Daniel Day Lewis. Way to over the top

I totally disagree. ..in fact bill the butcher was #2 on the list of all time great bad guys. he fkjng kicked ass in that role ! The real bill the butcher was a hardcore patriot just like DD lewis portayed him. But you gotta be smart to like DD lewis... far as cameron diaz, she is so fking ugly and probaly the worst actress ever. The movie would be a 10/10 if she wasnt in it...she pulls it down to a 8

Seriously?--he's over the top and has a stupid accent but Pacino's work in Scarface makes sense? Please. When Scarface came out, people jokingly described his accent as "charo"-like. Charo was a goofy over the top Spanish female singer. PLus, Pacino, unlike DDL in gangs, is playing in a modern day film. He doesn't need to be theatrical to get attention on the streets of Miami unlike Bill who lives in a place where speeches are screamed from platforms (no microphones) at the city corner... DDL's bigness and accent in Gangs make absolute sense. For one thing, Bill is the alpha-male in the worst ghetto in American history...an area in which women chisel their teeth into fine points to bit people's ears off. this was also an era in which 'showmen' modeled their theatrics off of 19th century stage acting. Bill is a gang leader, but he is also a politican and showman (his knife throwing presentations.) Bill the Butcher is written as an extreme character who cut out his own eye and who wears ridiculously tacky clothes. He also is fully aware of his own spectacle and showmanship...(as he describes his 'spectacle of fearsome acts".) He is brilliantly realized character--not just overacting lunacy. There is no way to play a man like that quietly. As for the accent, its an early day New York accent. Pacino's mediocre attempt at a Cuban accent is more broad and off the mark. DDL has to invent what street hubris and attitude would look like in the 19th century. Pacino could have easily modeled his Cuban street bravado of of real Cubans. Scarface is theatrical..and I get that and I don't mind Pacino's theatrics (its the accent that's more the problem). But Gangs is also a perfect context for bigger acting.. Its an heightened environment. This is what Leo failed to realize and why he seems so modern and off in Gangs. I doubt Leo would make that mistake today (see Django and Wolf of Wall Street.)

As for Jack, he's fine in The Shining, but the book shows a man who descends into insanity. In the film he seems insane from the beginning.



"You are not only wrong. You are wrong at the top of your voice."

That was the point. He's a caricature of American nationalism. He's the 1800's version of guy in a wife beater firing two guns at once, drinking from a beer hat and screaming "'merca! F&ck, yeah!"

I thought he was perfect.

Loved the movie, but I can see what u mean. It was a little hammy, but I accept that because the characther was exceptional and I feel like the old fashioned acting from the 20s would have played it like this. I know that the movie is set much sooner.

ddl was perfect. with all the boring bs with leo and cameron this movie needed a character like Bill the butcher. possibly my favorite movie villain

[deleted]

Are you kidding me, he was amazing. Great performance making a "villain " a likeable character.

You know OP, I actually agree. My opinion of him is constantly changing, because it depends on how you look at his acting. On one hand he is EXCEPTIONAL, because he transforms entirely and becomes unrecognisable, and he gives very convincing performances. But in Gangs and There Will Be Blood at least he just goes a little bit over the top. Cartoonish is a good word. He's one of those actors that is more about style rather than 100% realism, and going over the top is kinda expected. But I think he just pushes it a little too far.