Gangs of New York
Director Martin
Scorsese
Stars: Daniel Day Lewis
Leonardo Di Caprio
Rating: Magnificent, a tour de force.
Short review.
The basic plot line for this movie exists in about five hundred places
on the internet, and I cannot be bothered to retype it all here. Instead,
nothing review. How cool.
The acting in “Gangs of New York” is consistently of a high and occasionally
astonishing character. Daniel Day Lewis surmounts odd changes in makeup
to create a character of phenomenal power. Leonardo DiCaprio finally delivers
something I would call a performance. Cameron Diaz shines under Scorsese’s
direction.
If only one thing is true of Martin Scorsese, history will show that
he could see and extract acting talent that has been buried under a series
of third rate roles in fifth rate movies. Whatever this magic is, Martin
Scorsese has done wonders with both DiCaprio and Diaz. Their careers from
this point on will owe a deep debt of gratitude to Martin Scorsese.
The photography, set design, set dressing and prop work in this film
beggar belief. This film is period film making at its absolute very best.
All this aside, this film has a pure narrative power and driving force
behind it in which not a frame is wasted and not a second of screen time
less than at least 95% perfect. Usually, when I watch a film at least
part of my mind is decoding the imagery and techniques, where I am watching
the FILM rather than the story. In GANGS, the story picked me up and whirlpooled
me along, almost totally oblivious to the outside world. The film has
done that to me, twice. Two watchings 48 hours apart have convinced me
that on any level, GANGS is Scorsese’s finest film. That, of course, is
saying a very great deal.
Rating: Magnificent
The Elephant in the Freak
show.
Some Ideas in Gangs of New York.
MAJOR SPOILERS BEYOND THIS POINT!
Jesus Christ and Religion
From the final march of “priest” Vallon, to the gravestones at the
edge of the world, the reality behind the story of GANGS is suffused with
Christianity.
The “five points” is as close to a hell on Earth as is possible. The
levels of immorality and crime defy belief. The church attempts to rectify
this by its usual methods, namely, singing hymns, some preaching, soup
kitchens and of course, beating morality into the children in orphanages.
These techniques all fail miserably. The “Five Points” is relentlessly
amoral. To a casual observer the place would appear to be completely godless.
The casual observer would, of course, be wrong. The people of the “Five
Points” are actually deeply religious.
It’s just that their religion while completely Christian, is utterly
different to the religion of the church, and to the religion of anyone
who happens to have any money at all.
The salient scene happens towards the end, when Di Caprio and Daniel
Day Lewis prepare to go into battle against each other.
Broadly speaking, Day Lewis believes that the Irish are subhuman job
stealers. He has vowed to kill them. Like any soldier about to go into
battle, he prays to Christ for assistance in this sacred task. Di Caprio
is fighting putatively for freedom, and demonstrably for revenge. While
revenge is considered a bad thing in the bible, Di Caprio has no difficulty
in praying for heavenly assistance in his sacred duty. For both characters
Christ is a warlike being who aids his troops in their violation of the
sixth commandment. For them, Christ is the power in their sword arm, and
the blood of Christ means nothing in the way of forgiveness. At the same
time, uptown on the morning of the draft riots a rich (and completely immoral)
man gives thanks for the bounty of his table. His prayer is that Christ
is merciful.
GANGS shows three different warring groups all calling on the same
God, all expecting help. All three cannot be right. Morally speaking all
three are actually quite wrong. How does this situation pan out? In other
words, who is just? Who does Scorsese say has their prayers answered?
The rich get rioted on, they lose some of their worldly possessions,
a few of them get killed. Day Lewis gets dead, in a manner so random that
some could call it the hand of God.
DiCaprio, perhaps the least morally corrupt, barely survives.
Does God exist in this ethos? Scorsese reserves specific judgement.
His judgement on the fact that any criminal turd will use religion as an
excuse and a trigger to violence is not reserved.
Given recent world events, I doubt this film will get any Oscar votes
from Christians.
