GAMES: GameSpot | GameFAQs | SportsGamer MUSIC: Last.fm | MP3.com MOVIES: Metacritic | Movietome TV: TV.com
Home | About Metacritic | About Metascores | What's New | Wireless Versions | Discussion Forums | Advertising Inquiries | Contact Us | RSS
Metacritic.com: We Deal With Criticism
     Help
> Switch to Advanced Search  
Film Video/DVD Music Games TV

DVD and Video

Upcoming Release Calendar
Awards & Bests By Year
All-Time High Scores
All-Time Low Scores
How Metascores Are Calculated
Discuss Film In Our Forums

 

Recent Releases in DVD and Video

sort by name sort by score

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.



 

Printer-Friendly Version Email This Page Discuss In Our Forums

Gangs of New York
Miramax Films

Gangs of New York reviews
Critic Score
Metascore: 72 Metascore out of 100
User Score  
6.6 out of 10
based on 39 reviews
Read critic reviews
How did we calculate this?
based on 116 votes
Read user comments
Rate this movie

MPAA RATING: R for intense strong violence, sexuality/nudity and language

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz, Jim Broadbent, John C. Reilly, Henry Thomas, Brendan Gleeson, and Liam Neeson

Set in New York City between 1840 and 1863, this is the story of a young man named Amsterdam (DiCaprio) who seeks vengeance against Bill "The Butcher" Poole (Day-Lewis), the man who killed his father as a result of warfare between the powerful Manhattan gangs.


GENRE(S): Drama  
WRITTEN BY: Jay Cocks (also story)
Steven Zaillian
Kenneth Lonergan
 
DIRECTED BY: Martin Scorsese  
RELEASE DATE: DVD: July 1, 2003 
Video: July 1, 2003 
Theatrical: December 20, 2002 
RUNNING TIME: 168 minutes, Color 
ORIGIN: USA / Germany / Italy / UK / Netherlands 

Received 10 Oscar nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director (Martin Scorsese), and Best Actor (Daniel Day-Lewis). Scorsese also won a Golden Globe award, and the film received a Golden Globe nomination for Best Picture.

