Martin Scorsese is a native of New York, for many years wanted to make a large-scale film about the history of the city. However, the movie production required considerable experience and an impressive budget. Only in the late 1990s, the circumstances developed safely for the launch of the project. Gangs of New York is a historical drama of 2002 that received a plethora of fans around the world due to its scope, epic, and cast. The film shows New York City in the 1860s, the most violent city in the world at that time, and depicts the conflicts between the gangs of the “native” white Anglo-Saxons and Irish immigrants. The film caused a sound impact on the industry and became one of the significant works of the director. Therefore, an evaluation of its accordance with historical facts, plotlines, and ideas might be important issues to discover.
The movie provides the audience with an immense range of depicted topics. Starting from the historical-political background of the Civil War and ending with romantic and friendship plotlines. The film cast does its best to tell the interdependent and tragic stories of the characters. Amsterdam Vallon (DiCaprio) appears a young man who follows a sophisticated path of development to a person who is mighty enough to reborn the “Dead Rabbits” and to challenge the “Natives.” The love line is revealed through the relationships of the protagonist and Jenny Everdeane (Cameron Diaz). Notably, this line also emphasizes the price that Amsterdam is ready to pay to defeat “Bill the Butcher” (Daniel Day-Lewis) when he is prepared to let Jenny go and engage in the final battle. A significant issue of friendship is discussed throughout the interactions between Amsterdam and Johnny Sirocco (Henry Thomas), who, being jealous of Jenny, reveals Vallon’s identity to Bill. Then, Johnny repents but is ultimately doomed to take death at Amsterdam’s hands. Moreover, the sound political and cultural shifts of the US during the Civil War complete the picture of terrible violence and hatred.
In the film, the director identifies several critical issues for himself. Globally, by a clash of street gangs, as well as contradictions between society and the state, he wants to show the emergence of democracy in America. Another storyline of the picture is the tale of Amsterdam, who is driven by a thirst for revenge but draws close to the murderer of his father, “Bill the Butcher” (Panelli, 2016). Moreover, the picture seems to have a classic three-act structure. The first act includes the exposition: the battle of the “Natives” and immigrants, the death of the protagonist’s father; the setup: matured Amsterdam returns home; and the first event of opposition: Amsterdam joins the “Natives.” The second act includes the central plot twist: Amsterdam saves the “Butcher;” the next twist: the “Butcher” learns that Amsterdam is the son of his enemy, but instead of killing expels him from the gang. The third act is associated with an attempt by the protagonist to revive a band of immigrants and still avenge his father. Such a narrative facilitates the audience to follow the events of the story.
At the climax, storylines intersect: the clash of gangs and two main characters takes place against the backdrop of the public riot. Scorsese shows real New York of 1860s: broken brick, deaf catacombs, impoverished saloons, stunted shacks. Union Army suppresses the draft riot and kills hundreds of people. What is more, naval ships start cannon fire into the place of the gangs’ final battle and accidentally prevent it. Nevertheless, Amsterdam faces Bill, injured by shrapnel, and avenges his father by killing the “Butcher.” In the aftermath, Jenny and Vallon leave to San-Francisco to start life from scratch. The director effectively connects the personal tragedy of the protagonist and the epic story of the whole city. This connection additionally emphasizes the epilogue, which transfers the action from the past to the present. The entire story is accompanied by a Scorsese-specific trick – an off-screen voice that adds a sense of subjectivity to the events described. Thus, the film has a quite balanced plot that provides a viewer with the opportunity to percept its tale coherently.
