MovieChat Forums > Gangs of New York (2002) Discussion > Do you think this film would have been b...

Do you think this film would have been better if

posted 14 years ago by Benprogfuse
27 replies | jump to latest

They had taken out the part when Johnny Sirocco tells Bill the Butcher that Amsterdam is Priest Vallon's son? It would have made the scene where Amsterdamn attempts to throw the knife at Bill while drinking from the fiery glass more climactic.

Then the viewer would also have to wonder if Bill had known who Amsterdam really was all along. Especially during the scene where Amsterdam wakes up next to Cameron Diaz and Bill is sitting in the chair watching him, then brings up how he killed the Priest.

(Also, if they had re-cast cameron Diaz with somebody else..)

[–] bbb984 11 years ago

Totally agree. I thought part of the mystery was did Bill know who Amsterdam was. I thought he did the whole time, but then having Johnny tell him, you never know that part.

[–] PotassiumMan 11 years ago

I readily agree. It would have been much more intriguing had Scorsese kept it uncertain as to when Bill the Butcher figured it out.

[–] Benprogfuse 11 years ago

bump

[–] hellnback1234 10 years ago

Bill would have been killed by Amsterdam if nobody told him he was Vallon's son. He trusted him and wouldn't have deflected the knife throw + pistol shot. So it was kind of essential that Johnny told Bill about the truth.

Makes you kind of feel bad for Bill, that he thought he finally "found" his son and it turns out it was all a ruse to just get close so he could kill him.

[–] Benprogfuse 10 years ago

one of my points was that it would have seemed more clever if Bill had figured it out himself without having to be told by another character. Which would have worked in the film.

It also would have been more of a suprise to the audience.

So I think these are 2 reasons why it could have made for a better film.