Rating: 
Summary: Daniel Day-Lewis' Triumph.
Review: As Bill the Butcher, Day-Lewis steals the cinema from his talented co-stars. His character is one that would rip a man (preferably an immigrant to America) apart with a smile on his face the entire time. The fervor and controversy will go, of course, to Leonardo DiCaprio, but this is Day-Lewis' movie.Cameron Diaz sparkles and rocks in her role as the woman whom Bill the Butcher took under his wing, but she finds herself captivated by DiCaprio's Amsterdam Vallon, son of "Priest" Vallon (Liam Neeson), leader of one of the NY gangs and killed by Bill sixteen years previous. I'm hot for her, and she does not disappoint. DiCaprio is all right in the film, in perhaps the role with the least amount of flash and pomp. He performs ably, and should be viewed as an actor and not a heartthrob, but that's a difficult thing to do. Kudos also go to the supporting actors in this picture, like John C. Reilly as a former soldier of Priest's turned corrupt cop, and Oscar winner Jim Broadbent as Boss Tweed, the corrupt politician who ultimately finds himself in the middle of the war between Bill and Amsterdam. In all, a worthy picture of your time, and Day-Lewis will no doubt find himself a nomination come award time.
Rating: 
Summary: Gangs of the Underworld
Review: The fault line of this epic picture lies with the set decoration which may seem to be a minor flaw, but in fact distorts the sweep and accuracy of an otherwise beautifuly realized historical panorama.
Set in the squalor of lower Manhattan tenements in the mid 1800s, I was left wondering why Scorcese abandons the realism of the filthy conditions as depicted in books like Jacob Riis "How the Other Half Lives", in favor of some medieval like labyrinthe of underground chambers and tunnels. These peculiar sets are surreal when realism is what is called for to best serve this chapter of little known history.
All that aside, when Daniel Day Lewis is on the scene, his immense, intense, inventive presence is so mesmerizing that I could overlook the off-putting off kilter underworld background,and watch as Bill The Butcher Cutting-----lifts the movie aloft making any background seem irrelevant. Thats how good he is. DiCaprio almost keeps up, but Lewis's performance is one of those once in a lifetime "actors and their roles".He is "cutting edge" personified.
Rating: 
Summary: Movie Falls Short of Greatness
Review: I'm a big fan of Martin Scorsese's movies. You don't get much better than Taxi Driver, Good Fellas and Casino. Classics in my opinion. However, after viewing Gangs of New York, I felt somewhat let down. The biggest problem with this movie is its editing. It felt a bit rushed in places. The final confrontation between DiCaprio's and Lewis' characters fizzles at the end. Also, some of the characters could have used a bit more development, especially John C. Reilly's Irish cop. You see him in several scenes, but his character never really makes it out of second gear to become a real bad guy. On a positive note, Gangs of New York is visually stunning. The New York of the 1860's is painstakingly brought to life in both its detailed set and costumes. If anything, this film should receive an Academy Award just on that aspect alone. I understand that Scorsese's original version of this movie was much longer than its 3 hour theatrical release. Perhaps a directors cut of this movie on DVD will do it more justice.
Rating:
Summary: Martin Scorsese in top form!
Review: From the opening credits where you hear the razor on the skin until the very end of the film, you will NOT be able to take your eyes off of the screen. The sets are the most astounding there have been since probably David Lean's "Doctor Zhivago". Martin Scorsese brings you into this world in 1846 and grinds you into the snow and dirt just like Bill the Butcher does when he first sets foot on the snow in the opening scenes. Daniel Day-Lewis's acting elevates this story to a different level, and you find yourself falling into a love/hate relationship with his character. Bill the Butcher will be a character to remember throughout the years just like Hannibal Lecter, or Jack Nicholsons "The Joker". Dicaprio is adequate as Amsterdam Vallon, he does what he can with an underwritten role. Diaz is also adequate as the pickpocket Jenny Everdeane. I won't lie to you. The story is predictable, and you know who is going to turn on who. What you come to see this movie for is the directing, acting, sets, and a VERY IMPORTANT history lesson. Scorsese is in top form with this picture and it has all of his signature trademarks in one form or another (even a cameo by scorsese himself). I had to drive 50 MILES out of my way to see this picture, and it was worth every mile of driving!