The screenplay reflects the irreconcilable conflict of interests of several rival gangs in the so-called Five Points. It is the area where five streets converge in one place, which the “Butcher” figuratively imagines as five fingers clenched into one fist. Compelling, energetic, impressive directing makes itself felt in full force at the beginning and end of the movie when large-scale battles unfold on the screen. However, the times of open fistfights, when it is possible to achieve unquestionable supremacy over people, are already receding under the onslaught of the state power. It cruelly cracks down on those who are trying to preserve the primitively understood freedom stubbornly. Both the “Natives” and immigrants are bombarded with naval guns only because they do not want to join the army and participate in the Civil War. These events end the era of individualism; New York is conquered, like the Wild West. Thus, Gangs of New York is precisely a revolutionary film that reveals the mechanism of the inevitable historical process in the millstones of which individual human destinies and even entire classes are easily destroyed.
The film gives the viewers a broad spectrum of emotions. It depicts the significant events of American history with the addition of the appropriate action, exciting plot, and talented cast. The narration is smooth and consistent, but it explodes in climaxes, preventing viewers from getting bored. The director makes a conscious emphasis on the figures of Bill and Amsterdam to make the line between good and evil more obvious. However, Scorsese does not make any of the characters wholly innocent or pure embodiment of evil. So, Vallon is a kind protagonist but guided by a thirst for revenge, quick-tempered, and rather rude. While Bill, the vile antagonist, does not kill Amsterdam when he finds out who he is, respects his fallen adversary, revering him every year, and follows the principles of honor of the gangs. This contradiction makes the viewer think that any person has certain sins. However, the contrast in the final intentions of Vallon and the “Butcher” suggests that it is much more important where the person directs and how he realizes the best part of himself.
The symbolism that Scorsese implements into the screenplay is an essential part of the narration. Scorsese guides the viewers through the streets of sorrow, crime, poverty, and sin, unobtrusively reminding them that each person has an evil part as well. The crucifix, the most meaningful symbol of Christianism, appears in the film. It stands majestically in the scene when Amsterdam leaves the reformatory. However, its only presence does not bring redemption and peace to Vallon. Moreover, after leaving the establishment, Amsterdam throws the Holy Bible out as he is ready for the vengeance. Throughout the movie, he goes along a winding and sophisticated way to this purpose. Though, the director does not show Amsterdam’s intentions as something noble or proper. On the contrary, Scorsese reveals the horror of such actions when Vallon tastes the blood of his worst enemy and cannot discern it from his own. He confesses the guilt for the death of people and buries the blade in his act of repentance. Thus, the film delivers the idea that one’s awareness of his sin is a necessary step to redeem it.
In Gangs of New York, the director aims to ruin the myths around the origins of the US’s democracy, describing the historical basis of interaction between Americans within the scope of the city of 1863. Scorsese uses history in order to make his movie more convincible, impressive, and embarrassing. He reviews three different American conflicts of that period: immigration, political affiliations, race, and class discrimination (Oldenburg, 2016). Thus, New York is shown as a city of assimilation and corruption that is steadily turning into chaos. It needs just one spark to burst with the crowds of ragged and resented. The Union forces men aged 20 to 45 into the army to defeat the Confederation. However, the film mentions that a man can avoid service for $300, which is a proved historical fact (Shi & Tindal, 2016, p. 661). There is also a scene in which volunteers sign contracts with the Union army for $677 and $777 (to recruits and veteran soldiers respectively) – it is also true (Shi & Tindal, 2016, p. 660). So, it might be assumed that the movie has a sound historical ground.
However, Scorsese allows himself to add some manipulation of historical facts into the screenplay. In particular, the intervention of Union soldiers has no documentary basis, so the director added this element intentionally (Oldenburg, 2016). Furthermore, the opening gang battle in 1846 is fictional, despite there was a fight between the Dead Rabbits and Bowery Boys in 1857, which is not remarked in the movie (Riots, n.d., para. 1). The director also does not reveal that Irish immigrants were more likely to lynch African Americans during the Draft Riots due to high competition for a job among minorities (Oldenburg, 2016, p. 3). The film has no depiction of African American gangs, all of them are among other organized groups. However, their enclaves were densely spread within New York; they mostly independently took part in deals of criminal formations (Oldenburg, 2016, p. 5). The film also conceals the fact that there was a large-scale political and philosophic movement, defending and proclaiming African Americans’ rights, called Abolitionism (Shi & Tindal, 2016, p. 543). Thus, Gangs of New York cannot be considered as a documentary film as it includes some serious historical inaccuracies.
