[joebuck]

"Critics say Scorsese's best work is decades behind him, noting that recent epics such as "The Aviator" and "Gangs of New York" do not measure up to earlier masterpieces such as "Mean Streets" and "Raging Bull."

I wonder what critics the author is talking about? Gangs of NY was a much better film than "Mean Streets". Danial Day Lewis' acting in Gangs was every bit a good as DiNiro's in Raging Bull, also. I thought Gangs was a very underrated picture.

[L98Fiero]

"I thought Gangs was a very underrated picture."

I did too but was a litte rubbed at a couple of obvious PC inserted things.

1.)One of the dance hall "girls" was a guy with a 5 o'clock shadow. Homosexuality and gender ambiguity were openly accepted in the 1860's in the Five Points, evidently.

2.)A black guy was a member of the Dead Rabbits. Yeah, right.

The acting and overall portrayal was awesome, however.

[nathanbedford]

"Critics say Scorsese's best work is decades behind him, noting that recent epics such as "The Aviator" and "Gangs of New York" do not measure up to earlier masterpieces such as "Mean Streets" and "Raging Bull." I wonder what critics the author is talking about? Gangs of NY was a much better film than "Mean Streets". Danial Day Lewis' acting in Gangs was every bit a good as DiNiro's in Raging Bull, also. I thought Gangs was a very underrated picture.

I think "Aviator" can be dismissed as a clearly inferior work to "Raging Bull" and "Gangs." Of the latter two, "Raging Bull" alone deserves the sobriquet, "masterpiece" and DeNiro's performance was clearly a quantum level superior to Lewis'. This is because great art must ultimately treat of great themes to be great. "Raging Bull" undertakes to render nothing less than a parable of life's ultimate truth: Hubris leading inevitable to bankruptcy of spirit and renewal through surrender and rebirth. "Gangs" reveals no cosmic truth applicable to all people in all circumstances for all time, but it is merely an indulgence of prurience, a voyeur's peek at depravity with no "ahh" signifying that the viewer has been edified by his encounter with true art. At the end of the third reel, the patron is left asking, "what did I learn?" Regrettably, the answer must be, very little indeed about the human condition although much was shown of a historical period.

I do not quibble with the technique of "Gangs," every scene was technically flawless, but with its reach.

Lewis performance was wonderful but an exploration of madness is not to be compared with DeNiro's searing representation of self destruction and ultimate glimmering of wisdom. His physical transformation alone is a wonder of the film maker's art.

One film was good the other truly great.

[jdrules]

I have to say,I grew up in N.Y.,I've known alot of tough guy's.Real bad seed's,murder's,habitual criminal's,I grew up in the ghetto.My family was involved back in the 70's with mafia.Daniel Day Lewis's portait of a tough new yorker was perfect,the best I've ever seen.Deneiro is my favorite actor of all time,and roles from "gang's" are right up his ally.But Danny Day did the perfect job of expressing the cold heart combinded with the trust and respect that all tough guy's carry,not to mention his accent was perfect,for early imigrant's to this country,I should know,my family was one.As far as Scorsese go's any thing he's done is pure art.