A rich film that does not quite go the distance.

Rating: 8/10 (30 January 2003)

This film comes as a timely reminder that lives and political situations are never morally black and white. As one would expect, Scorsese avoids the terrible mainstream tendency to portray events as a simplified, 'noble struggle' by one side or the other. You have good attempts to try and portray things as they were - prejudice and idiosyncrasy are not covered up. I am no expert on this era of American history so cannot comment as to exact 'truth' to events, yet I applaud this film in its rich creation of the atmosphere and terrain of 1860s New York.
Firstly, in terms of negatives... the conclusion did lack the frisson and unpredictable drama promised by the rest of film. The final confrontation, while tied well to the draft-related events, lacks punch and I have heard historical basis. From the rest of the film one could not possibly believe Di Caprio could kill Day Lewis' character... Di Caprio for all the very still posturing, does not cut it as a tough man, while Day Lewis' crazed energy and precise force comes across crystal clear. The actual fight is barely shown at the end, which is telling. It seems to me for 'Amsterdam' to have been killed by the Butcher would have been far more likely and satisfactory note to end it on.
The presence of Di Caprio is destabilising to a script that calls for the Amsterdam figure to be a more impressive figure. Di Caprio simply lacks the stature to play the role, physically and in terms of his acting style. He does not convey much of a threat and comes across as an 'out of his depth' character much as dishonourable as the Butcher says he is. I'm surprised Scorsese didn't try to draw more out of the catholic guilt side of things, as it's certainly all set up for that. Amsterdam should have been a figure more convincing as a passionate, yet conflicted Irishman of that time. Di Caprio does the accent, yet he just doesn't convey all that much more of the character. While the character isn't meant to be anything like the man his father was, he is positioned in the film as close to a 'hero' and identification figure. Di Caprio doesn't bring the depth and interest to this role, which disrupts the balance of the film when you have a Day Lewis on rampant form.
Bill the Butcher is a great screen 'villain' precisely because he is a character of depth; a butcher, of animals and humans, who is also a theatrical showman and has strong moral convictions. You are wrapped up in this character who really seems of the time, unlike Di Caprio; this is Dickensian, broad playing of the best kind. Day Lewis' command of the screen is exemplary; it only makes you wish you had a more suitable actor in the other main role, who could play off him better. There are other fine performances; Jim Broadbent perhaps under-used as the typical politician figure, who is yet, rightfully, not made out as completely unsympathetic. He is a browbeaten man of some bewildered compassion; he has done what he does as that is what one had to do to get on in politics in such places. He is actually a figure very much to identify with; one of the few who does not resort to the prevalent violence. Brendan Gleeson is even more neglected - why not have had more scenes of his character and cut some of the Di Caprio slack? - as this "Monk" figure. I guess a lot was cut which made his character seem perhaps a little lacking here; it seems stuff is missing. Gleeson is magnificent as a straight-talking, wise figure; shame we don't get more of this character.
Cameron Diaz is capable enough at playing her character, yet the character is quite a waste of time in terms of the narrative, and is only necessary for the role she plays in understanding the Butcher - her telling of how he took her in et al - otherwise, it just seems for box office they had to slot in some token romance. Though, at least, Scorsese doesn't overdue the unwarranted sentiment here. The amount of screen time she gets is a waste really, of the film; it's economics talking here, rather than Scorsese's artistic sense. _Gangs of New York_ is a very enjoyable picture; Scorsese turning to history is a welcome change, and the realisation of the period is wonderfully rich in detail. It is another 'masculine-centred violent culture'-type story for Scorsese, yet seems very fresh due to some fine performances and a thoughtful approach. The film is sadly hamstrung, however, by the insufficiency of Di Caprio, the over-emphasis on Diaz and under-emphasis on Gleeson, and its finale is disappointingly pat. A worthy, enjoyable enterprise though, with the era brought to light and a performance to be remembered by Day Lewis. Always good to see a film in the mainstream that avoids the same old awful sentimentalism and simple-minded taking of sides.
Rating:- ****/*****