***************
Politics
All the characters in GANGS are politicians. The historical moment
at which the story occurs is a state of great flux. America is being born,
and at that very moment, things could go either way. The Confederate states
could win, and continue slavery. On the other hand, the Union could win, and
abolish slavery. While one can see this world view as approximating a just
war ultimately won by the forces of good, Scorsese stresses that the “good
guys” (the Union) are also profoundly morally corrupt.
As examples, a society which allows a twelve year old girl to live
in a doorway for weeks after her mother has died, is not a “good” (moral)
society. The Union ferries Irish over first as cheap labour to replace
slaves, then as the Civil War heats up, as cannon fodder. The Union is fighting
to survive, and feels justified in drafting men directly off the ships
from Ireland.
This hell on Earth is ruled over by the rich, whose lifestyles are
profoundly comfortable. A rich man, can live in New York with so many
servants that he will not notice the extra one who robs him.
As a side note, Scorsese’s cameo appearance as the rich man in this
scene is perhaps the driest humour I have ever witnessed in a motion picture.
In the midst of commenting on the disparity of rich and poor in his fictional
work, he places himself, the director, as the butt of the con, a man without
knowledge. Underneath this joke is another, even funnier. The director
of a film has many servants, while he sees the big picture, some of the
servants may have dubious morals. When one considers that the film was
made in Italy - the country which pushed the budget of Terry Gilliam’s
BRAZIL through the roof through those same dubious morals - the placement
of this cameo is nothing short of hilarious.
The “rich” get two salient lines in the film as regards their standpoint.
As before mentioned, “God is merciful.” From the viewpoint of man with
that lifestyle, the sentiment is understandable. Power, besides corrupting
makes you soft.
One of the rich also says, “One can always hire one half of the poor
to kill the other half.” The meaning of this is clear. The rich are on
top. They will kill to stay there. If this idea is expanded, the leaders
of the Union AND the leaders of the confederate states are equally criminal
and equally indistinguishable from the “gangs” of New York. Does the
title make more sense now? They are all “gangs” they all have their uniforms,
their morals, and all kill to consolidate and expand their power. The war
between the states is simply a huge gang war.
Down on street level, there are multiple gangs. At the very bottom
they rob and kill to eat. The higher ups in the chain tax these efforts
and kill to maintain power, through fear.
“Gangs” shows that there are only two methods of extracting power.
Getting votes is one. In this film all elections are completely, and blatantly
rigged. The rigging benefits those who do the rigging.
And there is always violence. If you kill the person above you, you
can take his place. DiCaprio’s character beats Day Lewis’ bodyguard bloody.
He immediately wins the role of confidant and special helper, since he is
both bright enough to understand power, and dangerously violent enough to
continue. Day Lewis’ believes the adage of keeping ones friends close, but
one’s enemies closer. Through violence DiCaprio has become Day Lewis’ prospective
heir.
There is one other form of power, largely hidden. The Power of family.
Day Lewis’ regrets not having a son. DiCaprio’s power comes from his being
the son of the legendary “Priest” Vallon. The rich have family owned companies.
One hires ones relatives first. If you aren’t related, fight, or starve,
says Gangs. Of course, if you happen to be black, or Irish you can’t possibly
be related, so just forget it.
NOTE.
The world of Gangs is utterly sexist. There is one road only open to
women. Get men to feed you. Even the free spirit played by Cameron Diaz
needs a male protector, and has sex with him largely to protect the protective
relationship. The sexism of the society is underscored by the presence
of transvestites at the Church dance. The transvestites are accepted,
by all. If you are a man, and have no ability or interest in thieving
or fighting, you can take the role of a woman, and be an orifice. Everyone
will understand. Have a look at your local jail sometime. The ethos is still
alive and well. All patriarchal societies have this subculture to a greater
or lesser extent.
NOTE ON THE NOTE.
The transvestites in the film are very poorly shaved. At a guess, this
is due to a law similar to the British law of the time, which drew precise
guidelines on the subject of impersonating women. Simply, if the impersonation
was *too* good, and therefore likely to fool a man into believing that
you could bear his children, you were, as the saying goes, “guilty of an
offence.”