What The Critics Said

All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

100
Rolling Stone Peter Travers
Gangs of New York is something better than perfect: It's thrillingly alive.
Read Full Review
100
Chicago Tribune Michael Wilmington
A magnificent throwback to an almost vanished era of epic filmmaking by great filmmakers in thrall to their own passions, rather than to the studio bookkeepers.
Read Full Review
91
Entertainment Weekly Lisa Schwarzbaum
Everything is vast and hugely ambitious in Martin Scorsese's magisterial, scrambled historical epic.
Read Full Review
90
The Onion (A.V. Club) Scott Tobias
A grand achievement in history and anthropology, supporting its ambition and scope with a sumptuous re-creation of the period and an immediacy that allows a forgotten past to barrel into the present.
Read Full Review
90
Time Richard Corliss
This daring, perhaps confusing declaration of irrelevance suggests that the epic is a form a director like Scorsese must subvert even as he invokes it. But it doesn't erase the sordid splendor of Scorsese's congested, conflicted, entrancing achievement.
Read Full Review
90
Variety Todd McCarthy
Bears all the earmarks of a magnum opus for Martin Scorsese: Fascinating and fresh material about his beloved New York City, an epic reach, an equally epic gestation period, a dynamic criminal element, combustible socio-political-religious elements, outstanding actors and sophisticated allusions to cinema history that inform and enrich the experience.
Read Full Review
90
Washington Post Michael O'Sullivan
Scorsese creates a film so resonant that it is both a work of great art and an anthropological document.
Read Full Review
90
The New York Times Dana Stevens
This is historical filmmaking without the balm of right-thinking ideology, either liberal or conservative. Gangs of New York is nearly a great movie. I suspect that, over time, it will make up the distance.
Read Full Review
90
Slate David Edelstein
It's a magnificent achievement—holes, tatters, crudities, screw-ups, and all.
Read Full Review
88
Boston Globe Ty Burr
Scorsese and his team of Grade A talents are working on an operatic scale here, and like many operas, this is long, overwrought, sprawling, and more than frequently brilliant. It also hits just enough discordant notes to keep it from greatness.
Read Full Review
88
Charlotte Observer Lawrence Toppman
Each major character is complex, none more so than Bill. He's almost Shakespearean in scope.
Read Full Review
88
USA Today Mike Clark
If Martin Scorsese's staggeringly ambitious one-of-a-kind finally has too many flaws to be great, it has as much greatness in it as any movie this year.
Read Full Review
88
Chicago Sun-Times Roger Ebert
Rips up the postcards of American history and reassembles them into a violent, blood-soaked story of our bare-knuckled past.
Read Full Review
80
Film Threat Rich Cline
This is a spacious, robust movie that grabs hold of us and doesn't let go for nearly three hours.
Read Full Review
80
Wall Street Journal Joe Morgenstern
Throbs with an ambition that sends it soaring, then brings it down.
78
Austin Chronicle Marjorie Baumgarten
The best Scorsese we've seen in a decade.
Read Full Review
75
New York Post Jonathan Foreman
Though never dull and often visually beautiful, this work of operatic sweep doesn't fulfill its own ambitions.
Read Full Review
75
New York Daily News Jami Bernard
The movie turns choppy in the final third, but it is a monumental achievement nonetheless.
Read Full Review
75
San Francisco Chronicle Mick LaSalle
Lacks one thing -- an epic grandeur.
Read Full Review
75
Portland Oregonian Shawn Levy
There is greatness in Martin Scorsese's Gangs of New York: titanic acting, violent poetry, moviemaking on a grand scale, a real air of daring. And there is flab in it as well, and confusion.
Read Full Review
75
ReelViews James Berardinelli
Doesn't come close to masterpiece status. There are some great individual scenes and a tremendous performance by Daniel Day-Lewis, but the connecting material is mediocre, leading to the occasional twinge of dissatisfaction.
Read Full Review
75
Christian Science Monitor David Sterritt
The movie is strong in sound and fury, weak in nuance and insight.
Read Full Review
75
Seattle Post-Intelligencer William Arnold
All of Scorsese's movies deliver a mixed message, but this one is downright schizophrenic.
Read Full Review
70
New York Magazine Peter Rainer
Stunning, and it has the added bonus of being about an era that is virtually new to movies. As a dramatic achievement, however, it is not quite so amazing.
Read Full Review
63
The Globe and Mail (Toronto) Rick Groen
While the initial sequence is glorious, the last is a shambles.
Read Full Review
63
Baltimore Sun Michael Sragow
Unfortunately, it lacks emotional lift or folkloric fervor.
Read Full Review
63
Miami Herald Rene Rodriguez
Gangs of New York is many things, but a masterpiece is not one of them. It is primarily, and somewhat surprisingly, a poky western, with a vengeful orphan.
Read Full Review
60
Salon.com Stephanie Zacharek
"Gunsmoke" meets "Planet of the Apes" in Martin Scorsese's overlarge, overcooked epic of 19th century Manhattan. You should see it anyway.
Read Full Review
60
Village Voice J. Hoberman
Cost well over $100 million, and the money is up there for the gawking. Illuminated by the orange flames of hell, the vast New York City set looks great. The least engaging aspect of the movie is its script -- which passed through the hands of three separate writers and perhaps even producer Harvey Weinstein.
Read Full Review
60
LA Weekly John Powers
Scorsese and his writers have saddled their dream with a corny plot apparently lifted from some old 1930s Warner Bros. film starring Jimmy Cagney and Pat O'Brien.
Read Full Review
60
The New Yorker David Denby
The movie is strange and muddled -- a disorganized epic -- but Day-Lewis, disporting himself with royal assurance, does what he can to hold it together. [23 & 30 December 2002, p. 166]
60
The New Republic Stanley Kauffmann
The flaw that separates Scorsese's film into its components is its lack of a crystallized theme.
Read Full Review
60
Dallas Observer Bill Gallo
The problem here lies not in the abundance of blood--we've seen that before--but in the film's pounding insistence, which prevails for all two hours and 40 minutes, that we also absorb a rather thin and unreliable history lesson.
Read Full Review
60
Newsweek David Ansen
Gangs is a dream project Scorsese has wanted to make for 30 years. You have to honor its mad ambition. But sadly, it feels like a dream too long deferred.
Read Full Review
50
TV Guide Maitland McDonagh
Epic, meticulously researched and ultimately disappointing, Martin Scorsese's bloody valentine to the birth of his beloved city is less than the sum of its parts.
Read Full Review
50
Washington Post Stephen Hunter
Under its scope and reach and passion, Gangs of New York is pretty ordinary stuff.
Read Full Review
50
Philadelphia Inquirer Steven Rea
An elaborately worked-over opus that's as tarted-up and artificial as Scorsese's '70s classic Mean Streets was gritty and real, Gangs of New York feels like a movie musical without the songs.
Read Full Review
50
Chicago Reader Jonathan Rosenbaum
Starts off with a lot of promise and excitement but winds up 165 minutes later feeling empty and affectless.
Read Full Review
40
Los Angeles Times Kenneth Turan
Scorsese and his team have created a heavy-footed golem of a motion picture, hard to ignore as it throws its weight around but fatally lacking in anything resembling soul.
Read Full Review

