Don't worry, no spoilers ahead.

Music: Nice touch Martin, I never expected to hear rock music back in 1846. I don't think it was Howard's idea either. Can you imagine this happening during the battle at Helm's Deep?!

Movie: Daniel Day Lewis -- acting was great, but unfortunately sank with the rest of the ship. Aside from his character, there was no character development on the part of Leo, Cameron, and everyone else. If this was a tribute to New York, you will be sadly disappointed and embarrassed.

Personally, I enjoyed the film. I thought that Daniel Day-Lewis was delightfully malicious, and I thought that it was an interesting part of our nation's history to look at - I wasn't aware of many of the things going on in there (the non-fiction stuff).

quote:

---

Originally posted by jburrows:
Music: Nice touch Martin, I never expected to hear rock music back in 1846. I don't think it was Howard's idea either. Can you imagine this happening during the battle at Helm's Deep?!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dgoldwas:
My understanding was that Shore didn't really "score" the film - so he had no involvement in the other music choices (i.e. the U2 rock music). I seriously wonder how much of that was Scorsese's choice, as well - the Weinstein brothers' fingerprints are all over this one....

---

The only piece of music that has studio-influenced fingerprints on it is the U2 song. This song brings the film into the modern era at the close, so the anachronism tag doesn't really fit here either. But an end title song written expressly for one of his films is not something Scorsese usually considers (with the exception of the closing theme to New York, New York). It's probably a safe bet that U2 was Harvey's sole contribution to the soundtrack. Harvey gets his due and proper in one of the film's card scenes, BTW. A character named Harvey is being a little stingy with his bets and the Butcher takes care of it.

I thought Shore's folksy second part to "Brooklyn Heights" worked very well in the sojourn uptown for the turtle-doving demonstration. I wonder where Shore got that title, anyway. Is it mere coincidence that the end of the film occurs in Brooklyn Heights, overlooking Manhattan?

I thought the overall mix of blues and Irish folk to be thoughtful and flavorful. I appreciated the way Scorsese incorporated his peculiar sensibilities with that of the traditional movie epic sound of the first and third parts of Shore's composition.

The most memorable shot in the film, a long one one that goes from immigrants debarking their boat, being sworn in as citizens, given uniforms and guns, and marching right back into another ship is scored to "Paddy's Lamentation." You just know Scorsese had that song playing in his ear on the set, just like he had "Then He Kissed Me" playing during Goodfellas' famous steadicam shot.

The best scene in the film, the one at the Chinese pagoda, was scored with Chinese opera, interrupted with American marching band. You can't help but smile at that. If any score deserves a melting pot of African, Celtic, and Chinese music, it's one about the origins of New York City.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arnzilla:
Unlike most directors, he frequently has his musical choices already in the margins of the shooting script when he's filming.

---

Yeah, and I'm sure Elmer Bernstein (who was on the film for TWO YEARS can agree with that comment.

Are you really suggesting that Scorsese willingly dumped Elmer after he wrote the score - twice? Everything I've heard about this issue has been that it was one of the major casualties in the very public battle between Scorsese and the Weinsteins.

quote:

---

I wonder where Shore got that title, anyway. Is it mere coincidence that the end of the film occurs in Brooklyn Heights, overlooking Manhattan?

---

Since the music over the ending you describe is actually the U2 song, I'd say - yes, it's a coincidence. Why? Because Shore did NOT wrote the cue for this film. And Scorsese shot the film long before it was decided to use Shore's composition.

I don't disagree with your comments regarding the other source cues.... my point (go read what I wrote again - you've clearly misread it) was questioning Scorsese's involvement in using the Shore composition - not his involvement in the other source cues.

THIS FILM IS AWFUL. U2's ridiculous "The Hands That Built America" in unbelieveable, like Bono's idiot performance at the Super Bowl last year, also, considering the excllent placement of "Bloody Sunday" in this year's film of the same title. In fact, the title of the song is insulting— yes, I know it's the name of the book that inspired this garbage—with Daniel Day-Lewis' character constantly roaring about "us, Natives!" Oh, please.

It's sad, too, how people use these films as a history lesson; very little in "Gangs of New York" is interesting in a historical perspective, and what is, is lost by the film's end and most of it, in fact, adds nothing to what should be a basic understanding of American history. So, really it isn't as Dan put it: "an interesting part of our nation's history to look at." What is so interesting? The corrupt politicians? The violence? The racism? (now, that should be general knowledge) And, of course, you'll dismiss me as being "anti-American" as you've done before. LOL!

quote:

---

Originally posted by sean:
So, really it isn't as Dan put it: "an interesting part of our nation's history to look at." What is so interesting? The corrupt politicians? The violence? The racism?

