Is Gangs of New York worth a blind buy? (1 Viewer)

[Jason Hughes]

I could not possibly agree with Ron's comments more. Brody WAS very good, but nothing compared to Day-Lewis. The scene where he has a flag draped around him and sitting next to DiCaprios bed alone was worth an Oscar.

 

[Raymond_H]

I'm doing a blind buy with this title for numerous reasons.

First it is a Martin movie, and with all the buzz with Daniel Day-Lewis (who I always loved his work) that added alot.

Also, I have had friends and family members highly recommend this film to me, so it looks like an easy buy for me.

Raymond

 

[Andrew_Sch]

For my money, Daniel Day-Lewis alone made this film worth seeing twice in theaters and worth purchasing on DVD. I agree with the reviewer on DVDFile (I think it was DVDFile) who said that DiCaprio made a wise decision in realizing that this was Day-Lewis' film and sort of stepping aside a little bit as far as the intensity of his performance went. Diaz's character did seem a bit thrown-in though, as others have suggested.

EDIT: It wasn't the DVD File review that said that, but I remember reading it somewhere.

 

[Richard Kim]

I would rent as well. Day-Lewis was incredible as Bill the Butcher, and deserved an Oscar, but other than him, the main characters were uninteresting and seem to given second fiddle to the tumultous events of the time period.

 

[dustinW]

one of my favorite movies, i would suggest it to anyone.....just my opinion though

 

[Eric Peterson]

I've never been a huge Scorcese fan, but have a huge amount of respect for the man and his talent.

That said, "Gangs of New York" is probably my favorite picture of his with "After Hours" and "Raging Bull" just behind it. I saw it three times in the theater and will be buying the disc without a second though later today.

I would recommend this title without hesitation.

 

[Howard Glenn]

I also missed this in the theatre, but am looking forward to buying it today. Daniel Day-Lewis is extremely talented and one of the best method actors of our generation. I've never been disappointed in any of his performances, and can't wait to see this!

 

[mike_frontier]

No, Please rent it at all costs. Say I did not warn you.

 

[Nathan V]

Give this film a chance. I've seen it three times. My reactions were:

first viewing: disappointed. Movie is far too short, breezes over a lot of material, narration is annoying, no end battle, leo was poor, and the narrative was way too generic for Scorsese. However, the opening battle was absolutely amazing- probably my favorite battle scene in any film ever. a flawed epic. 2.5/4

second viewing: good. Cameron diaz wasn't so bad, suddenly the narration became really neat, particularly during the finale, which, incidentally, is one of Scorsese's finest sequences. It mirrors the goodfellas "day" finale sequence very well. and Day-Lewis was awesome. Also, the fact that there's no end battle adds resonance to the film, showing that the outside world- the ships, soldiers- is butting into the gang's closed-off world, that the gangs no longer have the far-reaching power that they once did. There was still a major disconnect after the betrayal scene, and the underground scene was agonizingly long. a flawed masterpiece. 3/4.

third viewing: fucking great. the opening battle was incredible. and Leo's acting suddenly became very, very good- a study in minimalism. Same for Diaz, but to a lesser extent. Day-Lewis was, of course, out of this world. He stands alongside Vito Corleone as one of the all time great characters. No exaggeration. John C Reilly was much better, and I noticed that most of the violence in this film is offscreen. How odd for Scorsese. Sure, the violence is still constant and pervasive, but a lot of it is offscreen (which makes it more horrific) and this makes for a very violent atmosphere. I also found the film very funny in parts, how everybody goes about so normally in such a strange world. My only gripe was the flashbacks, but there so short and minor it doesn't really matter.
A beautiful, masterful, endlessly watchable, multilayered, beautifully written, acted, and shot masterpiece. 4/4 stars.

I call it 'the big lebowski syndrome.' It happens for a lot of Kubrick and Scorsese movies. It also happened to me for Heat and FIght Club (now my two top films of the 90s). I start out not liking the film, but eventually 'get' what the director was trying to do. It has to do with false expectations. With Heat I expected an action film; I was, of course, disappointed (except for that infamous bank scene). Then, 2 hours into the movie, I realized what Michal Mann was trying to do- create a thoughtful, character-driven drama. So then I saw it again later. Now I have 2 copies of the DVD. Same thing with Gangs. Marty wasn't trying to create a perfect masterpiece that 10 people in the world would like, but a film that's a fusion of art and mainstream elements. A movie that would please everybody. Thus, the Cameron Diaz character. And the flashbacks, probably insisted upon by Harvey, are for the stupid people in the audience. But the movie is still very much Scorsese's. I say buy the movie, watch it twice, listen to the commentary, and watch it again. Then you'll love it.

all IMHO, of course.
Nathan

I wrote this post very, very fast, call it stream-of-conciousness writing, so I apologize for any unintentionally humorous spelling mistakes.