Conclusion on Politics. And a Symbol
Politics is power. The pursuit and maintenance of power. Power is *taken*
by force, or assumed by spiritual means. DiCaprio’s lineage requires people
to perceive him as the heir to the vanquished king. His lineage gives
him power. Conversely, his lineage REQUIRES him to attempt to kill Day
Lewis who he can almost regard as a friend. Power exists. Power is required,
according to Scorsese.
If you consider that this film was made after the US elections of 2000,
and during the growth of the “war on terror” it should be possible to perceive
a message in the film. If you are in any doubt on this score, consider
this one idea.
The Tammany Hall politicians are corrupt beyond belief. They are the
beginnings of the Democrats. “Gangs of New York” features an elephant.
An elephant in New York is an unlikely thing, in that time. The elephant
is mad, and escaping from a burning down freak show.
The Republican party's symbol is an elephant.
I wonder how that concept will affect voting at the Academy Awards?
Historically the Academy supposedly strongly supports the Democrats. But,
of course it is illegal to think in The United States at present.
****************************************
The World Trade Centre
The final frame of GANGS features the (ex) World Trade Centre
The buildings in question do not fade out to reflect history as others
do.
The buildings in question rise above a weed shrouded cemetery, which
symbolizes the forgetfulness of time. Some reviewers have found this to
be offensive. They can’t explain why. In my opinion, they have good reflexes
in their knees.
Some Ideas.
In my opinion, the buildings fading and reflecting time would be sentimental.
If that was the case the message of the frame would be these will be forgotten
too. They won’t be. They too were the victims of a gang war, and like
the tombstones, in the film, they stand too.
The tombstones in the film are the symbol of the fact that time passes
and forgets the wars and disagreements of the past. The war that caused
the foreground tombstones is over. The war that caused the death of the
WTC is still going on. If the end of that war ever occurs, perhaps a future
“directors cut” can redress the balance. I doubt the real director will be
involved in that act, because...
The final frame is as deep and artistic statement as the end text of
Kubrick’s BARRY LYNDON. To quote, (black screen, white ornate lettering)
“Rich or poor, good or bad, they are all equal now”
Art does not have to MEAN precisely. It can simply direct thoughts
along a particular track Your response to the final frame of GANGS following
your response to the film itself, is the whole point of the experience.
*************************
Final Roundup.
In “Gangs of
New York” Scorsese takes on the two big subjects of politics and religion
and delivers his ideas and ideology in a highly entertaining and exciting
form. Bluntly, he delivers a political / religious /moral tract in
the form of a “revenge tale” mass culture entertainment. The mass culture
entertainment has proven so tasty that it has been nominated for many awards
and is doing, as VARIETY would say, “boffo biz.”
In all the reviews of this film that I have read, NONE of the above
concepts have been mentioned. Of all the reviews, non-US sources are consistently
more positive in response to the film.
This means one of two things. Either US reviewers aren’t as bright
and perceptive as “foreign” ones, (which could be argued, if not very
successfully) or that US reviewers are simply scared of putting the above
ideas into black and white, in the present political climate.
That said, GANGS was filmed in Italy. It has been a complete pleasure
to see a director as talented as Martin Scorsese have a free hand at making
the film that he wanted. While rumours exist of acrimony on the cutting
of an hour of film from GANGS, other rumours promise a “directors cut” DVD.
The free hand that Scorsese has been given is probably only evident to fans
familiar with his work. GANGS feels *free* from the relentless requirement
for a film to be easily classifiable. It has an elephant. Humour. Social
comment. None of these things exist comfortably in American films.
When one sees that the film was produced by the Grimaldi’s - the family
who bankrolled Federico Fellini among others - the source of the strength
and new feeling of artistic freedom in "Gangs of New York" is clearly identifiable.
I for one, hope that Martin Scorsese continues to make films outside
America. It appears to agree with him.
Alex Rieneck
27.02.2003
Notes on this review.
If concepts contained herein, deeply offend you, fuck off.
If you think I have left something out, write to me.
This page will be updated as I see the film more times.
If you are one of the people who wants me
to write something like this (or my Piano Teacher article) about some
other film, email me. You might be lucky and inspire me to do just
that.
Email