---

Uh, yeah, it's interesting. While I'm not saying Hollywood is a suitable replacement for history books, what this film did (just as FRIDA did, and other films before it), was spark in ME an interest in the particular subject matter, which in turn prompted me to do further reading by more legitimate and accurate sources.

So you didn't like the film - fair enough. Everyone has an opinion. But I found it interesting because it portrayed an aspect of American history (whether accurately or not) that I didn't know much about.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JeffBond:
And given the apparent fact that Howard Shore had no direct involvement in scoring the film, the credit "original music by Howard Shore" must be one of the most misleading ever put on film.

---

Unfortunately, now I'm getting mixed info.... According to Jon Burlingame, it was based on his unheard concert piece, "Brooklyn Heights" (which we all knew): http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/movies/cl-ca-shorts3nov03.story

And according to Mix Magazine, some of Elmer Bernstein's cues are in the final film (contrary to what Bernstein's office tells me), and Shore was brought in to write new music. http://mixonline.com/ar/audio_gangs_new_york/

So..... <shrug>

I might be confusing myself here, but didn't Elmer actually include a suite of music from Gangs of New York in a recent (relatively speaking) concert for the public? What a hot "tour" bootleg that would make!

And Kosh, if you are reading, can you demand Dan Goldwasser put an end to this smell anyway? Shirley he can cancel an afternoon tea with John Williams and spend some time with Scorcese, pinning him down on the subject?

quote:

---

Originally posted by JeffBond:
The idea that Scorsese had this mixed-up bag of music "planned" all along is ridiculous--why the hell did he hire Bernstein in the first place if that was the case?

---

Why is it so hard to believe that Scorsese fired Bernstein? I'm more interested in whether he hires him back for his next project due to start filming this summer. it seems like a perfect match for the two: Howard Hughes in early Hollywood.

How do you see Scorsese dumping Bernstein's score twice? Wasn't it recorded in Feb/March? Scorsese must have decided by May that he didn't want it since Elmer's name appeared nowhere in the press book at the Cannes film festival, and two months later Shore's name was linked to the film.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arnzilla:
A new score costs more money, so why would Weinstein want to spend more money if his director was happy with what he had?

---

But it's not a "new score". It's a previously written concert piece that was adapted to be placed in to the film. And I doubt it cost as much as it would have cost to hire a composer to write a full original score.

And Peter - why don't you just find out for us? You clearly have the time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeterK:
Shirley he can cancel an afternoon tea with John Williams and spend some time with Scorcese, pinning him down on the subject?

---

He was actually hard at work today while I was at the movies, so nuh!

::prepares to leave::

Oh yeah, and...

Scorsese tends to make beautifully crafted films about people I wouldn't want to spend 2 mins with, let alone 2 hours.

For instance, "Age of Innocence" was a beautiful film about emotionally repressed people and ya know what, I didn't give a damn about any of them. (I did LOVE Elmer's score and told him I wanted him to win the Oscar that year. But even he admitted that it was going to go to "Schindler's List.") You can make a film about an emotionally repressed character and still have sympathy and interest in that person. Just watch "Remains of the Day" released the same year to see what I mean.

As for "Gangs of New York," word of mouth has been bad to mixed and I'm not up for watching brutal violence at the moment. If I want that, I'll just turn on the TV.

There are too many wonderful films out that deserve my attention to spend 2 hours and 45 mins watching that.

James

P.S. Glad to hear Daniel Day Lewis is good in the film. He's a great actor who should do more work.

I do know people who think Hollywood films are history books, and your original post gave me that impression.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sean:
I do know people who think Hollywood films are history books, and your original post gave me that impression.

---

Egads, no way!! LOL. I know that some folks think that, but I'm no such folk.

quote:

---

Originally posted by dgoldwas:
But it's not a "new score". It's a previously written concert piece that was adapted to be placed in to the film. And I doubt it cost as much as it would have cost to hire a composer to write a full original score.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bond1965:
As for "Gangs of New York," word of mouth has been bad to mixed and I'm not up for watching brutal violence at the moment.

---

It opened slow but word of mouth is what's kept the grosses solid. One week from tommorrow will see GONY become the second highest domestic grossing Scorsese film ever. It may not surpass Cape Fear domestically, but internationally it's in the game.

quote:

---

Originally posted by danfan:
Does anyone know what the music at the end of "Gangs" was while shots of New York from the past to present were changing. It continued into the credits right before the U2 song played. Can't figure out what that was.

