Gangs of New York...

[Guest Mole]

I know there are other topics about this movie, but about how good you thought the movie is.

 

This is defiently the best movie of the year. From the cinematography, score, scenery, the story, and most of all the acting.

 

Daniel-Day Lewis did an awesome job with Bill the Butcher. Leo did a good job also, along with Cameron Diaz. It is great to see Cameron come along way since her first film. In the Mask, she did an alright job. But in GoNY, she did an great job, defiently worth an Oscar nod.

 

If anything, Daniel-Day should so get the Oscar for his role. Bar-non. Scorsese also deserves an Oscar for his directing. If you see it, look out for his cameo too.

 

I give it *** 1/2 stars.

 

What do you fellas think of it?

[Guest NoCalMike]

Daniel Day Lewis should get best Actor.

[Guest Ravenbomb]

I've no qualms with any of htat (except I'd give it ****)

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

Mild, if obvious spoilers within.

 

Already said my peace on it here, but in summary: Daniel Day Lewis is amazing, the sets and costumes are lovely, and the plot is engaging right up to the point that Bill the Butcher discovers Amsterdam's identity. It falls into typical dull epic form after that, and the imposition of all the draft riots and heavy-handed "social commentary" over that takes the film off its narrative rail and leads to a very unsatisfying conclusion. Not helped out by flat work from Diaz and DiCaprio.

 

Decent, but heavily flawed.

[Guest godthedog]

i actually thought the photography was typical glitzy 90s short-attention-span studio stuff, and not very unique.

 

that's a minor problem though. i was bowled over completely by the whole thing.

 

can't say if it was REALLY the best movie of 2002 for lack of seeing so many movies, but definitely the best one i saw in 2002.

[Guest Mole]

Edwin, you didn't think Diaz and Leo did a good job?

[Guest Ravenbomb]

I can't stand DiCaprio. Can't stand him, hate him, wanted to cut his throat out in Romeo + Juliet and Titanic, I just plain hate him. But even I liked him in Gangs of New York. If he's in 2 more movies I like, I won't be able to hate him anymore

[Guest C.H.U.D.]

This was #1 in my top 10 for 2002, followed closely by Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, which I recommend everyone should see.

[Guest Mole]

I can't stand DiCaprio. Can't stand him, hate him, wanted to cut his throat out in Romeo + Juliet and Titanic, I just plain hate him. But even I liked him in Gangs of New York. If he's in 2 more movies I like, I won't be able to hate him anymore  

 

This is another thing I don't understand. What is with a lot of people bashing Leo? Is it because of his good looks? What else is it?

 

I believe is a great actor. If you need proof, just watch What's Eating Gilbert Grape or Basketball Diaries. He played amazing roles in both of those movies, along with his performance in Gangs of New York.

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

Yes, Molestomp, I didn't think they did very well. I thought Diaz was pretty atrocious, and DiCaprio just adequate. I think he's absolutely wonderful in Catch Me If You Can. That film plays to his charm, one of his biggest strengths. He slides into that role, whereas Gangs felt like a real awkward fit for me. Whether it was the script, him, or both, he lacked the intensity I thought it was necessary to carry off the final act of the film.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Molestomp has DEFINATLY overrated the thing. The best actor in the film dies in the first five minutes, and while I think Day-Lewis is a bit over-the-top, I can accept a nomination for Best SUPPORTING Actor. (Yep, that's what he was doing.) Diaz was atrocious, DiCaprio seemed losty, and Scorcese was sub-par.

 

I enjoyed Bringing Out the Dead more, really.

[Guest Mole]

Well no, I am not overrating something if it is my opinion.

 

I thought Daniel-Day Lewis did a superb job. How can you not? He played one of the coolest characters ever. He defiently should win Best Actor. No, he didn't play a supporting role. Him and Leo were both lead actors in the film.

 

Besides, if he wasn't a lead actor, then why did he get nominated by the Golden Globes for Best Actor?

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Well no, I am not overrating something if it is my opinion.

 

I thought Daniel-Day Lewis did a superb job. How can you not? He played one of the coolest characters ever. He defiently should win Best Actor. No, he didn't play a supporting role. Him and Leo were both lead actors in the film.

 

Besides, if he wasn't a lead actor, then why did he get nominated by the Golden Globes for Best Actor?

Yes, he did play a supporting role. He was the villian. He was not the star. He was supporting cast. That's not an insult, that's the facts.

 

The Gloden Globes are fucking clownshoes. If I could give a shit what the Oscars say, why would I care what Oscars-lite have to say?

 

You are overrating it. It's a very disapointing film considering how long Scorcese's hyped the damn thing.

[Guest godthedog]

you're talking from the assumption that there can only be one lead. it's like saying dustin hoffman was playing a supporting character in 'rain man' because he has slightly less screen time than cruise & the story wasn't told through his eyes. bill the butcher was a LEAD role.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

you're talking from the assumption that there can only be one lead. it's like saying dustin hoffman was playing a supporting character in 'rain man' because he has slightly less screen time than cruise & the story wasn't told through his eyes. bill the butcher was a LEAD role.

I disagree, he was definatly an antagonistic character. It just so happens that he got a lot of screentime and made the most of it.

 

It's like saying Jack Nicholson was the lead in batman because he got more screentime.

[Guest godthedog]

nicholson & keaton WERE the leads in 'batman'.

[Guest Mole]

Yeah, they both were the leads.

 

Its like in American Beauty, Spacey and Bennet both were leads, and both had split screen time.

 

Same in Gangs, Leo and Day had the same amount of screen time, so they are both leads.

[Guest C.H.U.D.]

You are overrating it.

No, you are underrating it.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

You are overrating it.

No, you are underrating it.

