurs, and the men become enemies.

That’s all I’ll say about the story. Did you notice how I gave you a general overview of the background first and then I told you some details of the movie’s particular story? Well, don’t take that for the way the movie works. In fact, it does revolve around that story, but while telling it, it digs into such subjects as politics (with Jim Broadbent as a corrupt politician), treason of principles (with John C. Reilly and others as Irish who now belong to the gang of the Natives) and revolution. In a time of Civil War, echoes of it affect every place in the Nation, and even big deals like the one told in this movie, and briefly retold in the first paragraph of my review, mean nothing when compared to the big deal of a whole Nation rising against abuse, racism and poverty. How the little story unfolds into the big one is a beautiful and grand achievement by Martin Scorsese, and all those involved in this amazing, sense-numbing production.

Daniel Day-Lewis is absolutely perfect and unforgettable as a man who never feels that he’s doing wrong, for his principles are well established. His performance is breath-taking for he really transmits the belief and creates a conflict, though it is clear that he’s very wrong in many aspects. Hopefully, many viewers will understand the importance of the metaphor this movie brings to the way of things today. A great cast works around Day-Lewis, with DiCaprio solid in the lead, Diaz and Henry Thomas great in young support, Broadbent, Reilly and Brendan Gleeson excellent as well. Notice Martin Scorsese as the rich man in the house where Diaz “turtle doves”.

As for the technical achievements, there are not enough words. The realism of it all not only is due to the hard work of elaborating a perfect recreation of a particular time and place, but to the dedication of making it real, not only by computer, but brick by brick, giving the audience a true feeling of time-traveling. We’re there, and we can touch every wall, and every knife can hurt us too. The edition by Thelma Schoonmaker, cinematography by Michael Ballhaus and especially the art direction and set decoration are excellent. All tuned to the music of Howard Shore (original score) and Peter Gabriel, which fits to perfection. This is a true epic and all the people who worked at it deserve applause.

If anything, overlength wounds this haunting movie. I truly can’t think of anything else.

“He was the only man I ever killed worth remembering.”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Other reviews of Gangs of New York (2002): Morris

Review

Gangs of New York

Director

Martin Scorsese

Year

2002

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Monday, February 10, 2003

As anyone who knows me well can attest, I’ve been following the awards race quite closely this year. Gangs of New York is a movie that was mentioned as Oscar-worthy even before it was completed. The talent involved was simply too much. Then the movie was released. Reactions ranged from people calling it a masterpiece to others calling it a mess. Right now the movie stands a good chance of getting a Best Picture nod, but the question is… does it deserve it? If Martin Scorsese wins the coveted Oscar he’s been denied for years… will it be because of his work here or because he’s overdue?

It’s New York circa 1846. A Civil War between the natives and the Dead Rabbits gang is about to take place. Bill the Butcher (Daniel Day-Lewis) leads the natives’ group, while the Priest (Liam Neeson) is the main guy behind the revolution as his counterpart. When the latter is killed his son witnesses the scene and is deported from the city. Years later Amsterdam (Leonardo DiCaprio) returns for revenge and finds a city in decay, where surviving is the main activity and where he meets Jenny (Cameron Diaz), a beautiful thief who also gets involved in his plans.

Let me tell you without exaggeration that watching Gangs of New York was one of the most frustrating experiences of my life. I mean, it’s a movie, I know, but I live for movies, and so does Martin Scorsese, who has been developing this project for over 20 years. Whatever happened to the guy I don’t know, but the truth is the movie had the potential to be much more. I loved the actors, the setting, the period, the story, the costumes, the photography, and yet there is something missing here. The movie never soars. It is an epic in the truest sense of the word yet it never gives itself the opportunity to reach grandness.

The movie starts and those first 20 minutes are jaw-droppingly good. The first battle, the conversation between Priest and his son, the music, the way it’s shot, it’s brilliant. But from then on the movie goes down. There are individual scenes that work expertly, most of which involve Bill the Butcher, although the first scenes showing the sexual tension between Amsterdam and Jenny are also a joy to behold. But this is one of those movies where the bits work better than the whole. It’s not like we really care for Amsterdam. Jenny slowly becomes only a plot device that doesn’t serve the story in any way. Only Bill the Butcher develops into a far more interesting character than he was in the beginning. Just watch the scene in which he tells Amsterdam about the only honorable man he ever killed.

So what’s the common denominator? This movie works because there’s one character and one performance that elevates it from becoming a worse mess than it already is. As a matter of fact, all the characters of Bill the Butcher’s generation are equally interesting, and John C. Reilly, Brendan Gleeson and Liam Neeson do a magnificent job in their roles. Then again, it is Daniel Day-Lewis who steals the movie and gets away with it. He embodies his character with such gusto and fervor that he disappears into it. Truly amazing work.

Not to say Leonardo DiCaprio, Cameron Diaz and even Henry Thomas are bad. They’re good, but they don’t have as much to do with their roles as their older companions. And then there’s Howard Shore’s score, which is nothing truly remarkable.

All in all, the movie is good, but not great. It’s spectacular at times but boring at others. It’s rousing and lackluster at the same time. It also has a poignant ending that resonates today more than it would have before. It’s just that it must’ve slipped from Scorsese’s hands at the last moment…

“Each of the five points is a finger. When I close my hand it becomes a fist.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Other reviews of Gangs of New York (2002): Groucho