In 1862, Amsterdam Vallon returns to the Five Points area of New York City seeking revenge against Bill the Butcher; his father's killer.In 1862, Amsterdam Vallon returns to the Five Points area of New York City seeking revenge against Bill the Butcher; his father's killer.In 1862, Amsterdam Vallon returns to the Five Points area of New York City seeking revenge against Bill the Butcher; his father's killer.
- Nominated for 10 Oscars
- 50 wins & 135 nominations total
Alec McCowen
- Reverend Raleigh
- (as Alec Mccowen)
Lawrence Gilliard Jr.
- Jimmy Spoils
- (as Larry Gilliard Jr.)
Peter-Hugo Daly
- One-Armed Priest
- (as Peter Hugo Daly)
Cian McCormack
- Young Amsterdam
- (as Cian Mccormack)
What Scorsese Film Ranks Highest on IMDb?
What Scorsese Film Ranks Highest on IMDb?
Cinema legend Martin Scorsese has directed some of the most acclaimed films of all time. See how IMDb users rank all of his feature films as director.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaTo simulate Bill the Butcher's fake eye, Sir Daniel Day-Lewis had his own eyeball covered in prosthetic glass. Day-Lewis learned to tap his fake eye with the tip of a knife without blinking.
- GoofsWhen the competing fire companies arrive at the house fire, one fireman wears modern-day fireman's pants. He may be a real-life firefighter, in the scene as a safety precaution.
- Quotes
Amsterdam Vallon: It's a funny feeling being taken under the wing of a dragon. It's warmer than you'd think.
- Crazy creditsNoises from the modern day New York streets play over the second half of the closing credits.
- Alternate versionsScorsese's original cut of the film was 216 minutes (3 hours & 36 minutes) long.
- ConnectionsEdited into U2: The Hands That Built America (Version 1) (2002)
- SoundtracksBrooklyn Heights
Composed by Howard Shore
Produced by Hal Willner
Recorded and mixed by Eric Liljestrand
Additional mixing by Tom Lazarus
Additional recording and mixing by Geoff Foster
Orchestrations by Jeff Atmajian
Conducted by Andy Brown
Solo counter tenor by Will Towers
Solo boy soprano by James Kanagasooriam
Featured review
He actually did it!
You'd think Scorcese has bitten a bit more than he could possibly chew, this time. Well, he didn't. Gangs of new York is not an "epic masterpiece" and it ain't that because I seriously doubt the directors aim was that. It's a great movie in it's own account, but you have to watch it in the right way.
The plot: Tight enough and well paced, with a couple of lows (expected for a three-hour film) but generally it comes out pretty neat. Some may find it disturbing, as it contains extreme violence and it does not portray an America of happy workers, even happier slaves, benevolent rich and just authorities - instead, it portraits the true 1860 society. Definitely not for those who like their films with plenty of sugar on the top.
The epic and the drama: Well, basically the film is the story of two men. Around them things evolve and a brave new world comes forth - but we only get to watch snapshots of that world. Until the last sequence, that is when the whole city "explodes" (in some occasions literally...) and the streets are being covered in blood, and the two aspects (the main story and the events of the era) are being tied together in the same continuum.
At the same time, the director attempts to portrait the whole birth and growth of the United States, in a kind of parabole, but without loosing his focus on the main story and the surrounding. Scorsese dives deeply into the psychology of his heroes, without giving out any explanation of their acts other than the probable - he lets us figure it out ourselves, and that's a God-given gift.
The visuals: The film is disturbing, as it contains extreme violence. There are literally streams of blood, hacking, slashing, crushing - even some action movie fans (hey dude, look, he smashed his head with that thing... cool, man!") might find some parts of the film interesting. The last sequence is visually astounding, and it's by it's own account a reason to watch this film over and over again... if you got the stomach to actually cope with the disturbing images, that is.