Rating:
Summary: One of the best films of 2002!
Review: This is a powerful film and another fine accomplishment for Martin Scorsese, whose body of work stands with the great directors in history. It has the feel of an epic, and the effort made to bring one back to the New York of the mid-1800's is impressive. There are special effect shots which make you swear there was a camera then to capture the clipper ships sailing around Manhatten and, you wonder, how did he get rid of all the buildings from today. Those shots capture the feeling of place, but it is the story which grabs the viewer. Although it is a tale of turf battles and gangs based on a true story, it really is the story of Bill the Butcher, the leader of a reign of terror that lasted for almost twenty years. It is a harsh, violent film, filled with racial slurs and the hatred of the Nativists, the group led by the Butcher, who want to keep out the daily arrival of new immigrants by any means necessary. The story also weaves in the New York draft riots, not a particularly proud moment in the city's history, and shows the interaction between the gangs and Tammany Hall and the Mayor, Boss Tweed. The cast is outstanding, with Daniel Day-Lewis and Leonardo DiCaprio playing the roles of the Butcher and Amsterdam Vallon, whose relationship between each other changes over the years. Day-Lewis is a virtual lock for a Best Actor nomination and DiCaprio also provides a fine performance. John C. Reilly is wonderful as always ... and I wish there would have been more of him in this film. Although three hours long, I could not help but wish that there will be a Director's cut someday that will provide more detail about some of the other characters. Cameron Diaz plays a part-timer hooker and still manages to look good covered in the dirt and squalor of the 1860's. Jim Broadbent gives a good turn as Boss Tweed and continues to show his versatility as an actor. Although a great attempt at being a classic, the movie falls short when comparing it to Scorsese's best work, which I think is Goodfellas and Raging Bull. ... The sets and the cinematography are really fantastic. This movie, though violent, is powerful and worth seeing on the big screen.
Rating:
Summary: A return to artistic filmmaking
Review: I just saw this movie and I have to say - wow. This movie is everything that I expected from Scorese and a lot more. Not only does he draw out amazing performances from his cast - mainly Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Day-Lewis & Cameron Diaz - but he truly brings to life the grimy environment of Five Points, Manhattan in 1846. DiCaprio plays Amsterdam Vallon, the son of "Priest" Vallon. Amsterdam witnessed the demise of his father at the hands of Bill the Butcher as a child. After spending well over a decade in a reform school, he returns to Five Points to avenge his father's death. In a strange twist of fate, Bill the Butcher takes him under his wing and becomes his mentor, and in a way his father figure. No one except for a select few know Amsterdam's history. In the process, Amsterdam falls in love with Jenny (played by Cameron Diaz), a pickpocket and thief who is the spark that causes this huge fire of a gang war. What ensues is captivating. The film touches on many of the historical events of the time - the Civil War, the immigration, the division between the rich and the poor, racism in an era of emancipation as well as political corruption. If this film were a painting, the history of the time serves as a background while the violence, power struggles and vendettas serve as the foreground. The movie climaxes twice - once with a whimper and the second time with a bang. I will of course, not ruin the film for you, but I will say this: Scorese does an excellent job of playing with the "painting" that is his film. He adjusts the focus several times and as far as I can see, accurately portrays New York during the mid-19th century. This film, and Scorese, do not hesitate for an instant to show you the true character of not only the people, but of the environment and the age. ...
Rating:
Summary: Don't Join This Gang
Review: Having just come from seeing Gangs of New York, here is what you need to know. The movie is based on the book of the same title by Asbury. It was written a long time ago and it has been an obsession in the life of Martin Scorsese since 1970(Look closely and you will see him make a cameo in the film). The movie tells the story of the 5 Points area of New York. It was the worst of all of the slums and inhabited mostly by the Irish who were coming off the ships in the thousands. The movie opens with Priest Vallom being slain by a rival gang member, Bill the Butcher, played to perfection by Daniel Day Lewis. The murder is witnessed by Priest's son, Leonardo DiCaprio, who grows up and vows to exact revenge on the butcher. Thew movie endws with the famous draft riots of the late 1800's that almost burnt the city to the ground. Here are a few thoughts to condsider:
-The film is an epic by every measure. The sheer size of the movie and its scope is something that only could have been accomplished by a director of Scorses' calibur. -The movie is extremely violent, if you have a weak stomach it is not for you -The movie is slow, the plot is slow to develop and at nearly 3 hours, the movie is slow to end. -Daniel Day Lewis is superb as Bill the Butcher, all of the other performances were average. -The ending is extremely anti-climactic. All in all, it was a great attempt at an amazing story, but it falls just short. Daniel Day Lewis saves the movie and without his performance, the movie would not even get a star in my opinion. I you have 3 hours to kill, see it, if not, you will not be missing much.
