Gangs: The Best or the Butchered?

Martin Scorsese's ambitious epic has flaws, most notably its historical inaccuracies, but nothing can derail this finely crafted freight train of a movie. In time, Gangs of New York will surely prove to be one of the most enduring films of our time, but maybe not for obvious reasons:

1. Daniel Day-Lewis is back from semi-retirement to give the performance of his career. His Bill the Butcher is one of the most complex villains ever to grace the screen, a startling embodiment of the ugly, yet not wholly deplorable, aspects of our nation's spirit and history. His quiet speech on the power of fear delivered to DiCaprio while draped in an American flag is one of the most engaging moments in recent film history.

2. If Dante Ferretti fails to win an Oscar for his brilliant production design, it will be one of the biggest mistakes in movie award history. The overall accomplishment of this film in matching every piece of scenery and scrap of costuming to an historical source is unmatched. The Five Points area of New York, a gritty 19th century melting pot, was literally rebuilt in Italy--a choice which lends incredible realism to the work. Each scene seethes with background energy, a result of Scorsese's and Ferretti's careful attention to detail.

3. This film melds history with fiction in a way that is both refreshing and powerful. And while the nature of the New York Draft Riots becomes somewhat obscured by the film's devices, we are at least given a glimpse of an event that few Americans are aware of.

Gangs of New York is ultimately astonishing not so much because of what it accomplishes, but because of what it tries to accomplish. The challenges of dealing with such violent and difficult subject matter are too often simplified by the Hollywood powers. Gangs of New York doesn't leave us with a simple answer; instead, by letting the complications linger on, it spawns the kind of further questions that great films always do.

--Jacob Usner

Unquestionably one of Christmas' most ambitious movies, Gangs of New York suffered from an unfortunate--tragic even--lack of focus. The movie wavered strongly between a true-to-life historical film and a tragedy, and I never felt satisfied that either was accomplished. Too many story lines were partially explored and characters partially developed. I wouldn't advocate a longer film, but instead, a closer examination of the goals, which director, Martin Scorsese, wanted to reach--followed by some painstaking editing.

The interjection of the New York Draft Riots, while historically interesting, felt unexplored and empty. It happened. There were bold cinematic sequences. But I still left with no real sense of its place or purpose in the film other than to parallel the violence in Five Points, and even the parallel seemed to dilute the importance of the fight in Five Points to the characters in the movie. And the list continues--immigration, the Know-Nothing Party's role, Horace Greely and P.T. Barnum, and even the place of the Civil War in the context of the film was not fulfilled.

Gangs of New York also failed as a deep tragic character study. Daniel Day-Lewis as Bill Cutting contributed a laudable performance given the circumstances, but insights into his hubris and ultimate undoing were unfortunately few and far between. The overwhelming presence of his surface bravado drowned out his deeper tragic elements. Other main characters, like Leonardo DiCaprio's Amsterdam Vallon and Cameron Diaz's Jenny Everdeane were underacted and underdeveloped--we never got a true glimpse of their true personality. An exploration of the undercurrents in this "love triangle" was undermined in favor of historical detail, unnecessary to a tragedy.

So ambitious, so many elements, so little focus--that's Gangs' real tragedy.