Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab.
I’m actually glad that I can’t write about this film for another week, because I’m still chewing on it. One thing is certain... it’s worthy of great discussion, and is sure to be one of the lightning rods of controversy among film fans this season.
For now, let me hit you with some reviews that readers have been sending in over the last few days. First up is a long-absent TalkBacker, here today to offer up his views on Scorsese’s newest opus...
The DMFC has returned. I hope you have behaved in my absence. I braved the snow tonight - I braved icy roads darker than the racially-charged orcs of middle-earth...all to arrive at Gangs of New York and provide my faithful friends and lovers with a detailed review.
This isn't Raging Bull. This isn't Taxi Driver. This isn't Goodfellas. It's not even Casino. What it is, dear fanboys, is the closest Scorcese will ever come to directing a comic book movie.
Yes, you heard me right.
Forget best picture talk. In the opening scenes it's clear that we're in for something a little different than advertised. As Liam Neeson (in an effective cameo as Priest) leads Young Leo down the caverns of the old brewery, the sets seem more sci-fi than anything else. Really, in those opening moments, the movie looks and feels like Waterworld. Don't scoff. You'll see what I mean. When Hellcat Maggie, with daggers for fingers, leaps ten feet in the air and bites off a man's ear, you'll realize that this isn't Merchant-Ivory. It's Street Fighter 2.
And believe me, that's what you really want out of this movie. Some kick-ass action and cool characters. There's not much depth to be had, except a lame attempt in the end to tack on some 9/11 symbolism, which I didn't really get and I suppose I will wait for Richard Corliss to explain it for me.
Most Scorcese films have a main character you can attach yourself to. Leo is not one of them. His father was killed when he was a boy. He's still angry. That is the extent of his character development.
The film's other characters are far more compelling. Daniel Day Lewis is AWESOME as the Butcher and should become a fanboy icon. He will be nominated for an oscar and he will mostly deserve it. Cameron Diaz is passable, but like Leo, cannot seem to remember if she is from Ireland or Pasadena. Jim Broadbent is GREAT and John C. Reilly, while he plays a fairly two-dimensional heavy, is finally given a role where he doesn't need to be confused at all times (and if you think that's a shot at the overrated work of PT Anderson, it is. After seeing Punch-Drunk Love, I prefer the director of Mortal Kombat).
Brendan Gleeson is unfortunately saddled with the most predictable scene in the film. I won't ruin it - you'll see it coming anyway - but I'm referring to when he tries to reason with the Butcher. The Butcher shows mercy, Gleeson turns his back, and - WAIT, I can't ruin it for you!
The cinematography is great and really shines during the fight scenes. The opening battle between the Dead Rabbits and the Butcher is brutal and kinetic and stands with the best of Scorcese's visual achievements. As does a long tracking shot that traces immigrants getting off the boat and immediately being conscripted into the army. Unlike PT Anderson, Scorcese understands that trick shots should only be used in the service of the story and does so here with real gusto.
The film begins to unravel at the end with the depiction of the anti-draft riots. After nearly three hours of build-up for an eventual showdown between Leo and the Butcher, the movie completely shifts gears and decides that the final battle isn't as important as cannon balls smashing into buildings. The final confrontation is dropped in favor of noise, and when they finally get back to it, crucial momentum is lost. You'll fight to do more than shrug.
My biggest gripe is that the film plays with an interesting idea: a man dedicated to avenging his father's death inadvertantly becomes a son to the murderer. This storyline just falls away and one has to think that it was a product of an earlier draft. Perhaps Kenneth Lonergan. Wasn't You Can Count On Me great?
In conclusion, this is a problematic but enjoyable film. Those expecting greatness, look elsewhere. I fear that it will bomb at the box office. Perhaps it will force Marty to make that movie with Larry David.
I had call yesterday, I have call today, and I'll have call tomorrow!
DMFC
Our next reviewer, Vallon’s Other Son, has also got a bit to say about the picture...
To cut right to the chase, “Gangs of New York” is very good. Sadly, for me, it stops short of great because of Leonardo DiCaprio. He just didn’t do it for me. But more on that later.
The opening is fucking awesome. It’s New York, 1846. More specifically, the Five Points. Priest Vallon (Liam Neeson) is preparing for battle next to his young son. They pray so St. Michael. The young lad is in awe of his father. They walk through their hideout. People gather behind Priest and follow his lead. He stops at a door. Monk (Brendan Gleeson) stands next to it with a club in his hands. The crowd behind Priest is loud. Priest asks Monk if he is with them. Monk says yes as long as the price is right. Priest names the right price. And Monk kicks the door out and the snow-covered streets are dead silent. It really gets your adrenaline going.
