The Aviator

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. (10/02/2005)

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. (25/02/2011)

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% (29/06/2013)

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. (06/03/2016)

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. (15/09/2005)