Rating:
Summary: Scorsese's New Masterpiece
Review: When I first heard that Martin Scorsese was going to make Gangs of New York (oh so long ago!), I was extremely excited. The story of old New York, of the street gangs, the draft riots of 1863, the immigrants and the Know Nothings was a tale that had to be told. I wanted to see the poverty, the violence, the whorehouses, the filthy streets that no New Yorker could even imagine today. These are the things that Hollywood has never really glanced at, never given it the epic treatment it deserves. But I knew if anyone could do it, it was Scorsese, who understands New York and its amazing and unique history. I was a little worried that I was setting my standards too high, but after viewing the long awaited movie, I am totally satisfied with this picture. It fulfilled all the hopes and expectations I had which were extremely lofty. In the mid 19th century, New York was a city like few others on Earth. It was economically explosive, with massive factories and ports. It was also the gateway for the waves or Irish immigrants who flowed into the city from their famine stricken country. The Irish were yet another part of the cultural melting pot of the city, which was already beginning to stir. Against this human tide were the nativists. These men viewed the Irish as a foreign invader, destined to corrupt America with their Roman Catholic religion. Controlling this city was an increasingly well oiled political machine, ran by the powerful Boss Tweed, who's Tammany Hall establishment decided who won and who lost. The movie begins in 1846 as the Irish gangs under Liam Neilson fight back against the nativists, under the command of Bill the Butcher, played by Daniel Day Lewis. Watching the fight is Neilson's son, Amsterdam, who is played by Leonardo DiCaprio. The fight and its outcome leads to Amsterdam's quest, to kill Bill the Butcher in revenge. 16 years later, his anger is still boiling. By this time, Bill is the crime king of lower Manhattan, working with Tammany Hall to seize absolute control of city government. Leo at first works for Bill, who is an extremely complex man. He actually begins to admire the man who killed his father, but does not forget his pledge of vengeance. The story ends amid the anarchy and violence of the 1863 draft riots. The most impressive thing about this movie was the atmosphere. Scorsese does just a great job putting the viewer back in old New York, with unbelievably detailed sets and costumes. Spectacular, really spectacular. The story wanders a bit once and a while, but it is intriguing and energetic. The battle scenes are some of the most brutal in cinema history, as is the unbelievably common brawling and murder all throughout the movie. Leo DiCaprio does a very good job as Amsterdam, as does a surprisingly effective Cameron Diaz as a pick pocket/prostitute who falls in love with Leo. However, what carries this movie, and what makes it great, is the always-impressive Daniel Day Lewis. Bill the Butcher is probably the most memorable villain since Hannibal Lecter. He is everything, witty, charming, educated, compassionate, twisted and unimaginably brutal. They should just give Lewis the Oscar now for best actor, as this is the best performance I've seen in a while. You actually start to root for Bill, that's how effective Lewis is in presenting this complex man. Epic filmmaking at its finest.
Rating:
Summary: like the dickens!
