Is "Gangs of New York" a history of the evolution of the city?

Lao Ma’s ability to tell stories is beyond doubt. He is fully capable of telling this story well. Even in "Casino", which critics thought was plagiarized from his own, Lao Ma at least made the intricate relationships between several main characters clear, but "Gangs of New York" did not have such a chance. With the exception of Daniel DeLewis, DiCaprio and Cameron Diaz have very vague and monotonous characters. It cannot be said that they are not in top condition, but that the director put too much energy into factors other than the character image, limiting the space for creating full-fledged characters. Comrade Daniel DeLewis is an anomaly. He actually performed the character who was originally a negative character in the hands of the director brilliantly. He was so energetic that he seemed to be breaking through the screen and walking towards you with a straight face. If you have seen his performances in films such as "My Left Foot", "The Last of the Mohicans" and "The Age of Innocence", it will be difficult to imagine the vulgar, vicious, fanatical, sinister, humorous and stubborn person in front of you. , a shrewd ultra-nationalist is him. The movements of his hands, the way he talks and walks, even his mumbling and spitting, have completely transformed into another real person. Although I knew in advance that "Bill the Butcher" was played by him, it is still difficult to connect the name "Daniel DeLewis" with the terrible villain in front of me. Because the contrast with previous roles is so great, Lewis's superb performance is like an antelope hanging its horns, and there is no trace at all! You know, despite the acting talents of Jack Nicholson, Tom Hanks, Russell Crowe and other big names, I can still distinguish a coherent style from their series of roles. Lewis's performance, which completely surpassed himself and even exceeded the limits of performance, is the biggest surprise on the screen this year. However, Lewis's superb selfless performance cannot conceal the chaos of the film itself, because no matter how wonderful his story is, it still has nothing to do with the social reality that the director wants to criticize. Lao Ma’s original intention was to make Lewis and DiCaprio, one represents the hatred of thoughts and ideologies, the other represents the hatred of personal grievances. From their collision, they reflected the "non-democracy and tolerance" consistent with the social reality at that time. question. It's a pity that Lao Ma was so anxious to intuitively bring in the social background that he failed to fully express both aspects. You know, the conflict between Amsterdam and Bill was more of an individual one, or at most a group one. It just happened to happen in the context of that era, and it will still happen now. In short, the contradictions between the protagonists and the main contradictions in society are heterogeneous. If the director can focus on one aspect and then indirectly refer to the other, I believe the effect will be much better. At least the audience won't question the connection between the Dead Bunnies and the urban riots at the end.