This movie upon first glance also seems very overrated, but upon further analysis may actually be underrated. The build-up to Martin Scorsese’s self-describe epic masterpiece Gangs of New York was almost unbearable in the early months of the year. The film was in fact scheduled to be released in the early spring but because of editing problems and because of Miramax’s desire to squeeze as much money out as possible, the movie was moved to a Holiday season release in between Lord of the Rings and Steven Spielberg’s hugely popular Catch Me if You Can. In order to understand where all the criticism for Gangs came from, you have to understand Scorsese’s reputation as a filmmaker. Since the late 1960s and early ‘70s, Scorsese has been one of the key figures on the leading edge of American cinema. His films are known to be gritty, dark, and violent and they tend to all deal in some way with New York, Catholicism and the uglier side of humanity. Gangs of New York does contain all of these elements but there is something else that just doesn’t seem to fit. Most of Scorsese’s other movies are extremely personal and often spend more time developing the characters than actually showing us any plot action (i.e. Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Bringing Out the Dead, etc.), but Gangs is a decidedly less personal, more action based film. This could be attributed, in part, to Scorsese’s desire to make a film that is more appealing to the public than some of his previous films, but unfortunately that was not accomplished. Gangs was somewhat of a box office flop, coming up about $25 million short of what it cost Miramax to make the film. Scorsese’s films are never big money makers at the box office, but Gangs earned the reputation as a disappointment because it was so obviously attended to be a blockbuster and fell so far short of its expectations. I feel that Scorsese probably did go wrong in trying to appease the public with a large scale, epic action film. However, this film does make my list as one of the year’s best because aside from all the outside negativity surrounding Gangs of New York, this film stands alone as a classic example of great moviemaking. In terms of epic action films, this film has it all: a determined hero on a quest to avenge his father, a beautiful but dangerous love interest, epic and bloody battles, and best of all, one of the greatest, meanest, most complex villains in the history of the movies. Daniel Day-Lewis plays Bill “The Butcher” Cutting with incredible nuance and distinguishes the character as one of the most memorable in all of American cinema. In terms of historical relevance, the film shows us in astounding detail the streets of New York as they appeared in the Civil War era. There are also several shots that show us other aspects of life in that era, such as the sweeping shot that moves with the Irish immigrants getting off a ship, signing their citizenship papers, then signing their draft papers and getting suited up for Union Army all in the same motion. Scorsese clearly shows that he is a master of his craft; his only mistake may lie in the fact that he does not put enough of himself in the film. Regardless of whether or not this is Scorsese’s best film, it is certainly one of 2002’s best and is certainly worth any movie lover’s time.