Directed by:
Martin ScorseseCinematography:
Michael BallhausComposer:
Howard ShoreCast:
Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz, Jim Broadbent, John C. Reilly, Henry Thomas, Liam Neeson, Brendan Gleeson, Gary Lewis, Stephen Graham (more)Plots(1)
Amsterdam Vallon (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a young Irish immigrant released from prison. He returns to the Five Points seeking revenge against his father’s killer, William Cutting (Daniel Day-Lewis), a powerful anti-immigrant gang leader. He knows that revenge can only be attained by infiltrating Cutting’s inner circle. Amsterdam’s journey becomes a fight for personal survival and to find a place for the Irish people in 1860’s New York. (Umbrella Entertainment)
(more)Videos (2)
Reviews (13)
One great (Day-Lewis) and other good (DiCaprio, Reilly, Gleeson) performances are met with a lousy script, Scorsese's tired direction and outrageously long runtime. After about an hour, the fight of gangs against gangs turns into the viewer’s fight against boredom... And boredom will win out in the end. You could count the impressive scenes on one hand, and the film is quite strange in that it wants to feel like an intimate drama and a sweeping epic at times, but it doesn't quite manage either. I was also struck by the music. I don't mean the Howard Shore music, but the modern music that plays in the opening battle - I seem to have misunderstood something about its use. Not to mention the final slow tune by U2.__P.S. Liam Neeson was here for maybe only five minutes, but he still impressed me the most after Daniel Day-Lewis.
()
Scorsese is back! Personally, one of the peaks of the historical genre for me, with great sets and Daniel Day-Lewis. It's not fast, it's not aggressive, I wouldn't hesitate to call it a tribute to classics. It is slow storytelling with emphasis on characters, with minimal visual effects, accompanied by period music. An impressive fresco.
()
That organized crime played a significant role in the building of American society, not only during Prohibition, is widely known, and the intertwining of American political elites at the local level with the underworld could be the basis for epic TV series that would grab the attention of crowds while still staying true to reality. Scorsese could have undoubtedly directed a magnificent story without using exaggerated elements like in the case of Gangs of New York. Even the opening scene of the battle between two clans looks like something out of a dark medieval fantasy, full of characters who seem to have just stepped out of a sadomasochistic roleplay session. It's all shot for effect, with brutal violence and exaggeration that would be more fitting for a comic book. What works perfectly is the scene that truly breathes a romanticized, yet still somewhat accurate, history of America's most famous metropolis. The cast, led by Leonardo DiCaprio and Daniel Day-Lewis, is also solid. However, from a director of Martin Scorsese's caliber, I expected something more than a costume drama with a B-movie theme based on these non-existent underworld rituals and their glorification. The reality was much more down-to-earth. Overall impression: 60%.
()
The question is what you expect from a filmmaker of Scorsese's calibre: a disposable product or something that will last for ages and that you will love to come back to. I expected the latter, but got the former. The product comes in an attractive package, the production design is meticulously detailed, there are dozens of extras in front of the camera in most shots, and the 100 million budget is palpable. Scorsese artfully inserts shots of period illustrations into the plot, which positively highlight the atmosphere of 19th century New York. The actors, Caprio and Diaz are excellent, but above them all looms the demonic Day Lewis with his artificial eye, you wouldn’t want to mess with him. The story: that’s were they dropped the ball. Gangs of New York is a portrait of an era that doesn’t go deep. The first two acts run like clockwork, but after a plot twist in the last act, the whole narrative goes haywire leading to a completely chaotic ending. The question is who is the culprit, the frequent reshoots or the bad script. I often like to return to Scorsese's films, such as The Last Temptation of Christ or Taxi Driver, as true art with profound content. Unfortunately, there’s no chance of that in this case. Overall, I'd say it's about a three-and-a-half-star film, but the actors give it their all and my respect for the Master is still high.
()
The script is a questionable mess that probably wants to be something in the style of The Godfather or Once Upon a Time in America, but in the end it is just a patchwork of scenes. But those scenes are so impressively delivered and acted that it doesn't really matter that much.
()
Ads