---

I also think I made it quite clear how I feel about Scorsese's work in general

James

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arnzilla:
Bond1965, Ebert gave GONY 3 1/2 stars and put it as an honorable mention as number 11 on his top ten list. Oscar whore Richard Corliss from Time magazine put it at number 2 and AMPAS tart Michael Wilmington from the Chicago Tribune has it at at number 3.

---

Still isn't on my "Must See" list.

I liked GANGS OF NEW YORK. When I was asked to go see it, I didn't think I would like it. Despite the fact that the projected image kept shifting out-of-focus, and there was a talkative, 5-year-old Philipino girl sitting next to me (parents should set a date with Bill the Butcher if they want to bring their kids to a 9'30pm showing of a picture like GANGS OF NEW YORK -- and sit next to me!), the movie still works.

Sure the source cues, etc. didn't really feel emotionally connected with the film, but I don't think the picture suffers without Bernstein's music. Sure, it might have been better, but we won't ever know that, will we.

I agree with Jeff Bond about the opening battle scene. Not impressed with that musical choice, but the movie settles down after that and truly evokes a time and place. As a grandson to an Irish immigrant (though replace New York with Toronto -- hey, filmmakers do it all the time), I appreciated the portrayal of bigotry leveled at the Irish -- something you rarely see from an industry like Hollywood. My grandfather was treated no differently then the Irish of New York, and like Tamany (Jim Broadbent) says in the picture, "No Irish will be elected above Alderman" -- a position my Grandfather held for sometime in this city.

Elmer's score was the main reason for me to "suffer" through another Scorsese film. I like him THAT much.

You can file Scorsese along with David Lynch in my book. There's another film maker I can do without. I felt last year's "Mullholland Drive" was a case of the emperor's new clothes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rkeaveney:
As a grandson to an Irish immigrant

---

Well... that certainly explains the drunken reviews and crazy-coloured website.

(oh, darn, I just went for a Ryan-style cheap shot at drunken Irishpeople... )

Watch it boyo, before I add another notch to my sheleigh!

Ryan O'Keaveney
NP: Michael Collins / Elliot Goldenthal

As far as the film, I think Scorsese is a genius (I loved his cameo as an aristocrat in the house that Diaz's pickpocket hits). This film, for me, made up for BRINGING OUT THE DEAD, Scorsese's worst film and his only real travesty IMHO, an experience that tainted my first visit to L.A.'s Manns Chinese Theatre. He is a brilliant director and these performances he commands out of these actors is testament to that. Okay, Diaz didn't end up delivering a Sharon Stone in CASINO, but Leonardo is back on track, recalling his performances in WHAT'S EATING GILBERT GRAPE and THIS BOY'S LIFE. Daniel Day Lewis IS the film though, one of the best villians to come along in awhile...because of his unpredictability. I loved Henry Thomas and John C. Reilly.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bond1965:
You can file Scorsese along with David Lynch in my book. There's another film maker I can do without.

---

Bernstein on GONY in The Guardian - 1/6/03

quote:

---

"I had written the score for the film almost a year before. Then, when he started editing the film, he changed his mind. He rang me and said he was going to go for a Scorsese score, by which he meant that, as with Goodfellas and Casino, he was going to use recorded music on the soundtrack... it's one of those judgment calls that's very hard to argue with. I still think what I wrote was right - I just don't know how it would work in the final edit of the film. How could I?"

---

My beef with the film comes with the structure. Too crowded. Only Day-Lewis, DiCaprio and Diaz seem to have the only fleshed-out roles. Everyone else -- Jim Broadbent, Brendan Gleeson, John C. Reilly et. al -- just wandered around on the periphery. While I appreciated Scorcese's ambition, it was just too much going on. This was evident in the stuffy climax. It was supposed to be about Bill and Amsterdam finally doing battle, but it turned into a recreation of this major riot.

I don't know. Movies like Patton and Schindler's List tackled broad topics and managed to keep them intimate and interesting.

I didn't care for much of the music, but it's probably just as well Bernstein's score was taken out. Given the horrific trimming on this film I'm sure it would have been chopped up terribly anyway.

The film is still quite good, and clips from a masterpiece are better than no masterpiece at all. And Daniel Day-Lewis blows any other potential Best Actor nominees (at least that I've seen) clear out of the Five Corners.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave:
Does it have Hobbits or Jedi in it? No. Then I ain't gonna see it!

---

So you're saying you saw only TWO films this year? How sad....

Yeah, and one of them was EPISODE II!

That's like eating two meals in a year, one of which was a steaming pile of dog **** !

Ryan
NP: SKLA! BRAZIL'S BEST FILM MUSIC / Various