"The Aviator" didn't fly as high as I hoped!

Rating: 7/10 (31 January 2005)

Martin Scorsese is one of my favorite directors. At least five of his movies (Taxi Driver  Raging Bull  Last Temptation of Christ  Goodfellas and Casino) are on top of my "All-Time Favorite Movie List". With raising expectation, I was waiting for a chance to watch his last opus "The Aviator", about a period of the life of the flamboyant and visionary Howard Hughes, who started building Drill-bits in Houston, TX and ended up in California, producing spectacular movies (and courting pretty movie starlets which he made famous), building futuristic planes and confronting head to head the giant (at that time) of commercial aviation PAN-AM. Yesterday, finally the chance arrived. What can I say: it's a wonderfully crafted and polished Hollywood product but I felt that something was definitely missing. Strong directions and cinematography, swift editing, jaw-dropping visual effects (the plane crash on Beverly Hills sequence is visually impacting and leaves you, at the end, totally devastated; cannot believe what nowadays computer graphics can do...), top-notch casting and production, very good acting especially by Leonardo DiCaprio, (who is "getting better by the movie" in spite of looking, in this one, a bit to boyish to credibly impersonate Howard Hughes), Cate Blanchett (amazing portrayal of a young Kate Hepburn which, however, I remember much prettier...please no offense), Alec Baldwin (one of the most slick and stylish villain in movie history) and Alan Alda (great performance which absolutely deserves a recognition). So what was really missing? I think this movie is missing a "Soul", that special "something" which touches you and somehow gets you involved, for good or for bad, while watching a movie. The one which can make you think, laugh or cry. The one that can give you the willies or, sometimes, even can make you feel like throwing pop-corn and stuff at the screen of your TV set. In short, that "something" that somehow gets to you and makes movie-watching such a fascinating experience! Even so called "bad movies" or "B-Movies" usually have it (I am a die-hard fan of those), but I couldn't feel it here. I was watching that marvelous and expensive display of cinematographic art, but I couldn't get emotionally involved and really relate to the characters or to the story unfolding on the screen. ...just watching and, I think, I even doze-off a couple of times (and I didn't even drink one beer...). Does this make it a bad movie? Of course not! This is a splendid movie. Perhaps only a "not entirely perfect one". It simply did not completely "deliver". By the way, this is simply my personal reaction and point of view as a spectator and movie lover and I truly think that "The Aviator" deserves (and certainly will receive) more then one "Academy Award". However, I would be surprised (and a bit disappointed), if it will receive an "Oscar for Best Picture". I think it should go to "Closer" instead, but.... who am I to judge...? Sorry Martin but, this time, I give it a 7 out of 10.