Rating: 
Summary: Would give zero stars if I could
Review: What a pathetic excuse for a film. Scorcese has re-written history to provide a story that cannot merely be described as unauthentic but purely fictional. Yet usually fiction provides some kind of entertainment value while this is so painfully dull I could scarcely sit through it.Oh. And how about of religious intolerance thrown in for good measure? The Irish Catholics are depicted as a fun-loving, faith-filled group of enthusiasts who support treat African Americans as their brothers and allow women to play major roles in their uprising. Protestants are, of course!, a bunch of intolerant back-stabbers (literally) whose demise we are supposed to applaud. Scorcese: spend your dotage sunning in Palm Beach. If this is the best you can do in your old age, take up golf!
Rating:
Summary: Soooooo Boooring!
Review: This film should have been cut down to 1-1/2 hour. DeCaprio--great actor, but miscast, in real life, he would have been beaten up a bit more when he came out of the orphanage--too pretty for this part. You needed grittier looking guy. Day-Lewis over the top, Johnny one-note, snarl, growl, snarl, growl, etc. I know he can do subtlety, and should have used a bit in this film. Two excellent actors wasted in this dismally long, boring film. If you see one fight, you've seen them all. Didn't have to bring in the Civil War Draft Riots, it just made it lose the point of the rivalry between the two main characters. We didn't need that much of a history lesson. Many of us know when the Civil War draft riots took place in New York, and those who don't didn't need to know about it in context with this film. Diaz--is this the look of a slum girl? Lots of bad things would have happened to her if she looked like that in those days in that place. Lovely hair? Who cut and styled it in the slums? Better writing could have yielded two films of this one. It was like sailing through a mess of garbage all looking about the same. I rented "The Pianist" at the same time I rented "Gangs . . .". World of difference. That actor knew how to, and did, use emotional range in his role. That's why he won an Academy Award.
Rating: 
Summary: Not for everyone taste.
Review: I enjoyed this movie a lot, even recognizing some of its big flaws. The best part is Daniel Day-Lewis. It's a pity that him seldom works making movies. I wish he did more movies. He's one of the best actors that EVER lived. The rest of the cast is also good, but simply does not have much material to work with. Cameron Diaz's character is lost in the middle. DiCaprio did his best, but, once again, the writers did not offer to him a good script. Also great are the scenarios and the historic background. I mean, it's just a background, don'pt expect a history lesson here. It's like TITANIC, foe example, where Cameron used a hystorical background to tell a love story. Here, Scorcese used history to talk about the old cliche of revenge, the diffrence being that he got enthusiasthic about his movie and really tried to pass a message. Good movie, it could have been better, but, I'm not a director, just a consumer!
Rating: 
Summary: Cinema at it's Best
Review: Whether talking about great literature or great movie making, one of the hallmarks of both is for a creative hand to draw a portrait of a perfectly realized time or place that would not have occured to us, had not some genius come along and showed it to us. Tolkien's Middle Earth. Hugo's Paris sewers. Celine's nightmare, apocalyptic landscapes. Now we have Martin Scorsese's/Jay Cocks' warped, wonderful vision/hallucination of 19th century New York. I resided in NY for many years and I sometimes wondered where the term "Hell's Kitchen" originated. Now I know. This movie offers a bird's-eye/God's-eye perspective of a brutal, awesome slice of NYC history, concentrating on a small area of Manhatten known at the time as "Five Points." An area ruled over by Bill, "The Butcher" Cutting, the most amazing, gruesome, threatening personage to be depicted in the history of cinema, perhaps. The combination of Daniel Day Lewis and Martin Scorsese is positively lethal. Do not watch if you are currently taking heart medication. You remember those old adverts for The Screaming Skull? Well be advised that this pic will do major damage to your aorta if you're not careful. It is a postcard sent from the lower regions of the Inferno. A three + hour nightmare from the other side of the Styx. Don't forget to give Charon a good tip or your way back or you're likely to take up permanent residence! Not a happy prospect, trust me!! Rent (or follow my lead and purchase) this movie! This film didn't win any major Academy Awards? Brody over Daniel Day? What are those people smoking out there? Oh right. The really good stuff!! That explains it!!