Another point that might be important to consider is the character of “Bill the Butcher” within the scope of the historical context. William Poole is the prototype of William Cutting, the “Butcher” who is described in Herbert Asbury’s book, The Gangs of New York. He is depicted as the most oppressing, infringing, and furious part of the criminal mechanism of gangs. So, it is natural that Bill is their undisputed ideological inspirer, leading, nevertheless, in accordance with the laws of honor and relative impartiality of his world. Having undeniable influence, he engages gangs in sharp political feuds because he wants to realize and consolidate the principles of the “Natives” throughout the city. Cruelty, cold-bloodedness, and bloodthirstiness largely determine this character, which is contrary to his historical prototype. Moreover, Poole had been killed nearly ten years before the Draft Riots took place in 1863 (Boissoneault, 2017, para. 13). He was a principal of the Know-Nothing party and the Bowery Boys gang; he had butcher shops; but he was not known for any murders or slaughters (Boissoneault, 2017). Thus, the fiction “Butcher’s” story does not follow the facts about Poole considerably.
Evidently, the director decides not to follow the historical record substantially. Streams of blood filling the streets during the riots, violence coming almost from everyone, greediness of every official, and murderous racism might be considered as a substantial exaggeration. With this in mind, the director’s manipulations with history start to be a conscious choice. The purpose may be in Scorsese’s willingness to depict the roots of American democracy and greatness as they are or even darker, which the tagline for the movie confirms, “America was born in the streets.” The contrast between Amsterdam’s oppressed gang and Bill’s vile one would not be so visible without concealing some facts such as immigrants’ constant murders of African Americans. To that end, Scorsese shows the “Butcher’s” as an evil person. The price that the US paid for today’s wealth and prosperity can be studied through the prism of its history that may not always be pleasant and kind. However, modern society tends to forget the lessons from the past, which the director might want to emphasize by the epilogue scene when wooden houses become skyscrapers and gravestones become abandoned.
All things considered, it might be reasonable to assume that Gangs of New York is an epic drama with a sound historical background. The film has a classic three-act structure that consistently tells the interdepended and exciting stories of its characters. Amsterdam Vallon, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, is a protagonist of the movie who walks the long way of development to a person that is a leader of the Dead Rabbits, ready to avenge his father. “Bill the Butcher,” played by Daniel Day-Lewis, is an antagonist who has a real prototype, William Poole, but substantially does not follow the proved facts about him. The “Butcher” embodies cruelness and evil that filled New York during the period of the Civil War while Poole was an intelligent leader and had been murdered about ten years before these events took place. Scorsese makes historical inaccuracies in order to emphasize the madness and hatred that were spread around America of the 1860s. Nevertheless, he depicts the importance of lessons of the past and makes a significant contribution to the film industry, which might impress any audience.
Gangs of New York might be one of the best works of Martin Scorsese as it comprehensively discusses relevant historical topics, engages significant actors, and gives the audience plenty of issues to think about. The dark tone of the movie results in a mysterious pathos. So, this film may be considered as one that has an immense influence on the Hollywood industry and is an essential part of Scorsese’s great legacy.
References
Boissoneault, L. (2017). How the 19th-century Know-Nothing party reshaped American politics. Web.
Oldenburg, A. L. (2016). Thrown into the melting pot: Representations of African Americans in Scorsese’s Gangs of New York and Taxi Driver. [PDF File]. Web.
Panelli, A. (2003). Gangs of New York. Journal of Religion & Film, 7(1), p. 1–4.
Riots. (n.d.) Web.
Shi, D. E., & Tindal, G. B. (2016). America: A narrative history (9th ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.