Gangs Of New York Opinions

[judgeofallandnothing]

Originally posted by uNdEaD$$$@5 January 2004 - 01:08
No shit sherlock! Who's else thought would it be? Unlike you Im capable of independent thought.

It has everything I would call a bad movie Americans, Bad acting, Big budget, Di Caprio and other stuff.

American: Well its a movie during the civil war...
Bad Acting: Only Leo
Big Budget: Everything looks really poor and worn down if its any consolation

[Mobas]

I liked it. It really had that sense that it was taking place in that time period.

WARNING! WARNING! SPOILERS.....


























1. I thought that when Bill the Butcher (Daniel Day Lewis) had Amsterdam (DiCaprio) down on the table that it was gonna be a very bad carving up scene (I kind of lost track of time watching the movie... I would of realized that the movie couldn't of finished without one of the main stars).

2. That fat guy that was running for office. The one that put niches in his mallot for everyone he killed. I kinda was hoping for a real good fight between him and Bill the Butcher. But that idiot coward had to throw his knife at him when he turned his back.

3. I didn't expect it to end like that with Bill the Butcher fatally wounded from some shrapnel blast, then being finished off too easy by Amsterdam (Dicaprio). I was hoping for a better one on one fight there.

I still liked the movie. Movie can't be half bad if it keeps your interest for 2 hr 45 min.

btw, my dad didn't like it. He said it was to slow in the starting. I don't think he really gave it a chance.

[Memento]

i paid to watch this at the cinema, and half way through i watched a couple walked out, and i tbh i wish i went with them......dont get me wrong, its not the worst film in the world, the actin in it is very good, and the action scenes are entertain, but all this film is just another hollywood film that takes a real event and throws in a pointless plot......if ur gonna make a historic film, set around a particular historic event why not include some real history, this film story line could have been set in any era. Just like titanics love story, and pearl harbour. im sure many will disagree, but im not runnin out to see this movie again.

p.s the end was a big disapointment as well.

[BigBank_Hank]

Originally posted by Memento@5 January 2004 - 14:03
Just like titanics love story, and pearl harbour. im sure many will disagree, but im not runnin out to see this movie again.

Pearl Harbor please. Pearl Harbor was so historically inaccurate is was a laughable. A movie that would be mostly accurate would be boring to an average movie goers. That is one of the main reasons why I love the WWII movie Tora! Tora! Tora!,which is about Pearl Harbor,so much. The producers of the film spent a lot of painstaking hours to make the film making the film as accurate as possible with what was available.

[100%]

I give the movie 8\10-as opinion goes, majorly violent, odd coloring, DDLewis rocks - Caprio was annoying as always- but the whole movie was a masterpiece in style, concept, originality.

and i love this guys description....

I don't even know where to begin. I gave this movie one star because the only thing I liked about it was the fact that there was a movie during the civil war in the New York. That never happens. I'm a history buff. I love period films. I love movies that take place in New York. I didn't like this movie. First off. DiCaprio was miscast bigtime. Should have been Depp or someone else. I have no feeling on Diaz. She could have stayed or left. Whatever. Day-Lewis was good for whatever that was worth. The title was wrong. Yes, there were tons of GANGS in NEW YORK but that was NOT what the story was about! The film was long for nothing. a chunk could have been cut out in the middle and we would have not really skipped a beat as far as the story was concerned. Scorcese was trying to tell too many stories instead of sticking to the main one. Not usually his style. Characters weren't developed. Overproduced. Sloppy. Uggh! I couldn't wait for it to end. I was exhausted. Skip it. --This text refers to the VHS Tape edition

Was this review helpful to you? 

[Aaron_T]

i thought it was OK but i think they should have shortened it down a bit i mean sitting all that time was a little boriing

[uNdEaD$$$]

People don't like this movie because it's too long? That's just lack of paitence and prolly intelligence.

I feel my I.Q is just a little too big this post.

[Samurai]

Originally posted by uNdEaD$$$@6 January 2004 - 22:04
People don't like this movie because it's too long? That's just lack of paitence and prolly intelligence.

I feel my I.Q is just a little too big this post.

Actually I believe firmly that some of the best films are the longest, i.e Das Boot, The Great Escape etc... so how you can say that's lack of patience is just insulting at best. I've watched the entire series of Band Of Brothers all in one go, and I didn't feel the need to walk away.

Gangs Of New York is a great film. Daniel Day Lewis played his part superbly, but the film was a bit too long, hence boring at times.

[-E-]

I thought it was utter crap. Neither Caprio or Diaz can act for a damn. Also hurt the movie that it was hyped so much. Really didn't come anywhere close to the hype. Was just another violence movie...not even a good one at that.

[dragwell]

hated it. Good idea badly done. I can't believe scorsece is the director of such crap.