Gangs of New York (2002)
Genre: Crime / Drama
Duration: 167 minuten
Country:
United States / Italy
Directed by: Martin Scorsese
Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Day-Lewis and Cameron Diaz
IMDb score:
7,5 (500.447)
Releasedate: 14 December 2002
Gangs of New York plot
"America was born in the streets."
The film covers the period between 1846 and 1863 in New York's "Five Points", the most violent area in the world at the time. The Irish immigrants entering New York create several conflicts with the natives. Amsterdam Vallon, the son of one of these immigrants, is out for revenge after his father's death.
Social Media
Actors and actresses
Amsterdam Vallon
Bill "The Butcher" Cutting
Jenny Everdeane
Boss Tweed
Happy Jack
Johnny Sirocco
"Priest" Vallon
Walter "Monk" McGinn
McGloin
Shang
Reviews & comments
tbouwh
-
- 5809 messages
- 5398 votes
This one hits you raw. Intense film, which repeatedly raised the question: 'Did NY really look like this'? A harsh world, in which gangs rule, and the police actually have nothing to contribute. In the first 10 minutes of the film, Scorsese already lets a lot of blood spatter, in a goosebumps-provoking scene in which Liam Neeson immediately comes to his end, not in the least. . I didn't really like the way of filming in this fight, as if the camera was set to play twice as fast. Daniel Day-Lewis is as unparalleled as he is repulsive, he plays the ultimate villain, and is so convincing that you almost start to think it is real. I found Di Caprio a little less in this film: he lacked real expressiveness. I missed something in the way he played that broken boy whose father was killed. This could have been much more convincing. Cameron Diaz is well cast, because with her appearance in this film she fits well with the people who were walking around in NY at the time. Her romance with Di Caprio has gone a bit too far, but fortunately it does not detract from the harshness of this film. An empty feeling was left afterwards, and that's why I stick to 4*. It is certainly a good movie. Maybe reconsider.
Translated from Dutch · View original
Lovelyboy
-
- 3906 messages
- 2920 votes
Seen several times in the meantime and have always come to the conclusion that the film falls short and inadvertently gets lost in a state that is too whipped up between fact and fiction.
A more than fine background is initially presented with an x number of facts that are more than quite accurate such as the gang wars, The Dead Rabbits, The Bowery Boys, political involvement, Bill Cutting aka William Poole, Hell Cat Maggie with her claw and pointed teeth, and the setting around The Five points in Mulberry Street Manhattan. Together with the decoration and the raw fight in the snowy streets, the film starts more than fine. Until then I always think, could I have seen it wrong...? No Unfortunately.
Once after the return from Amsterdam, the film falls too slowly into the so-called revenge. Something that is not only stretched and drawn out far too much, but also doesn't touch me personally, because the character of Amsterdam is too one-dimensional. That also applies to a certain extent to Bill the Butcher who only really impresses and appeals once in a while, while Lewis tries to make the best of it. Besides the not particularly appealing story, the film also gets bogged down in a pretentious, too stylized, and above all too long whole that does not manage to hold the attention. In addition, despite some accurate facts, the film feels over-made and overblown. The editing during some battles is also sometimes very weird and adds little. Add to that ginnegap Cameron Diaz with that silly look in the eye and stupid giggle, someone I always find very difficult to take seriously, and the film is actually at a dead end. Not to mention that the soundtrack sometimes hits like a pig.
No, for the umpteenth time I have come to the conclusion that this Scorsese is not for me and it is also a mystery to me that the film garnered so much praise and received nominations.
Translated from Dutch · View original
filmfan0511
-
- 1092 messages
- 1123 votes
Gangs of New York is an intermediate level Scorsese. With a professional like him, that means that you are nevertheless still dealing with a very decent film, but there are still some flaws and negatives. For example, the film easily takes way too long, and because of the many characters and subplots present, a certain form of focus, or at least a sense of coherence, is missing. It does feel quite epic and grand because of that, but I don't think that always worked out positively. The main characters of DiCaprio and Cameron Diaz are also not the most catchy. And I don't think that's the actors' fault, but rather a combination of less writing and simply the fact that the characters they play are boring and uninteresting. The ending is also a bit over the top, especially that last monologue and the images that slowly change in contemporary New York. It's all so thick.
But okay, enough with the negatives. Visually, in terms of decoration and costumes, as well as in terms of backgrounds and sets, this is truly a beautiful film. So much attention to detail; flawless. Scorsese really creates a world of its own here, where you get sucked into it. Always admirable, and the historical events that take place in the background and are occasionally mentioned also contribute to that immersion. The other big, and obvious, plus is Daniel Day-Lewis's divine (or diabolical) feat. Fair is fair; He also plays the funniest/best character of course. Still, in the hands of a lesser actor, Bill The Butcher might not work at all; it's a very over the top character. Day-Lewis, however, just embraces this, and dabbles in it, and that's a choice that absolutely works. Without his role/acting performance you would honestly have a lesser film.
Modest 3.5*.
Translated from Dutch · View original
Trending Movies
Corporate & Media
Realtimes Network
Innovatieweg 20C
7007 CD, Doetinchem, Netherlands
+31(315)-764002