Priest and his gang step outside and wait, weapons in hand, for their enemy. The enemy is the Natives, led by Bill the Butcher (Daniel Day-Lewis). Bill hates the Irish. Actually, Bill hates everyone. He and Priest exchange a few words as their respective gangs face each other. Then all hell breaks loose.
The battle that follows reminded me of the ones in “Braveheart.” No guns. All hand-to-hand combat, up close and personal. Clubs and knives and swords. Blood gushes and limbs fly. It’s an extremely brutal, bloody and intense sequence. Very well done and exciting. Bill has his eyes (or eye, since one is glass) on Priest the entire time. Finally he reaches him and stabs him twice before Priest even has time to react. Then, at Priest’s request, and in front of his boy, Bill finishes him off and the battle is over.
Cut to 16 years later. The young boy is now a young man, Amsterdam (DiCaprio). He has spent the past 16 years in an orphanage and returns to the Five Points upon his release. He meets Johnny (Henry Thomas), whom he knew as a child. And soon he meets Bill, who has done quite well for himself. He’s partners of sorts with a politician named Tweed (Jim Broadbent) and controls virtually everything in the Five Points. People have to pay just to be in his presence.
Through Johnny, Amsterdam gets close to Bill. And Bill likes Amsterdam immediately. He sees a tough, smart young man and comes to call him his associate and apprentice. All the while, Amsterdam has plans to kill Bill (no Tarantino reference intended) at a celebration that’s coming up. It’s an annual party thrown in tribute to Priest’s death at Bill’s hands. As Amsterdam sees it, you don’t kill the king in private. You do it in front of everyone.
There’s also the matter of Jenny (Cameron Diaz), a pickpocket that takes a liking to Amsterdam. She was raised by Bill starting at age 12, following her mother’s death. Amsterdam tries to resist her at first, both because he fears she is involved with Bill and because she’s slept with most of the Five Points. But resistance is futile.
The movie spends a lot of time addressing racism and immigration. Two groups of people greet those coming off the boats. One group offers bread and something warm to drink while the other throws rocks. Bill and most of the authority figures hate immigrants, minorities and the poor. It’s also the year of the first draft, and that plus Lincoln and the Civil War come up frequently.
Technically, “Gangs of New York” is an amazing achievement, from Sandy Powell’s costume design to Dante Ferreti’s production design. It all looks remarkable. Scorsese and his collaborators do an outstanding job of transporting you to another time and place. Howard Shore’s music and Michael Ballhaus’ cinematography are also top-notch.
As the buzz has suggested, Day-Lewis owns this movie. It’s his show, and his return to the screen after five years could not be more welcome. Bill is smart, scary, merciless, funny, sadistic and a little insane all at the same time. He is as memorable a character as Hannibal Lecter. As far as villains go, they don’t get any better. Day-Lewis creates an entirely three-dimensional character and hits a grand slam. This is the definition of tour-de-force.
The supporting cast is also impressive. Neeson, Broadbent, Gleeson and the always-wonderful John C. Reilly (playing a dirty cop and former ally of Priest’s) are all excellent in smaller roles. Diaz looks great and holds her own while not being particularly memorable.
Unfortunately, Leo doesn’t cut it. I think he’s a good actor, especially in “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape” and “This Boy’s Life.” But “Catch Me If You Can” looks like it features the better of the two Christmas offerings from DiCaprio. Day-Lewis (and Gleeson and Broadbent for that matter) acts circles around him. DiCaprio resorts to the same scowl too often and always looks like he’s trying too hard. Amsterdam never becomes someone you care about. We should be rooting for him to get his revenge, but this never happens. As a result, there is no emotional resonance. We’re rooting for the bad guy.
But it’s no use wishing for a better lead. Leo’s the one we got. And for the most part, “Gangs of New York” is pretty spectacular. It’s well paced (about two hours and forty-five minutes), Scorsese is in fine form, Day-Lewis gives one of the year’s best performances, it’s wondrous to look at and it’s always entertaining. Might not be quite good enough to be a Best Picture candidate, but at the least pretty damn close.
Finally today, we’ve got Truthgame, our British spy who seems to have his hands in everything. He’s gone screening-mad as awards season kicks in, and he’s probably the most openly disappointed of our reviewers this morning. I’ll let him explain...
This is probably the most anticipated film of the year. We have had Spiderman and we have already been introduced to the world of middle earth. Gangs of New York is the only event film we have left this year that was made to and we “expect” and want it to inspire us and be everything great films can be. The only clue to this film qualities and failures is its release date… An entire year late.
Gangs of New York is not terrible. Just it’s not that good. With all the expectations one has of this film – you just want it to be great. There are great things in it. But as a whole – the film is not.
