Movie Review: The Aviator

WillMagic · #1 01-24-2005, 05:27 AM

A very good film. DiCaprio does a superb job as Howard Hughes (who, by the way, is the most famous alum from my prep school....i know, i know, I AM THE COOLEST.)

But in all seriousness, this was quite well done. I think, unfortunately, that in some respects it was brought down by the script. The movie seems to go places on occasion that you just wonder "Ok, so why do we care again?" If anything this is just a problem of being too true-to-life in the screenwriting...they let the truth get in the way of a good story at points.

However, despite this, I really enjoyed the style and feel of the film, I thought the acting was excellent, and there were a few superb scenes. Other than the occasional wandering, a fine film.

Oh, and a final note...the best performance in the film had to be Cate Blanchett's Katharine Hepburn. After about five minutes, you don't even notice anymore. It's not an impression but an embodiment, and that is extremely hard to do with such an iconic figure.

Will

jakethebake · #2 01-24-2005, 10:46 AM

Haven't seen the "film". The only thing I've ever seen Leo do a good job in was that Gilbert Grape thing because his eyes are too close together and he kinda looks retarded anyway.

Dr. Strangelove · #3 01-24-2005, 12:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Haven't seen the "film". The only thing I've ever seen Leo do a good job in was that Gilbert Grape thing because his eyes are too close together and he kinda looks retarded anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

"I gillled im Gilbert!!"

brassnuts · #4 02-09-2005, 12:41 AM

Just saw it tonight. Interesting movie and very well filmed, albeit maybe a bit sluggish at times. Also, Kate Beckinsale looked hot as hell made up as a 40's Hollywood starlet.

Dominic · #5 02-09-2005, 06:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Just saw it tonight. Interesting movie and very well filmed, albeit maybe a bit sluggish at times. Also, Kate Beckinsale looked hot as hell made up as a 40's Hollywood starlet.

[/ QUOTE ]

She was portraying Ava Gardner - a huge movie star.

The Dude · #6 02-09-2005, 08:30 AM

I was disappointed. Not because it was a bad film, but because it was nominated for both "Best Picture" and "Best Actor in a Leading Role." I really don't think it was worthy of either of these nominations. I will be extremely disappointed if it wins either of these bids, and I am extremely disappointed it got the "Best Picture" nomination over Hotel Rwanda.

Not nearly as good as the reviews made it out to be.

sammysusar · #7 02-09-2005, 10:02 AM

This movie bored me so much that I left the theater. I would not say the film was aweful, was fairly interesting at beginning but is extremely slow moving.

WillMagic · #8 02-09-2005, 06:55 PM

I haven't seen Hotel Rwanda yet (it's on my to-do list,) but I agree with your assessment that the film was in now way deserving of all the acclaim it is getting. I enjoyed it, but it is just so much worse than any of the other contenders. The only major nomination that was truly deserving was Cate Blanchett's.

Will

The Dude · #9 02-09-2005, 07:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The only major nomination that was truly deserving was Cate Blanchett's.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. Her performance was great, and I have no problem with that nomination - altough I think Virginia Madsen deserves the award.

I am just baffled by the two major nominations this film got. I really don't get it.

brassnuts · #10 02-09-2005, 08:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I am just baffled by the two major nominations this film got. I really don't get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really get anything that goes on in Hollywood.