Review: i think scorsese was trying to do what kurosawa did in 'ran', make that one last great 'personal vision' film that he's been dying to do for a long time. unlike 'ran', though, which was an unqualified success, 'gangs of new york' is a mixed. the best way i can characterize this film is that it reminds me of a dickens novel: it's long, it's uneven, it has some colorful characters, and it ends with a bang. the whole story of dicaprio's character just didn't move me. i think it's partly leo himself who is too much the lightweight to be the heavy, especially opposite bill the butcher. and it's partly the screenplay/directing. the story dragged and was even embarassingly bad in spots - like every time dicaprio and diaz were on the screen together. it's the closest thing to a hollywood melodrama that scorsese's ever done. one reason i can pinpoint is that the characters all lack the psychological depth that scorsese's best characters have. for example, bill's a butcher and he's a racist, but so was travis bickle. yet bill is a two-dimensional cartoon character compared to travis. in some ways, i think the expansive, generalising 'epic' genre doesn't suit scorsese's talent which leans towards the intensive, detailed, psychological portrait. whatever the reason, i found myself looking at my watch every ten or fifteen minutes, that's how bad it was. that is, until the last half hour which was great! the staging of the mob riot was riveting. scorsese obviously paid attention to kurosawa's battle scenes, and even borrowed the little stunt of the spurting blood kurosawa created for his film 'sanjuro'. it's this story of the poor irish immigrants who were conscripted into a war they didn't make that really drove home scorsese's point about the contribution of these poor souls to the making of america. not the dicaprio/day lewis story which was supposed to personalize the point, but got lost somewhere in the telling. i should mention the opening tracking shot and the battle scene in five points was also very good. some other notable points. the sets were excellent and the camera work and editing were very good. in fact, in the middle hour and a half of the film, i found myself looking and thinking about these things more than following the story itself. that's how good they were - or how bad the story was. the shooting of the boxing match on the barge, in particular, almost made me think i was watching 'raging bull, the sequel'. an interesting film. not one of scorsese's best. worth shelling out the $ to see in the cinema if you're a die-hard scorsese fan, or a dicaprio groupie. otherwise, you might consider waiting for the rental. last, seeing as the oscar season is almost upon us, i hope this film does not win for best picture. it doesn't deserve it. 3 stars only on the strengths of the production, camera work, editing, and the very good first and last half hour.
Rating:
Summary: Flawed but Still Fascinating
Review: If Martin Scorsese gets his long overdue Best Direction Oscar with "Gangs of New York," it will be a fitting film to represent the span of his amazing career. Gangs plays like Scorsese's final exam in film, taking the themes from all of his films and fitting them together. Here's a film that contains the exploration of American violence of "Goodfellas" and "Casino"; the charasmatic anti-heroes of "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull"; the periodic elements of "The Age of Innocence"; the epic scope and religious imagery of "The Last Temptation of Christ" and "Kundun"; and more, all contained in the same small neighborhood feel that was at the heart of Scorsese's first classic, "Mean Streets." To watch it to take a tour of all things Scorsese, and that alone is worth the price of admission. Naturally, that is also the problem with "Gangs of New York." It's a movie that comes at you on so many different levels that it constantly feels on the verge of falling apart. Fitting that a film that took over three decades to make would have such an awkward start. The opening of Gangs puts you in a world so utterly unfamiliar, you don't feel like it's at all real. It feels stagey, even wrong, in terms of costumes, editing and even music. But as the film progresses, it slowly grips you as it takes you through a guide of old New York that feels more like the OK Corral than anything memory or imagination can come up with. It helps that Scorsese has Daniel Day-Lewis working on his side to get under your skin. Day-Lewis easily gives the performance of the year as Bill the Butcher, and he does it almost totally with his eyes. Channelling his inner De Niro (who probably would have played this part had the film actually been made when it was intended to), Day-Lewis' wild eyes draw you in with just a glare and keep you glued to the screen as he plays out his blood feud with Leonardo DiCaprio's Amsterdam Vallon. Give DiCaprio credit for partially shedding his boyish image, but he can't stand a chance in a charisma match against Day-Lewis. DiCaprio's charm is mostly muted here on purpose, and that tends to work against him, because his matinee idol persona pops out at inopportune times during the film, particularly in the film's climax, which is otherwise electrifying. It's the same problem that plagues Cameron Diaz, who is miscast in a role that is largely underwritten and unnecessary. But character (with the enormous exception of Day-Lewis) is almost beside the point here. The idea of Gangs is to take you through an unfamiliar chapter of American history and show its parallels to the world we live in today. And, in that sense, it ends of being a smashing success. The violence, the morality, the politics, and all the other issues that consume our world today are here, but in the context of a place that was essentially a free-for-all a century and a half ago. Scorsese has long made films that you observe more than you actually watch, and Gangs is the movie that best fits that description. Its weaknesses are apparent, but almost necessary given the task at hand. Gangs may never have the long legacy of movies like "Goodfellas" or "Taxi Driver," but it is a fitting cumulative effort from one of the movies' true masters.
| 
