Gangs of New York

Hi, yaw. There may have been a huge thread about this way back when the movie came out but I just saw it. Unfortunately, a lot was going on while I was watching it (I was taking care of the baby and doing some little chores) so I missed a few things and didn't feel like going back to re-watch those parts. Anyone wanna help me out by answering some questions/responding to some comments?

1) DiCaprio's dad was a priest? Or he just dressed like a priest and was called "priest." If he was a priest, how did he have a kid?

2) Why did Cameron Diaz turn against Bill with DiCaprio - I thought Bill raised her. Did Bill also sleep with her?

3) Anyone catch the capoeria scene? Very brief, but just showed some folks dancing and practicing.

4) The fights - pretty good, wouldn't you say? As far as historically realistic and realistically depicted. I thought maybe stuff like the "cat woman" was a little far-fetched but then again I read about some weeeird stuff that went on back then, so maybe not so far-fetched.

5) The skill with knives displayed by these characters - wow.

I have more questions, and will write them as I get to them. Might have to take this to the OG (shudder) if no one's interested.

Hey Gotgame,

Check out the link below.....he's the guy that actually made all the knives and cleavers for the movie.

I might order one of the cleavers and the razor "The Priest" used right at the opening scenes.

Love "Bills" knife rig as well......reminds me of the Sayoc Kali rigs

http://www.bright.net/~deforge1/

Enjoy...........

I believe priest was just a nickname, like butcher.

She was in love. I'm pretty sure they insinuated that there was a past relationship with Bill.

I second the motion to read the book, although with the caveat that not all of the information agrees 100% with other sources from the same period. Still, it's a fascinating read and a landmark text.

Yeah realistic.....not.

I hated the film. One of the worst films I have ever seen. It was badly cut and edited and therefore mind numbingly boring. Costumes were great, sets were great. Pity about the complete lack of character development, meaningful personal interaction or any semblance of a twist in storyline.....

Anyway
How does a guy armed with a cleaver and a knife that have no defensive capability deal so easily with folks armed with what are essentially short heavy quarterstaves. It was quite ridiculous. *rolls eyes*

The guys with the big clubs and staves would have IMHO had a insurmountable advantage. If someone had been smart enough to fashion a shield......

Also in melee fighting, people tend to work in teams and hold a line. These are rudimentary tactics that anyone can just about work with. Once it gets to a sitation where there is a 360 degree fight it usually means one side has broken the other and are about to be mopped up.

The film was absolute rubbish
Cheers,
Stu.

Stu,

You should quit your job and become a film critic...........LOL

What did you think about the boxing scene between Leo an the other guy? I thought it looked pretty good. Me and my friends where cheering and laughing our asses off when Leo took his back and fishhooked him. :D

That's what I thought, too, Einar.

Hey Ray,

I think I would last about 5 minutes before I was in court against a movie maker.

Actually, the boxing was something I should have singled out as being not that bad at all. I kinda even looked like the way we actually fight at Stoccata in the bare knuckle style.
Cheers,
Stu.

Anyone expecting a factual representation of historical combat in a movie is sniffing glue. The scenes were meant to be theatrically effective and I feel they accomplished this task in spades.

It was a fine film which featured an excellent performance by Day-Lewis in particular.

Oh, and I liked the boxing too.

TH

Great film. Lewis should have gotten Best Actor for his role as Bill the Butcher.


I own it on DVD and watch if often. One of my favorites of recent years.


Ok...bye.

"3) Anyone catch the capoeria scene? Very brief, but just showed some folks dancing and practicing."

Hmmm...nothing in the film even remotely came close to Capoeira. The scene you're talking about may have been similar to it, but it was moreso folk dance.

The barfight was the best fight scene of the film. But, you have to give Hollywood credit for making the Battle for Five Points fight scenes so captivating. I love watching the crazy lady tear at people with those claws she had..lol.

Takedown

"What did you think about the boxing scene between Leo an the other guy? I thought it looked pretty good. Me and my friends where cheering and laughing our asses off when Leo took his back and fishhooked him. :D"I was actually a bit annoyed at the "boxing stances" they had. It looked a little too cartoonish and cliche', like the "fighting irish" logo everyone sees. If you look at the stances of all the famous boxers from the late 19th/early 20th century, they all seemed to have an efficient looking centerline stance. Similar to that of Wing Chun (or vice versa). There seems to be a lot less mobility if your knuckles are facing the ceiling and your palms are facing you. Perhaps that was seen for blocking, but I think that the neutral fighting stance would have been a lot more like we see it in the photos of the old time pugilists.

"Hmmm...nothing in the film even remotely came close to Capoeira. The scene you're talking about may have been similar to it, but it was moreso folk dance."

*shrug* Okay. I don't know the difference between capoeria and folk dancing and I don't think the average joe that has seen maybe two capoeria demos in his life does either.

In re: the boxing stances, I have a copy of an 1860s boxing treatise that shows this stance, very much like a fencer's stance and footwork. I think, too, that the guys in the film would have had sloppy technique since they probably never trained except in the school of hard knocks, which involves more mimicry than coaching. At least, that's one way to look at it.

Hi Lunatic,

I didn't think the boxing was too bad at all. GG makes a good point. There were many boxers of many different nationalities with many different fighting postures over the History of BKB.
During the 1860s we have everything from hands high and the posture backweighted (Price) to hands low and the posture forward weighted (Donnelly). There are enough pics floating about to suggest that there were many more postures and that the Mendoza system was still in use by some.
Cheers,
Stu.

Part of Mendoza's exhibition schtick when touring was to actually display for the audience how the different champs fought, their postures, blows, etc. He of course finished with his own style to show its superiority.

Here are the stances that I have pretty much exclusively seen from the pugilist era, with slight variation. I always notice a centerline stance with the rear hand covering the chest/body.When I saw Gangs of New York, I remember my impression being that the stances looked a bit to cliche' and cartoonish, with the rear forearm pointing straight up, like this:I remember that being my impression. I would like to see it again.

Well, what I meant was _I_ have seen two capoeria demos in my life and I don't know the difference between it and folk dance, hence, my comment above.

Listen to Scorcese's commentary. He admits to taking some liberties. Most of the main characters were based on real figures though, including Mad Maggie, a bouncer who grew her nails long and kept a jar of ears on her bar.

i hated the movie! Everyone told me how great this movie was and that I just had to rent it. It sucked.