 

[Jason_Els]

Poorly edited (if Scorsese is telling the truth and this is his cut of the film, then he should fire the editor).

That editor is Thelma Schoonmaker. Scorsese hired her and trained her to edit film. They work together as a team, each one working off the other. Before you say, "fire her", keep in mind that NO edit is made without his final approval and that she is also the editor of Goodfellas, Raging Bull (for which she won an Oscar), Kundun, Age of Innocence, Woodstock, Bring Out the Dead, and a host of other films. Her editing in Gangs of New York won the American Cinema Editors Award for editing of a drama and got her an Oscar nomination. Not too shabby.

I've been fascinated with Schoonmaker's editing since I realized that a lot of what we think of as Scorsese's vision is translated through her work. I keep going back to Goodfellas as I don't particularly love Raging Bull (even if I do appreciate it). I keep watching the editing, the acting, those magnificent stedi-cam tracking shots, the montage; all of it is singluarly brilliant. Even the gratuitous shot of Pesci firing a gun into the camera ala The Great Train Robbery is brilliant.

Schoonmaker is a gem of an editor. Say what you will about how Gangs of New York turned out, but don't blame her, she does solid work.

 

[Marc Colella]

Her editing in Gangs of New York won the American Cinema Editors Award for editing of a drama and got her an Oscar nomination. Not too shabby.

I don't give much value in Oscar nominations...especially when Miramax is behind the film.

 

[Jason_Els]

Then Scorsese's ultimately to blame for the editing.

Absolutely. My problem with Gangs is that it's all over the place. I get the impression that there's a lot left out but that the scope and breadth of the original concept was so great that nothing could be edited without it resulting in a choppy film.

I believe, in this case, Schoonmaker did her best and actually came up with a decent, if not great, edit (hence the resulting nomination and award).

The pressure on Scorsese for this to be his magnum opus was not lost on anyone from Hollywood to the fans. He certainly deserves an Oscar and this would have been the perfect reason to give him one but, alas, Gangs just wasn't good enough.

As to Miramax and its Oscar-lobbying efforts, I can only say that sometimes the Academy sometimes gets it right and sometimes they get it wrong. This time I think they did get it right with a nomination but no win. If Scorsese can pull off anything on par with his previous great films then he will win it. Miramax or not, for better or for worse, he's overdue and the Academy knows it.

 

[Bill J]

I really wish they hadn't spread the film over 2 discs. I just watched the DVD and the break is at a horrible location.

 

[Andrew_Sch]

Poorly edited (if Scorsese is telling the truth and this is his cut of the film, then he should fire the editor).

Good call. The editor was some amateur named Thelma Schoonmaker. Not like she's ever done any impressive work or anything.

 

[Marc Colella]

Good call. The editor was some amateur named Thelma Schoonmaker. Not like she's ever done any impressive work or anything.

Even the best people in the biz misfire once in a while... just look at Scorsese and Gangs of New York.

 

[ChrisChap]

I think this film grows on you.

I liked it at the theater, despite its problems.

I bought it because I am a Scorcese fan and watched it tonight. I loved it the second time and I will probably watch it again before the week is over.

 

[GerardoHP]

Is Gangs of New York worth a blind buy?

ABSOLUTELY NOT! I think GONY is too much the kind of movie many either hate or love or have extremely mixed reactions to. I suggest you rent it first.

 

[Mr. Brian]

This film was better than 95% of the other junk that came to theaters last year - so yes, buy it.

Brian

 

[Robert Crawford]

Ceasefire guys, the originator of this thread already stated he's going to rent it first rather than do a blind purchase of the dvd.




Crawdaddy

 

[Parisis]

Definetly worth $14.95. I agree that this film needs to be seen more than once. I enjoyed yesterday's second viewing. My comments on exiting the theater " Nice , but a little disappointing" Also in little Delaware, my budget home theater is much more enjoyable than our local theaters.