Unrelenting misery

Rating: 3/10 (8 January 2003)

Not a shred of humanity shines through in this film to rescue it from being one of the most unpleasant cinematic experiences of recent years. Some say, "but it's Scorcese", afraid to consider that the master may have taken a misstep, and ready to admire his pet project on the basis of previous triumphs. I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree. For highly stylised characterisation, read "pantomine villains", for impressive design, read "an overwrought and unconvincing pastiche", for a captivating plot, read "a relentless barrage of violence, punctuated by the annoying musings of unsympathetic characters, none of whom arouse any sympathy".
I have no problem with violence in films, especially of the sort shown here. That is, brutal, unsettling and far more likely to make one a pacifist than a violent man. Usually, however, the violence is countered by the humanity shining through in at least one of the central characters. The only character capable of arousing pity and sympathy is this film is that of Cameron Diaz (under-used). Others, especially Di Caprio (as Amsterdam Vallon), simply arouse frustration, annoyance and contempt (are we suppose to respect this disturbed young man's violent revenge fantasy?).

The only plus note is the (historically accurate) incorporation of the anti-emancipation riots and lynchings of black men in New York during the Civil War into the plot. There have been few American films recently to show the ugly side of America's formation and I'll give the film a cautious plaudit for that at least.