BEK
Rating:
Summary: I Couldn't Take My Eyes off the Screen!!
Review: For most of the movie, I could not take my eyes off of the screen. I sat there in the nearly empty theater, staring at the screen in shock, disbelief and horror, because I couldn't believe what I was seeing and hearing! "Gangs of New York" has got to be THE worst movie I've ever seen in my entire life. Every moment that I spent watching this film was absolute torture! The prelude to the story--showing how The Butcher came to hold his place of power in New York and how Amsterdam came to be hardened and filled with vegeance--was genuinely captivating. The battle between The Butcher's gang and the Irish ragtag gang, led by Amsterdam's father, entices you with the promise of an exciting movie ahead. It never delivers. From this point on, everything goes steadily downhill, right to the tragically disappointing finale. The moments you anticipate never come. You wait with eager anticipation for Amsterdam (Leonardo DiCaprio)to carry out his plans of vegeance on his ruthless, loathesome enemy, The Butcher (Daniel Day-Lewis), as the former infiltrates the latter's gang and gains his respect and confidence. When more than half of the movie passes, and Amsterdam is still playing right-hand man to The Butcher--even saving his life at one point--you realize with crushing disappointment that this moment will never come--and it never does. (As if that's not bad enough, The Butcher, who you grow to passionately detest throughout the course of the movie, actually becomes a HERO by the end of the film!) Unfortunately, after Amsterdam recovers his dead father's knife and vows to avenge past wrongs near the beginning, you never have any clue what he is planning, or if he's planning anything at all, because we're never really allowed to get into Amsterdam's head. This brings me to the next issue I have with this film. Unfortunately, I couldn't really empathize with Leonardo DiCaprio's character--mainly because I had no idea who he was. The characters were underdeveloped and very poorly written. Whoever made this movie could have spent more time on this essential attribute, and LESS time on unnecessary scenes (dances, bar scenes, numerous stage performances, constant pointless nude and homoerotic scenes, etc.) that made the movie drag on MUCH longer than it should have (I was so bored I couldn't keep my eyes open, and at one point, even dozed off for two or three minutes. Of course, when I opened my eyes, I saw that I hadn't missed a thing). Ultimately, there is no real plot to this movie; there are numerous subplots, resulting in confusion for the viewer. I didn't find the movie to be TOO (eek-I-can't-look-at-the-screen) violent, but there was quite a bit of violence and gore that was not necessary. Furthermore, there were quite a few things that I found unbelievable, such as the fact that Amsterdam's best friend--whose life Amsterdam had saved on, I believe, more than one occasion--jealous that Amsterdam had won the heart of the woman he wanted, betrayed Amsterdam in the worst way. It didn't make sense that he would do something so horrible that nearly cost his friend's life, and not even regret it in the least after having had ample time to give it some thought. He even went so far as to seek to become The Butcher's new right-hand man as a reward for having saved that man's life (but then again, since there was no character development, that may very well have been the guy's nature, after all). The ending, also, was ridiculous, unbelievable, pointless--and horrible. The one good thing about Gangs of New York--nearly lost amidst the chaos that was this movie-was the message it attempted to convey. It is a message that is important in times such as these: that we are all Americans because each ethnic group has fought, suffered and died for our freedom and the right to live in America: Anglo-Americans had to overcome the oppressive British government; and out of fear, they in turn oppressed other groups, such as the Irish-Americans and African-Americans. I hated this movie with a passion unequalled. My BF is still making it up to me for dragging me to this terrible movie, and rightfully so. I hate (so-called) "chick-flicks," but I should drag him to one or two, anyway, just to get my revenge. LOL.
Rating:
Summary: Civil War History told from another viewpoint
Review: This was a trully excellent movie. Although the characters are ficticious, the facts are real. The movie depicts life in the New York Irish Slums and shows the plight of immigrants arriving into the United States at the time of the "War for Southern Independence". Having read many letters and autobiographies of this period, I find the movie to be historically true, and gives a different perspective to life in America in the 1860's. By-the-way, it is also highly entertaining with excellent performances by all of the cast.
