This is topic Gangs of New York in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000474

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-20-2002, 04:29 AM:
 
My review is posted here.
 
Posted by Mitchell Cope (Member # 32) on 12-20-2002, 05:21 PM:
 
I went to see it at the AMC Studio 30 in Olathe Kansas. (I've been boycotting AMC because of their high ticket prices, but my wife said she had to see it on the big screen. So we went.) The picture was out of focus during the previews. I complained. The picture was still out of focus at the end of the first reel. I complained again. The picture was still out of focus at the end of the second reel. My family walked out and got a refund for poor presentation. Probably along the lines with Brad, my wife and daughter hated it. I'd give it a second chance if it was in focus.
 
Posted by Daniel Boisson (Member # 1027) on 12-20-2002, 11:34 PM:
 
I kinda had a feeling cause of all the commercials on TV. I'm still gonna see it(probably the 25th?) whenever it opens at one of our theatres. The trailer looked so good, its really gonna be disappointing when I don't like it:(
 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-21-2002, 03:34 AM:
 
Overwhelmingly mediocre!
 
Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 12-21-2002, 02:40 PM:
 
I have not seen this pic, yet, but it has been getting a lot of attention on "The History Channel" and their other affiliates. In fact, this film was just the subject of one of their recent shows "History According To Hollywood".

Basically, this film is about the early Irish immigration to America and their experiences in the 5-Points area of New York in the mid 1800s. Jewish and Italian immigration was to follow in the later part of the 19th Century and into the 20th Century.

Many parts of the film are based on historic fact...some of the characters were based on actual persons, and some were a compilation of several persons.

According to to Martin Scorcese (spelling?), the film is a historic record with melodrama mixed in.

This History Channel gave excellent reviews about the attempt to accurately protray the living conditions in what was once one of the poorest, most cramped slums/ghettos in America at that time.

N.Y.'s China Town is now this area.
 
Posted by Mitchell Cope (Member # 32) on 12-29-2002, 09:14 PM:
 
I went back to a Cinemark to see this film in its entirety. I thought I was going to like it, but the story became very one dimensional.

--------------- SPOILERS AHEAD ------------------

When was Leonardo's character going to act? He kept having all these great opportunities! Come on, give me more meat than this! Finally, when he does decide to act, he's pinned down for shame. He didn't lose his ears or his eyes, but supposedly severely scarred by a sword burn on his face. The scar(s) disappear and pretty boy is back. [Eek!] What was the point of all this? [Confused]

OK, give me the history wrapped in a romantic story... just like "Titanic". Well, that didn't happen. [puke] Did the "love story" occupy more than 10 minutes of screen time?

Leonardo DiCaprio was great in the film. I'm not sure if Cameron Diaz was right for it. She was good, but was wasted for what it was worth. Daniel Day-Lewis, I understand, became "Bill the Butcher" on the set. Well, he'll probably win an Oscar nomination for his role (Best Supporting?), too bad the movie didn't have a good enough script to match his performance.

Production values were excellent. Too bad the movie didn't have a good enough script to match those production values.

Finally, the end was a mess. Things seemed like they were chopped out. You know it's bad when the smoke clears and the two protagonists are left lying on the ground, lying next to each other, and finally ready to kill each other. Come on, Marty! This isn't very believable. [puke]

Unfortunately, this is a [thumbsdown] for a movie I thought I couldn't miss.
 
Posted by Daniel Boisson (Member # 1027) on 01-04-2003, 10:46 PM:
 
quote:
Overwhelmingly mediocre!

well put....

I finally saw it, and I'm glad I did. I can't say it was bad, but I can't say it was great either. I enjoyed the way it was made, but a lot of the acting kinda brought it down I think. All in all, I enjoyed it.....
 
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-24-2003, 11:33 PM:
 
Just saw this tonight. I need to think about it some more and maybe see it again before I fully make up my mind about it, though.

In the meantime, here are some random thoughts:

- the sets and costumes were amazing
- there were way too many obvious CGI shots and dollies, cranes, zooms, and a steadicam were all overused
- the print that I saw was very poorly timed; some reels had CinemaScope cue marks and others had 1.85 cue marks...weird
- acting was generally good throughout
- sound mix was OK; there were some attempts at panned dialogue which didn't work very well

I guess I haven't sorted out in my mind whether the "modern" aesthetic (zooms, dollies, steadicams, etc.) suits the subject matter of the film.
 
Posted by Brad Haven (Member # 954) on 02-25-2003, 06:53 AM:
 
I saw this last week and i didn't love it and i didn't hate it.
I loved the opening battle scene, the closing riot with commentry and the general design of the film.
All the way through the film i kept thinking TITANIC, not just leo but the feel of the film (or lack of it?).
I love Scorsese, he's been quite an inspiration for me over the years but i would have to say that this would be my least favourite of his films that i've seen.
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2