Who was King Saul's father?

Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Church of the Masses

Home
Religious Music & Entertainment

Last updated on: February 17, 2003 at 1:15 am by Barbara Nicolosi

2003-02-17T01:15:00-07:00 Barbara Nicolosi

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

SCORSESE GANGS UP ON THE AUDIENCE

Just saw Gangs of New York tonight. This is such an awful movie that I can’t even bring myself to relive it for the purposes of reviewing it. The only thing more repugnant than the graphic brutality and filmmaking excesses in this over-long piece of cinematic pretension, is the fact that it is nominated for TEN Academy Awards! It’s the kind of project that makes me want to run from Hollywood, and go get a job in a shoe store somewhere in RI.

Screenwriter William Goldman has fortunately written a sufficiently brutal review of Gangs, such that I don’t have to.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I am sick unto death of feeling guilty

about Martin Scorsese. Here are the names of five great directors: Charlie Chaplin,

Howard Hawks, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick and Orson Welles. What do they

have in common? For all their fame and brilliance, none has won the Oscar for best

direction. Neither has Scorsese. Should the five have won? Absolutely. But it’s not a

mortal sin they didn’t. Should Scorsese? You bet. A couple of times. (“Taxi Driver,”

obviously, “Raging Bull,” obviously. But I fell in love with his talent earlier on, with

“Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore.”)

This year, more than ever, it’s like there’s a Byzantine plot to get Scorsese the honor….

And I suspect Scorsese will win, too. But he sure doesn’t deserve it, not this year —

“Gangs of New York” is a mess. Please do not sputter on about some of the visuals —

my God, bring Ed Wood back from the dead, give him a hundred mil-plus to play with,

he’d give you some visuals, too.No, the problem with “Gangs of New York” is nothing

new in Scorsese’s work — he has never been secure with a story. No one’s much better

with actors or look or camera placement. It’s that most crucial director’s tool that haunts

him. The reason his movies do not make much, if any, money is not because he is

dealing with esoteric subjects that are above the average moviegoer’s head. It’s the

clumsy storytelling that frustrates us, sending us out of the theater dissatisfied.

“Gangs” is in trouble from the outset. In the opening scene Leo, at about age 10,

is watching his daddy shave. There is a cut. The razor is given to the kid and then the

father intones the following: “The blood stays on the blade.” I have a friend who is so

giddy with the sheer pretentiousness of that line that he says it to everyone. You say

“Good morning.” He answers, “Yes, and the blood stays on the blade.”

And please do not blame the screenwriter for that. Because when you are dealing with

a giant ape director, they get what they want. And Scorsese chose to open the story

that way. What story though? The lack of an answer is what demolishes the movie. Is

it about gang warfare? Family revenge? Irish immigration? The Civil War? The draft?

Political corruption? Prejudice? These subjects and more, all of them valid enough alone,

flicker in and out, never accumulating or connecting one to the other. One example to

indicate the problem: Two hours and seven minutes into the film, folks, there is a scene

between Leo and the political boss of New York — and they are discussing a subject never

mentioned before in the movie and which you could not guess if I gave you the rest of my

lifetime: who is going to run for Sheriff. For 10 minutes, an amazing wasted length of movie

time, and especially damaging this late into a pic, we deal with the election of the sheriff

and his subsequent murder and Leo eventually challenging Daniel Day-Lewis to combat.

But we knew from the first sequence that this would happen because Day-Lewis killed

Leo’s pop. So now the fight, yes? Nope. Not in this baby. Ten additional minutes drudge

on before they get to it. But this fight was worse — because you couldn’t see it. Scorsese

has hidden it behind the smoke of cannon fire. Nothing to make John Wayne worry. But

the battle is still better than the way the movie ends, with a disgraceful shot of the

World Trade Center. I guess if you can’t move people legitimately, you do what you have

to do. (Originally printed in Variety)

I would rather see The Hours get every award, than see this film get one. And you know how much I loathed The Hours.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

February 16, 2003

Next Post

February 17, 2003

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 March 2012 October 2011 September 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 September 2010 August 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 November 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was King Saul's father?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Kish Methuselah Job Rehoboam