Gangs of New York (2002)

Directed by Martin Scorsese
Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz and Jim Broadbent.

The first Scorsese film on this site is one of his most controversial, as far as general consensus goes. Complaints of a weak storyline are common, as well as the long running time (167 minutes), which you can often see are valid. The film is a modified Scorsese, with the usual bloodthirsty gangsters and morally ambiguous/morally bankrupt characters, but with knives and cleavers replacing guns. The story of rival gangs of early New York is told through the blood, the fights and the gore, the core battle between the Native gangs (led by the immense Day-Lewis), and the Irish immigrants (led by DiCaprio). It is centred on DiCaprio's hunt for revenge after his father (Liam Neeson) is murdered by Day-Lewis' Bill 'the Butcher' Cutting.

What could have been a typical revenge story is filled with spectacular period settings and styles and vivid cinematography, bringing the early city to life. Scorsese's direction is as good as any time of his career, and DiCaprio himself is solid.

However, it is the supporting cast, with the exception of the woefully miscast Diaz, that bring the story to life, imbuing what could have been cliches with . . . well, they remain cliches, but interesting ones. Jim Broadbent, Liam Neeson, John C. Reilly and Brendan Gleeson are among the roster of supporting actors who outshine DiCaprio and Diaz, lending the film their own personal presence and persona. Broadbent in particular as a corrupt politician is marvellous.

However, it is Daniel Day-Lewis, who, in the acting stakes, triumphs. His Bill the Butcher could have been a psychotic cartoon with a finger-twirling moustache, and is so much more, layer after layer stripping off as the film continues, revealing a twisted xenophobic fatherly figure, a grotesque caricature of Uncle Sam. Day-Lewis unashamedly steals the film, chewing up scenery and his lines like nobody's business, and spitting them out in a glorious New York lilt. DiCaprio, normally very capable, looks like a boy lost against Day-Lewis, who has so many opportunities to take the film as his own you begin to wonder which character should be the supporting one.

While the film does come with its own set of insane stereotypes, it is surprisingly good on historical accuracy . . . at least for a Hollywood film. Though it never seems able to truly decide whether it wants to focus on DiCaprio's pursuit of revenge or the bigger tale of rival gangs that surrounds it, which is the film's inherent weakness. The storyline certainly does sag slightly in the middle, and could have done with some of Bill the Butcher's vicious cutting for a leaner, meatier plot.

That said, Scorsese himself is the usual magnificent director we have all come to expect. the acting is top notch (while Diaz shows she is better suited for romcoms) - Daniel Day-Lewis is simply the reason the film is so watchable - he himself elevates it a rating or two. Perhaps it says something about Daniel Day-Lewis' performance that he was nominated for the Best Actor Academy Award. Perhaps it says something more about the Academy that he didn't win it.

Rating: 8/10.

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)

Director: Jonathan Mostow
Starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nick Stahl, Claire Danes

The Terminator series is perplexing. Not only for the interweaving storylines, timelines, alternate endings and 'back to the future' events, a melting pot caused by different directors from 1984 to the present day. But also for the genre-hopping it manages to do - the first is a sci-fi horror, the second an action blockbuster, and the third is . . . well, what is it?

It never seems capable of deciding. But then, it barely resembles a Terminator film, with the exception of the strangely charismatic Schwarzenegger, who somehow takes the film so seriously but ends up looking like having a lot of fun anyway. This is his third outing - he knows what he has to do, and he does it with his usual schtick and a hint of self-mockery.

The supporting players are disappointing. Claire Danes is extremely irritating, while her character appearing like a late add-on to the franchise, with no mention in the first two films. Nick Stahl is weak, his supposed saviour of the world character seemingly more inept than 13 year old John Connor from T2. Where has the cocky, streetwise kid gone? Kristanna Loken, playing the T-X advanced killing machine, has not realised that just because she's playing a cyborg, doesn't mean she can get away with merely tilting her head and glaring menacingly into the camera. Her character, the T-X, is a walking deus ex machina, and is so stupidly sophisticated you wonder how the future Earth resistance will ever win the war.

The film itself takes much the same route as T2, missing Schwarzenegger and Ed Furlong's chemistry, which was no doubt in part to James Cameron, also sorely missed. The early car chase is symbolic of Hollywood - lots of explosions, terrible CGI, and nowhere near as memorable as T2's.

Some good moments - the Terminator's reveal that it is he who will kill John Connor in the future, and the reprogrammed Terminator's internal struggle over killing Connor. It is entirely down to Schwarzenegger that these moments succeed, because of the sheer nostalgia brought to the film by his presence. The young, attractive female T-X is an interesting twist, while the ending is brilliantly bleak for a summer blockbuster.

However, all the nuances, lessons and the entire point of Terminator 2, including the marvellous ending, are ignored. What is left are annoying nods and references to the previous two, recycling lines that were inane in the first place, jokes that were only funny the first couple of times. By the end, I felt like some audience members was constantly nudging me, loudly recalling "do you remember that time in the first movie? Well, they just did it again . . ."

Rating: 4/10