Over Inflated Bio Pic with Under Inflated Performances

Rating: 5/10 (12 June 2005)

The Aviator (2004) is director, Martin Scorsese's send up to Hollywood's mythology in glamor during the golden thirties and glittering forties. A quick recap of Scorsese's career finds that he has delved into various time periods throughout his film canon in an attempt to make the past live again. On some occasions  as with his fifties pastiche done in snapshots for Raging Bull or Goodfellas, or in his sixties rekindling used in Casino, Scorsese is bang on, and generates a genuine flair. Other attempts, like his reconstruction of turn of the century city life, in Gangs of New York, or exploring the cultured set in The Age of Innocence have faired less than ably  perhaps hinting of a sniff of formaldehyde dabbled in sensibilities and mannerisms that are too contemporary to fit in.
"The Aviator" ranks somewhere between these two extremes in the director's film making prowess. Like his previous efforts to celebrate the forties in "New York, New York", "The Aviator" proves equivocally that Scorsese has trouble evoking this sort of past without adding something of a contemporary vein to it. From his recreation of Hollywood's legendary Cocoanut Grove through his valiant attempt at recapturing the pioneering spirit that made intercontinental flying such an exciting prospect in the first place, Scorsese's master craftsmanship is once again hampered on this occasion by his casting of effeminate and prepubescent-looking Leonardo DiCaprio as the legendary Howard Hughes.
Hughes  at least in the photographs I've seen that were taken in his youth  was studly yet, quite clearly looked every bit his age, in a way that men of his generation tended to have a more careworn façade that was both sexy and mature, much more than today's youth. DiCaprio has something of the coloring of Hughes' wanton and maniacal flair for the dramatic  at least in spots  but it gets mired in his own disbelief of acting the part; as though he suddenly awakens half way into his lines and realizes that he's just Leonardo DiCaprio and not Howard Hughes. Hence, the suspension of belief for an audience in his characterization only comes to life in fits and sparks  most often dying slowly  and rather painfully  before our very eyes.
But enough about DiCaprio's shortcomings. I remain at an even greater loss to explain why so many critics found Cate Blanchette's take on Katharine Hepburn the definitive evocation of this great lady. Having seen every Katharine Hepburn movie ever made - at least twice  and, owning more than a handful of her best performances for repeat viewing after seeing this film  as well as owning no less than four documentaries in which Hepburn speaks about her life, the movies, Spenc' and so on - I must reiterate for this review that Blanchette is nowhere near the stature or embodiment of Kate Hepburn any more than I could pass for Cary Grant! In both her mannerism and behavior, Blanchette presents us with a gross caricature of Hepburn, something in the subtext of a manic latex puppet.
The story of Hughes and his romantic goings on with Hepburn fuel the first half of Scorsese's film. In pacing and style it does come together rather nicely in spots, but there is never a sense of the characters being lived in or the places they occupy seeming as anything more than highly stylized sets. The clothes worn are not attire, but costumes that feel out of vogue with Scorsese's handling of the material. Hence, the whole affair comes across as something of a gavotte in horse's harness  an impeccably lit and beautifully photographed fake of an era, instead of a living snapshot of the world circa 1920-1949. To go any further with the plot of this film seems moot, since it isn't a very glamorous story  made even less glamorous by its two leads. Best then, to simply state that, although the film was generally applauded as Scorsese's most 'accessible work' (a comment I find rather insulting, since it has the faint echo of being talked down to or, at the very least, suggesting that Scorsese has sold out by talking down to his audience), I suspect that Academy voters were not fooled by either the film or its performances  at least not enough to give either the picture or its director statuettes.
Now, for the good news. Warner Home Video's widescreen transfer is reference quality. The anamorphic picture is stunning with a sumptuous color palette that absolutely jumps off the screen. There are moments when the image will almost appear three dimensional for those watching it on larger projection units. Rich, deep and solid blacks, very clean whites and some beautifully rendered night scenes  in which even extreme background detail is obvious, but never digitally harsh, leave much to recommend this film as a visual experience. The audio is 5.1 and a marvel to listen to, with even the most subtle clanging of dinner and flatware evident from various channels of one's surround sound. Extras  too many to get into in this review; the standouts being The Age of Glamour and The Role of Howard Hughes. Scorsese's commentary track for the film is also a highlight not to be missed.