I came away from the screening feeling pissed off that such an opportunity has been wasted. An opportunity to create a world unseen by human eye in nearly 150 years. An opportunity to tell of an important part of US history at a time when America itself was at war with itself. To Tell a Love story with actors who we have enjoyed in similar roles. And there is simply not enough time in the 160 minutes to get fully intergraded with the many facets the film shows up and there are clear signs of brutal editing and a director perhaps even out of touch with his film – the tone and pacing alter drastically from scene to scene and there are huge holes in the plot that are missing.
The film opens with a bloody – but a censored battle. (many shots are missing 2 – 6 frames of bloody climax) A Catholic gang called The Dead Rabbits, representing the Irish population of New York are lead by Priest Vallon played Liam Neeson and they are fighting a Native gang lead by Bill The Butcher played by Daniel Day Lewis who although excellent – is not always in the same film as everyone else. The battle ends with Day Lewis killing Vallon and witnessed by his young son – Amsterdam. Bill then spares Amsterdam’s life but does order him to prison…
15 years later Amsterdam is release from prison and is bent on avenging his father’s death. Amsterdam joins a small group of petty criminals who all pay some of their earnings to Bill The Butcher who runs the area. We are in an area called the Five Points and this is where most of the story happens. De Caprio for reasons that are never fully explained or justified fall in with Bill the Butcher who takes him under his wing as a surrogate father of sorts. De Caprio also falls in love with Cameron Diaz which is probably the weakest plot point. It just doesn’t make sense that Cameron would or even could fall for De Caprio who we never actually see committing any crimes!
Where the film is great is in the detail. Just like Goodfellas, Casino and even Kundun to an extent Scorsese bombards you with information. We see each type of thief and get told their names… (too many to remember after one screening) We have thieves that rob the rich by dressing up as the rich. We have thieves that steal from men as they sleep with whores. We have thieves who steal in church while everyone is praying.
We see the New York fire brigade. Answering a fire they come rushing in only to find a rival brigade has also been alerted. Instead of putting out the fire – they fight each other while the building burns. This would not have been popular if the film came out last Christmas as originally intended as September 11th was so close to all our memories and fireman were the natural hero’s of that time.
We see New York as teaming with different races, cultures and creeds. There are the Chinese who are mostly portrayed as either opera performers or owners of Opium dens… We have the Irish, the Germans, the English… All are poor and all have arrived in America trying to start a new life.
In the harbour we see coffins coming in on boats with the dead from the civil war in the south. We see immigrants coming off boats and signing papers making them Americans and then signing another paper which commits them to military service.
The whole thing is very political. Jim Broadbent plays a very corrupt politician who uses Bill The Butcher as an ally who controls the masses out of fear and ensuring his people vote accordingly. The irony is at the end when the masses rise in the Draft Riots of 1863 we realise that Bill The Butcher was playing the politicians just as much.
Each of these details are potentially films within themselves. We want to know more. We want to see more. But the action has already rushes ahead to another detail and for lack of better description – isn’t detailed enough.
Scorsese wants to take us into this world – but I think he has offered a trailer for perhaps a different version of the same film that lies back on an AVID as a much longer but obviously less commercially viable cut. I am reminded of Heavens Gate (a film I quite enjoy and as still overwhelmed by its beauty – Read “Final Cut” by Stephen Bach as a fantastic chronicle of the making of that film that bankrupted United Artists in 1980) I am not saying GONY is like Heavens Gate – but I can see the similarities in both scale, ambition and artistic success.
The first 90 minutes of the film are spent setting this up. It is only when De Caprio’s is portrayed and his identity is revealed does the film being the final confrontation between him and Day Lewis. All this is set against the backdrop of the 1883 draft riots.
In typical politician style, when De Caprio’s reformed Dead Rabbits rise against Bill The Butchers clan we have Jim Broadbent come in and make a deal offering money in exchange for votes. Of course Leo who has gone from petty criminal to political leader in only a few short scenes wants an Irish candidate…
I don’t want to tell you the whole movie – I want you to see it for yourselves. I know most of you are passionate about films and regardless of what I or anyone else says – will be first in line to see it.
The casting is magnificent. Not only are there the 3 leads great marquee names and people of talent. But the entire secondary cast of 25 people was fantastic. We have Liam Neeson, Jim Broadbent, David Hemmings, John C Reilly, Henry Thomas, Stephen Graham and many, many more. That’s what a budget and package Gangs Of New York offered the acting world. They are all good. Just the problem I had is that they were all competing against the running time to get their stories and perspectives out. Most of them end up being thinly veiled clichés who project the stories political and social themes as opposed to characters who function with their own logic and sense of morality. This is not necessary the fault of the editor – but more the running time as the film has so much to say.