Rating:
Summary: Good For The Most Part
Review: Overall, I was very entertained by this movie. Despite how long it was, I never felt myself getting bored. Granted, I wasn't looking for a history lesson like some of the chowderheads that have reviewed this movie. If you want a history lesson, why are you going to a Hollywood movie? Go to a library or watch the History Channel for Pete's sake! I found the acting to be outstanding with one glaring exception: Cameron Diaz. Not since Coppola put his daughter in Godfather 3 have I been more amazed at such poor casting. This woman simply cannot act among the ranks of Leonardo DiCaprio and Daniel Day Lewis (and I cannot see why some people actually think she is pretty). I guess she's alright in those Something About Mary roles that require nothing more than acting goofy, but for such a moving piece of cinema, I would have picked somebody more talented for that role. I cannot recommend buying this movie based solely on Diaz. As much as I enjoyed the rest of the film I simply could not sit through it again to witness her failed attempt at acting. Definitey worth a rental though, and if Cameron Diaz doesn't completely ruin it for you, then you may find it worth buying.
Rating:
Summary: WORST MOVIE EVER!!
Review: This was by far the worst movie I saw last year. I had read an article about the backstory in Smithsonian and
thought it would be a pretty good movie to see. The amount
of blood in this movie is ludicrous. I mean from the first
scene to the end it is like one big violent blood-letting. The plot if you want to call it that because it is pretty far
from it, is laughable. The story seems to follow some kind of
path until midway thru when (spoiler) Leonardo Dicaprio's character is convinced to kill bill (Daniel Day-Lewis' character)
which makes no sense. Then the rest of the movie plays out
like a long violent cliche'. I mean really the cop who became crooked, the hooker with the heart of gold, the pyschopathic
madman who controls everything and everyone. It is just ridiculous. I will say this though. Daniel Day Lewis did a wonderful bit of acting in this movie. He really showed his versatility with his
acting in this movie. I was really impressed. I was just sad to see him in such a flop of a movie. I hope that he can make a comeback at some point. I think because of the plot (Perhaps because of the director)
the other actors are never really allowed to shine. Compare
Leonardo DiCaprios performance in this with his performance in
Catch Me if you can. He has a similar amount of screen time in
each but Catch me has alot more pathos and character development
in the writing. The acting is this movie is so bad because the
writing is so bad. These are great actors The writing has no sense of pace, no good development aspects. Take away the violence and it is really kind of booring. Notice the number
of writers on it by the way. Which is a shame because it was kind of a cool historical time to borrow from. I think this is my last Scorsese movie for a while. He really does seem to be getting worse...
Rating:
Summary: Where is this movie going?
Review: A strong and powerful look at the birthing of a city. Then it goes to - I don't know. A long movie, which usually doesn't distract me, that seems to rush to an ending that is tacked on. The detail of the period and its activities as well as social mores is incredible. Well acted for the most part. Some of the "bit" roles were memorable. Wouldn't buy it because of the disappointment at the ending but I did sit through it.
Rating: 
Summary: A Visually Stunning Period Piece - And A Fine Cast, Too!
Review: I recently purchased the "Gangs of New York" DVD, and am very impressed with the film. It just cements Martin Scorcese's place in history as one of the greatest American film makers of all time - Oscar or not! The cinematography, set design, costumes and art directions made everything look "vintage." This is indeed a visually satisfying period piece. As for the performances, I really can't complain. Leo DiCaprio and Cameron Diaz both turn in strong performances as do the rest of the cast, but Daniel Day-Lewis is without a doubt the jewel in this film's crown. Honestly, he cannibalized every scene he was in as the Irish-hating "native" gang leader/thug Bill "the Butcher" Cutting. One scene in particular that gave me chills was when "The Butcher" publicly brutalizes Amsterdam Vallon (DiCaprio) after the young man's initial attempt to avenge his father's death fails. Upon the crowd's request that Bill publicly off him right then and there, he loudly declares "HE AIN'T EARNED A DEATH AT MY HANDS!" Is there any role that this gifted performer CAN'T do?! The film is a bit on the long side, but not so much that it takes away from the overall story. Could it have been better? Probably, but I would still recommend this movie.
| 
