Review of Gangs of New York (2002) by Schyguy96 — 09 Dec 2013

In terms of ranking Gangs of New York as a 'great movie', it does not achieve that. I do not believe, in watching it, that it ever intended to be a purportedly great film. It is very good, as a historical drama film, however.

Scorsese does not fail at capturing the idea of The Five Points, the gang warfare, or perhaps most importantly, the political corruption that ran rampant. For all of its faults, it is made up for by representing itself, in a historical term, relatively well.

The key selling point to make Gangs of New York a better than film than it might have otherwise been is the ineffable performance of Daniel Day-Lewis. In a career defined by great performances, only his performance as Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood rivals his riveting spin on Bill 'The Butcher' Cutting.

Adrien Brody in The Pianist won the Academy Award for Best Actor this year, and I do not fault the Academy for selecting him entirely, but I do believe that Day-Lewis was robbed of his most deserving award here.

He defines the villain that you love, even though their morals may be flawed. You lose sight of the fact that you are watching an actor during the film, as I see Day-Lewis become Bill The Butcher. The scene in which he sits in the brothel bedroom, discussing Priest Vallon with Amsterdam, is one of the greatly acted scenes in cinematic history, although much of the movie could be attributed with that title.

If you are a fan of historical dramas and of great acting performances, I believe that Gangs of New York would pique your interest, and suggest it for you.