Bull. I', laughing at the post thatvstarted this thread Diaz for an Oscar. Shyeah-Right! She gives one of the most actively bad performances of the year. It wasn't even the accent. She just nevermade me gave a damn.

 

 

I agree with what the reviewer from CHUD said. Day-Lewis was great. He's a bit over-the-top for my tastes, but I won't let that affect my love for his performance.

 

Nicholson was nominated for Best Supporting Actor by the Golden Globes so there goes your reasoning about whether Day-Lewis was a lead because the GG says he is.

 

The direction is woefully sub-par. The story was epic, but none of the characters are very fleshed out at all. It's a joke from beginning to end, there's isn't a single element of the film, save Day-Lewis' performance without a fatal flaw. If Scorcese gets an Oscar for this tripe it will be an Apology for Taxi Driver or Raging Bull.

 

Nice to see the usual idoits are still easily brainwashed.

 

 

I'm disgusted and amused at the same time.

[Guest godthedog]

how exactly was the direction sub-par? where was the editing bad? when was the framing bad? when exactly was the pacing bad? what should it have cut? what was missing & should've been put in?

[Guest C.H.U.D.]

Nice to see the usual idoits are still easily brainwashed.

Sad to see some idiots can be brainwashed by one reviewer on a website.

[Guest Mole]

Nice to see the usual idoits are still easily brainwashed.

 

I'm disgusted and amused at the same time.

 

So you know everything about movies in this world do you? Just because you didn't like what happened in the movie, doesn't mean that other people didn't like it.

 

I liked the movie for everything I said above. The story was great, the acting was great, and the directing was great. Was the movie perfect? Nope, it wasn't. Did I think it was the best movie of the year? From what I saw, yes it was.

 

Just because it didn't fit your taste, doesn't mean that everyone else's opinion of the movie was wrong.

[Guest LaParkaMarka]

Sorry to bring this thread back from the depths of the archive, but I finally saw Gangs tonight. Great flick, and Daniel Day Lewis was awesome. And he did get nominated for Best Actor. Hah.

 

Has anyone seen both Gangs and Chicago? Chicago is supposed to be the big favorite for Best Picture, so I was wondering if anyone really liked Gangs better or thinks it's more deserving for Best Picture.

[Guest El Satanico]

I've seen both and liked both. I'm figuring Chicago will win best picture, but I have no problems with that. I really liked Gangs, but it could've been better.

 

Scorcese will likely get his "lifetime achievement" Oscar so all will be good.

[Guest evenflowDDT]

I just saw Gangs of New York as well (Valentine's Day... how sweet!). It's definitely surprising to me to see how much Cameron Diaz has grown as an actress, and even though her accent was shaky in some spots, on the whole I was impressed. As for Leo, aside from a few months of Titanic backlash (that I think every 8th grade/high school male at the time was "supposed to feel"), I've never had a major problem with the guy (then again, I've never seen Titanic or Romeo & Juliet so who knows?), and although I wouldn't necessarily say he was Oscar-calibre, he wasn't bad, and I can't think of anyone else I'd have rather seen in the role. And of course, Daniel-Day Lewish was great as The Butcher (although near the end his act wore a little thin). I'd never heard of him before, though, has he had any other major roles?

 

It was a great, fun little flick that managed to hold my short attention span for its entire running length (although it seemed like it could've been two movies the way it ended up).

[cawthon777 0]

I thought it was awesome and glad to see they're FINALLY using the U2 song in the TV ads.

[Guest Gamengiri2002]

Lewis one his first Best Actor Oscar for his leading role in "My Left Foot"

 

Other notable films include:

 

The Last of the Mohicans

The Age of Innocence

The Crucible

 

Those are the ones you might have seen.

[Guest LooseCannon]

Mild, if obvious spoilers within.

 

Already said my peace on it here, but in summary: Daniel Day Lewis is amazing, the sets and costumes are lovely, and the plot is engaging right up to the point that Bill the Butcher discovers Amsterdam's identity. It falls into typical dull epic form after that, and the imposition of all the draft riots and heavy-handed "social commentary" over that takes the film off its narrative rail and leads to a very unsatisfying conclusion. Not helped out by flat work from Diaz and DiCaprio.

 

Decent, but heavily flawed.

You've got it all wrong, man. the movie was about America and social tumult it was going through at the time, and the questions it faced, and how it was at a crossroads at the time and the battles over what kind of country it would eventually become. The plot between Leo and Bull the Butcher was just one small segment of that larger picture going on around it. It was their story within that larger story. Personally I thought the movie was just okay, right up untill the point where Bill the Butcher discovers Amsterdams identity, and then it became phenomenal.

 

i actually thought the photography was typical glitzy 90s short-attention-span studio stuff, and not very unique.

 

I thought the same thing.

[Guest Crazy Dan]

I liked this movie, but I think Martin S. (I am not even going to try to pretend I know how to spell his last name) has done better films. But this was still quite good. I liked how this movie captured how NY wopuld look back in the 1860's. Danial Day Lewis gave a wonderful performance, he should be the winner of the best actor award. Leo was ok, nothing special. He was way better in Catch Me if You Can.

 

Overall a very good movie, but I am not sure if it was really Best Picture material. I do think Martin S. will win Best Director. But, even that I feel will be awarded to him based on all of his previous work overlooked by the Academy. And that is why the Academy Awards suck sometimes, because many times actors/directors will win to make up for them not winning in years past. Last I heard, the Awards were for the year that they came out, and not a Lifetime Acheivement Award.

 

Sorry about the rant. Overall I give Gangs 3 1/2 stars. I liked it very much, but I felt that it did have some flaws in it.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I actually fell asleep in the middle of this movie, and barely can remember any of it. Maybe I should see it again, because I hardly remember anyone but Daniel Day Lewis being a good actor in this film...