Aviátor

A stunning cinematic work by a true artist, both in image and acting. I wasn't bored even for a minute, the runtime was okay, I actually wouldn't have minded a bit more. And the emotional impact on me was all the greater because I have dealt with obsessive compulsive disorder in my life, so I know exactly what Scorsese was talking about, and that he didn't miss the mark is evidenced by the feelings of one of my friends, also OCD, who was shocked to find himself in the character of Howard Hughes. So, thank you Sir. (2005.10.29)

After the not-so-favorably received (but brilliant in my opinion) Gangs of New York, director Martin Scorsese has ventured into slightly more recent history. He tells the story of an extraordinary person in an extraordinary style. A man who can be perceived as either a genius or a madman. You have to choose whether you will admire Howard Hughes for pushing the boundaries of technological and human capabilities or despise him for his obsessively guarded cleanliness or instability in relationships. Martin Scorsese gives you both sides of the story in a unique trip back to the early 1930s and late 1940s. The atmosphere of parties, bars, women, cigarettes, and unique music breathed so strongly on me that it tousled my hair. And in this environment, Leonardo DiCaprio moves with his characteristic elegance. The acting challenge was truly formidable. DiCaprio picked up the thrown gauntlet and, with a performance more than dignified, proved to everyone that he truly knows how to act. The entire film is full of one famous name after another. While I'm not particularly a fan of Cate Blanchett, neither physically nor as an actress, I must reluctantly praise her. Alan Alda as Hughes' main antagonist is absolutely superb. A lot of people fault the film for the story going nowhere at times. I strongly disagree. I attentively watched the entire three hours to see what was happening. Visually, the film is perfect. Some scenes are indelibly etched in my memory. For example, the filming of Hell's Angels or the plane crash between houses in Beverly Hills. Robert Richardson's brilliant cinematography adds the final touch to everything. Not only the period music but also Howard Shore's orchestration perfectly contributed to creating the (already perfect) atmosphere. Everything I've listed here should be enough to give The Aviator four stars, but the film has something that makes me want to give it no less than five. It has soul. The soul that allowed it to live and tell. Thank you, Master. (2005.02.12)

If The Aviator is anything to go by, it's a perfect example of top Hollywood, the Hollywood that Hughes helped build in the 1920s with his bold visions. It's a precisely-fulfilled genre scheme that offers both a breathtaking spectacle and great dramatic filmmaking. You can't help but praise the famous camera, the well-incorporated tricks, and the perfect period music that gives everything style and atmosphere. The story of Howard Hughes is not only a personal drama, but also a spectacular and epic spectacle in which some scenes bolt you to your seat in a "Hollywood" manner and don't let you breathe (the superbly shot aerial sequences are really worth it). More importantly, each part serves a monumental whole, and the monumentality of the whole does not overshadow the personal and not-very-idealized personal plane. Hughes' personality is the centerpiece around which everything spectacularly turns, not the other way around. That's what I appreciate about Martin Scorsese. He didn't succumb to a big topic and tried to go under the surface. He did not idealize, but he tried to tell the story of one of the fascinating carriers of human imagination and the desire to fly (figuratively and literally) in all shades. From where I was sitting, it clearly seemed that he had succeeded. The Aviator is a truly wonderful specimen of a biographical major film in all its dazzling sheen. There's no room for misery this time... The few extra minutes the film has can be considered a hereditary disease. And Scorsese was able to richly balance Logan's weaker script with his precise direction. (2005.02.12)

Paradoxically, the most interesting stages of Hughes’ life are merely mentioned in passing or completely ignored, while there is also a lot of needless filler (albeit excellently filmed). The actors are excellent, Scorsese’s still got it - it’s just that the screenplay isn’t one of the best ever written. Which is really a great shame and it knocks The Aviator out of the sky before it has the chance to take off. (2005.11.06)

The pilot is not bad at all, but after two screenings in one year, I can't imagine trying to go through it all again even fifteen years later. DiCaprio is great, but surprisingly, Scorsese can't maintain a good momentum, he gets lost in Hughes' psychoses, and the story that goes to flowers is only fixed in the thrilling courtroom finale. (2005.09.15)