Leonardo De Caprio is a good actor. He was fantastic in What’s Easting Gilbert Grape and after the excellent Titanic made him a Box Office legend its become popular and easy to ridicule him. The Beach was not a great film – but far from a disaster… Here… he is not the clean cut Romantic lead… Sadly nor is he believable as a leader of the reformed gang. This is quite a problem. His accent flanders throughout the film. In voice over he comes across as Irish and then English and at one point he sounds like he’s high on drugs as his words slur to much…
Daniel Day Lewis is a fantastic actor who when works – which is rarely - he doesn’t act – but “becomes.” I think that’s joy he finds is the process and the total submergence in a character. In this film he plays a very charismatic leader who is totally believable as both a gang leader with echo’s to an old mob boss from the Godfather as he does look after his own. The problem is his acting is so dynamic and entertaining and with so many brilliant lines and delivery that we end being distracted by his performance.
Cameron Diaz has the weakest role of the 3 leads. Her character has a couple of points
There is casual violence, which is disturbing. One key character had a forced abortion, which leads her to have a horrible scar going down her belly. But in other scenes when Jim Broadbent requests an execution just for the sake of an execution we see the condemned men acting not with terror and dread but with good natured tones. This is very bewildering and takes the audience out of the mood the film tries so hard to evoke.
The Music in this film is terrible. We are presented with composed music from Elmer Bernstein, period songs of the day and the obligatory U2 track as this is an Irish story!
Music in a Scorsese film is always pivotal and he has great success using music to amplify his points of time and story. Here however he fails. He tries – but he fails. The music here is at best distracting and at worst just laughable. Several times in to the film I though I was watching a musical as characters (not lead actors thank god) sing on screen to music played on the soundtrack… This technique is brave but fails.
The Camera work on this film is competent but not excellent – not at all Scorsese’s best nor award winning. Michael Ballaus has created a muted world and quite realistic. It is not a stylised world which although appropriate for the milieu is still a little disappointing coming from Scorsese. There are no stand out shots like the Cococaba steadicam shot in Goodfellas or the overhead shot at the end of Taxi Driver. We have lots of crane shots – including the obligatory crane pullbacks that reveal the sets in their entirety – but no shots of any note and NONE that inspire.
Dante Ferreti has created 1860’s New York city on film. To create the look most of what you see was built on a studio backlot with subtle digital work to fill out the few backgrounds that go beyond the 3 story buildings and “Paradise Square” set that we spend so much time in. It all looks good. The props seem appropriate and the scale is there. A huge amount of time and money was spent creating the “Five Points” set – in fact they build and shot the film in Italy as it was most financially viable and the famed Production Designer heralds from that country. I just never felt a real sense of location. Everything looks real and was build and dressed to the highest standards by some of the best practitioners of the craft… Just it never seemed to be anything more than just the backlot… We have the main “Paradise Square,” A harbour set and a few square blocks of streets. Interior work was competent but never great.
Scorsese for his technical virtuosity and finesse has never been a great practitioner of digital effects. They are often badly structured and probably cost more money than they should. And most frustratingly the digital matte paintings and composite work that went into them doesn’t look believable when we’ve seen these effects successfully completed on so many other films with much smaller budgets.
The editing by Scorsese’s regular editor Thelma Schoonmaker is not full of Scorsese tricks but still has many… like rapid dissolves to get close to the action, there’s even a horrible freeze frame during the first battle. Just the film has so much to say and the editing struggles to focus on one story… This brings this review round to most important point which is the question of how much interference was there in Post Production by Harvey “Scissorhands” or was he trying to deliver a financially viable film with a more cinema friendly running time. Whatever the answers are – the blame lies ALL in the script. I’ve never read the shooting script nor any drafts during its development phase – but there was such a longer, more detailed, more captivating and more satisfying story in the script – it just wasn’t in the film. Either the script was too long, or Scorsese shot too much (I am curious to learn who or what caused the film to go 4 months over schedule) Either way both the director and producers should have known the problems before shooting.
Somewhere in what I saw was a fantastic film. It was all there. The environment. The story, the intrigue and politics. There was room for a love story too – just none of it quite worked and that for me is very, very sad.
Big Spoiler Here
The film ends on showing New York skyline through the ages. We go from 1860’s skyline to the arrival of the first skyscrapers through to the image of New York with the World Trade Centre towers in the background. I am glad they used that image, as that is how New York deserves to be seen. t’s a good shot… and does summarise the film as I found it quite arrogant to think that ALL of New York owes itself to barbaric events 150 years ago…
Spoiler End
This is a big film. On every level… Just its success doesn’t justify its ambition.
Keep on seeing them – even when they’re bad…
Truthgame
You’ll see for yourself on December 20th, when this rolls out in theaters with that new KILL BILL trailer attached to the front. Sounds like the geek nation’s gettin’ an early Christmas present to meeeeeeee...
"Moriarty" out.