What Our Users Said

Vote Now!The average user rating for this movie is 6.6 (out of 10) based on 116 User Votes
Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.

Kevin M gave it a3:
Just about everything that can go wrong with a film goes wrong here. No unifying theme or idea, poor writing and characterization with equally poor acting, terrible use of music (who the hell chose that song to play during the opening fight?), and a trite use of the twin towers at the very end. Never at any point in this movie are we offered a single reason to care about it or any of the characters and it seems never once did they ask "why are we even making this film?" It's a purposeless and overrated flop from a very good director.

Conor S. gave it a9:
This is one of Scorsese's finest accomplishments. Though Leo fails to really step it up and deliver, he does fine and hands the spotlight to the far superior (in this film) Daniel Day Lewis, who is fascinating to watch and at the same time chilling. Though he plays the villain, I found myself rooting for him after the first half of the film.

Blake J. gave it an8:
A painfully gruesome and honest portrayal of racism. Daniel Day-Lewis falls into his role so well half the time you will wonder if he is coming for you.

Joseph gave it a10:
Excellent movie. Amazing acting. Original and chaotically beautiful. Gritty and intriguing. You should give this movie a chance unless the only action you enjoy is the standard "action flick."

Eon gave it a5:
As much as I like Scorcese, this movie is boring and pointless.

Less_success gave it an8:
I can't believe the way people are hating on this movie. It can't possibly deserve a 0 ranking - that's just silly. I think I like this movie more then a lot of people, but let's get real for a moment, guys. Daniel Day-Lewis and DiCaprio both do a great job in this movie (particularly Day-Lewis). The plot isn't amazing, but it's still enthralling enough to keep someone interested, even though it is a little too long. It's not Scorsese's best directed film, but it's still got better direction then 75% of the films made. If you rate this movie a 0, then your rating system is greatly flawed.

Dave F gave it a10:
Picture that friend of yours who falls asleep during action movies. He's always complaining about the clichés, the watered-down plot, the hackneyed action sequences. Gangs of New York is what that friend might dream up given a Hollywood cast and limitless freedom. I was expecting a gaudy, eye-rolling showcase for Diaz and DiCaprio's pretty faces. Instead I witnessed a down-and-dirty masterpiece with inspired acting, dazzling writing, and bold camerawork. The script doggedly avoids empty-headed clichés, instead inventing classic lines for future copycats. One memorable scene takes place on a body-strewn battlefield in the Five Points. Bill the Butcher, folding a blood-stained knife into the hands of a fallen priest, says with dutiful respect: "you'll need this to cross the river." Even the voice-over work in Gangs is fresh, binding the meaty chaos with barbed-wire eloquence. It's a pity some critics label the movie "indulgent", simply because it dares to sustain virtuoso vision for nearly three hours. We should be so lucky to have this-a Hollywood movie that bleeds when pricked. It is rare to have characters we not only care about, but whose conflicts and relationships are unapologetically human. Here is a conniving monster with a heart, and a hero who becomes his son. And why was it news to some that the film is not 100 percent historically accurate? This is a story. A story that ignites as grisly, glorious nightmare the way only film can.

Read more user comments...

Discuss this movie in our forums

Return to top of page
Home | FILM | DVD/VIDEO | MUSIC | GAMES | TV | Forums | About Metacritic metacritic.com

Popular on CBS sites: MLB | Spore | iPhone 3G | Paris Hilton | Antivirus Software | GPS | Recipes | Shwayze | NFL

About CBS Interactive | Jobs | Advertise

© 2008 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use