This is the second time I have seen this Scorsese film, as I couldn't endure it all the way to the end the first time due to its length and my lack of interest, and I was missing about 40 minutes to settle the score with The Aviator. I was able to erase it from my memory practically perfectly in record time, and that already proves that this time Martin and I didn't see eye to eye. Honestly, it's probably the film I most could not get into from this famous American filmmaker in the last two decades. While his recent films managed to impress me, The Aviator only bored and disinterested me. Despite being undoubtedly a blockbuster with everything that belongs to it - a multitude of stars, a high budget, a script overflowing with ambition, and a charismatic hero - something doesn't work in it, and it's not just because the theme didn't appeal to me. Scorsese describes his hero in a way that is very different from the reality that could resemble how Costa Gavras settles accounts with capitalism in his film Capital. The real Howard Hughes was such a scoundrel that even Belfort, the main character of The Wolf of Wall Street could be considered a good buddy from Sunday school and Mother Teresa's secretary. Even an American like Leacock noticed the typical characteristic of Americans - admiring successful people regardless of how they came to wealth and how they handled it and made fun of it in his book "Literary Lapses." In the United States, Howard Hughes is considered a legend, even though his real behavior, actions, and impacts were very problematic. In the movie, there is one scene where Howard is visiting Katharine Hepburn's family, which represents that typical inward-looking snobbish liberal society that drowns in wealth while prattling about socialism. When the lady of the house says that they never talk about money in their house, Howard responds, "That's because you have plenty of it." Howard Hughes was the last person who could pass any judgments. He inherited the money and then enjoyed it and lived the typical life of a playboy and celebrity. He treated his employees thoughtlessly, manipulated, blackmailed and lobbied in the worst imaginable way, which meant nothing other than mass corruption. Even his illness is highly debatable; in the 1940s, he certainly didn't suffer from any mental illness, and, typically, he was able to manage his companies so skillfully until the end of his life that he never paid a penny in taxes while being one of the five richest people on this planet. I'll give it three stars thanks to several great scenes, such as the crash of the airplane and its impressive flight through a residential area, where Scorsese presents himself in the best possible form. But it's just barely three stars... Overall impression: 50%. (2014.04.14)

Originally I didn’t want to watch The Aviator because of DiCaprio, but now he was the main reason (and of course Marty was too) I wanted to watch it. Strange how priorities change over the years. Scorsese pulled me into a world that I admire... movies, airplanes and he masterfully pieces together the most interesting details of Hughes life. Caprio played him superbly (was Penn’s performance back then really that much better than this gripping solo?) and Cate won a well-deserved Oscar. An inspiring picture. (2011.02.25)

The Aviator is not Martin Scorsese’s best film and, in my opinion, it doesn't even belong among the best ones. It is beautifully shot, but that's about it. There are plenty of unforgettable scenes, shots, and dialogues, but the end result doesn't have such a strong impact, and there is no deeper emotional experience. Surprisingly, technically, the movie is quite uneven, and sometimes it seems like a farce or an overly theatrical costume drama. Sometimes, I even feel a sense of theater. It's an interesting retro film, but definitely not aiming for an Oscar. (2005.02.11)

This film should be called Howard Hughes, and the subtitle could be "DiCaprio Flying to the Stars". It'd be easy to say that Scorsese has lost his grip for once, especially the in second part, when the story gets out of hand, but anyone who lets the whole film sink into their head and understands the concept should admit that it could hardly have been made better. For us here overseas, The Aviator will have a hard time, a viewer who has never heard of Hughes can expect anything from it based on the premise or even the poster, but in the end they will probably get something completely different. It's a spectacular narrative built entirely on the complex and idiosyncratic character of the aviation mogul, or rather, on the excellent performance of Leo DiCaprio, which in my opinion was the starting point of his tremendous acting form that continues uninterrupted to this day. Hughes's personality and fascinating life are explored so thoroughly and interestingly in the space of 160 minutes that you simply can't take your eyes off the screen in order to see how it all plays out. And it wouldn't be Scorsese if he didn't come up with a hugely impressive and academically appealing production design and invite a whole host of stars to play the supporting roles; they do an excellent job and complement Leo, who barely leaves the screen (besides the Oscar-winning Blancett, it's worth mentioning Senator Alda, the master of supporting roles Reilly and the beautiful Beckinsale). For the uninitiated, it's a more challenging spectacle and I can't say I outright enjoyed it, but it's still a film with capital F, the likes of which only a few top directors can make (and have made) :) 80% (2013.06.29)

One of those films for which Leo should have rather received an Oscar. It is his great performance, but it is not the only strong aspect of the film. Scorsese's direction is so confident that he dares to have an excessive running time because he knows it won't bore anyone. The last two hours captivated me so much that I couldn't tear myself away from the film - for the second time. (2016.03.06)

One of the many impressive Scorsese-DiCaprio collaborations. The transformation of the main character is incredibly impressive, and the overwhelming emphasis on the personal storyline adds an urgency to the entire story and moves the whole film out of the usual box of successful autobiographical dramas and into the category of a gripping emotional spectacle. Technically absolutely flawless, plus you could find numerous breathtaking moments that enhance the overall emotional experience at given moments. All the finishing touches here are truly perfect, from the costumes and set design to the music and editing to the divine cinematography. Marty's direction perhaps needs no exegesis. (2014.05.24)