The actors: I didn't think it would come a day when I'd say that Leo Di Caprio can act, but ...here I go: The kid can act. And quite good too. Guess he needed a Scorsese to put him in the right path. Same with Cameron Diaz - she has got some potential, seems so. Too bad she wastes it in films like "the sweetest thing" and other throw-ups like that. And... Daniel Day Lewis. Truly, with this performance, they should give him the Academy award. He portrays the vile "Butcher" in a way few would be able of, and he adds depth to a character that could very easily end up "two-dimensional". He is stunningly good.
New York, New York: Scorsese gets involved in something that compares to his previous work the way a fancy little sports car compares to a huge truck: A grandioso film of epic proportions and of great ambition. He does deliver, I believe. But this film shall not be acknowledged universally, because there is too much violence, corruption, lack of the good old white vs black (good vs evil, I mean) concept and does not sweeten the pill in any way. It's disturbing and raw, and it's a great. It's not a political film - in such, the director usually picks a stance, a "true" hero, an opposing view, and builds upon those. In this case, the director is truly endistancemented and keeps that distance, even from his "hero". There are no "good" people in that movie, all are acting like chess pieces in a predetermined way, but at the same time they try to burst out and do their own.
The verdict: A fabulous film, which is going to be recognized for such in some years
The plot: Tight enough and well paced, with a couple of lows (expected for a three-hour film) but generally it comes out pretty neat. Some may find it disturbing, as it contains extreme violence and it does not portray an America of happy workers, even happier slaves, benevolent rich and just authorities - instead, it portraits the true 1860 society. Definitely not for those who like their films with plenty of sugar on the top.
The epic and the drama: Well, basically the film is the story of two men. Around them things evolve and a brave new world comes forth - but we only get to watch snapshots of that world. Until the last sequence, that is when the whole city "explodes" (in some occasions literally...) and the streets are being covered in blood, and the two aspects (the main story and the events of the era) are being tied together in the same continuum.
At the same time, the director attempts to portrait the whole birth and growth of the United States, in a kind of parabole, but without loosing his focus on the main story and the surrounding. Scorsese dives deeply into the psychology of his heroes, without giving out any explanation of their acts other than the probable - he lets us figure it out ourselves, and that's a God-given gift.
The visuals: The film is disturbing, as it contains extreme violence. There are literally streams of blood, hacking, slashing, crushing - even some action movie fans (hey dude, look, he smashed his head with that thing... cool, man!") might find some parts of the film interesting. The last sequence is visually astounding, and it's by it's own account a reason to watch this film over and over again... if you got the stomach to actually cope with the disturbing images, that is.
The actors: I didn't think it would come a day when I'd say that Leo Di Caprio can act, but ...here I go: The kid can act. And quite good too. Guess he needed a Scorsese to put him in the right path. Same with Cameron Diaz - she has got some potential, seems so. Too bad she wastes it in films like "the sweetest thing" and other throw-ups like that. And... Daniel Day Lewis. Truly, with this performance, they should give him the Academy award. He portrays the vile "Butcher" in a way few would be able of, and he adds depth to a character that could very easily end up "two-dimensional". He is stunningly good.
New York, New York: Scorsese gets involved in something that compares to his previous work the way a fancy little sports car compares to a huge truck: A grandioso film of epic proportions and of great ambition. He does deliver, I believe. But this film shall not be acknowledged universally, because there is too much violence, corruption, lack of the good old white vs black (good vs evil, I mean) concept and does not sweeten the pill in any way. It's disturbing and raw, and it's a great. It's not a political film - in such, the director usually picks a stance, a "true" hero, an opposing view, and builds upon those. In this case, the director is truly endistancemented and keeps that distance, even from his "hero". There are no "good" people in that movie, all are acting like chess pieces in a predetermined way, but at the same time they try to burst out and do their own.
The verdict: A fabulous film, which is going to be recognized for such in some years
Helpful•22885
The Movies of Martin Scorsese
The Movies of Martin Scorsese
From Taxi Driver to Killers of the Flower Moon, see some of our favorite stills from Martin Scorsese's films
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Also known as
- Pandillas de Nueva York
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $100,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $77,812,000
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $9,100,000
- Dec 22, 2002
- Gross worldwide
- $193,772,504
- Runtime2 hours 47 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content