It'll win at least one Oscar, but there are definite flaws

Rating: 7/10 (7 January 2005)

SPOILERS Hollywood has changed so much over the years. The glamour and beauty of film starts has faded slightly and Hollywood no longer seems to be a playground purely for the rich. Whilst this is definitely a good thing, films like "The Aviator" remind us of the awe dropping beauty of the time. With modern actors playing acting legends, the film could so easily have collapsed into an awkward tribute. Instead what we have, mainly due to Cate Blanchett's performance, modern genius recreating legendary genius. Ironic, perhaps, but never a bad thing.
Howard Hughes is a name most people will probably not be aware of. Those who do know him will probably remember him as an old eccentric in a Las Vegas Hotel Room. Years before this however, Hughes was a rich playboy who dated most of Hollywood, produced jaw dropping films, and created Aviation history.
As Hughes, Leonardo DiCaprio puts in one of his better performances. Often seen as the boy from "Titanic" (1997), Leo takes yet another step to maturity with a solid performance as Hughes. Questioned by many who claim he fails to fully grasp the mentally ill character, Leo tries his hardest to show the mental destruction which Hughes experiences.
Come February 2005, the Oscar's will once more arrive with some wonderful performances receiving the statuette. On that night, the one role which MUST win an Oscar, is Cate Blanchett as Katherine Hepburn. Whilst "The Aviator" contains some great performances, DiCaprio is good, as is Kate Beckinsale as Ava Gardner, it is Blanchett's performance which overshadows everyone. Taking a well known figure like Hepburn and playing her on the big screen must not have been easy, but there are times that Blanchett makes it look as simple as tying your shoelaces. Copying the voice, personality and movement perfectly, Blanchett seems to almost be possessed by Hepburn's ghost. Despite countless other top notch performances in the past, Blanchett puts in her finest ever performance. She's earned that Best Supporting Actress Oscar and if she doesn't win, then the Academy really are inept.
Alongside Blanchett, no other actor comes close on this screen. One performance worth mentioning though is the brief appearance of Jude Law as Errol Flynn. Whilst not on the screen for perhaps as long as he should be, Law copies Flynn's lifestyle to a tee. In one ten minute period, Law's character manages to not only frustrate Hughes, but he also smokes constantly, drinks constantly, and actually ends up punching someone in the face. Maybe sounding slightly harsh, but this portrayal quite literally smacks of accuracy.
Whilst a masterclass of acting, it is not right to describe "The Aviator" as a modern classic. While Blanchett should win an Oscar for her portrayal, the film is not necessarily going to win any others. Director Martin Scorsese definitely has his finest chance of winning his first, and the film will no doubt be nominated for Best Film, but whether these will be deserved or not is another matter.
What is never mentioned about Oscar winners is what the competition is like. In the 1980's, some very poor films won the main award, not necessarily because they were good, but simply because the competition was worse. The fate of "The Aviator" remains the same. It is entirely possible that this film might scoop countless awards, but this will depend entirely on the competition. "The Aviator" is definitely an Oscar friendly film, but the question remains whether the Academy will look beyond it's flaws.
For starters, the problem with "The Aviator" is that like so many other modern films, it is just too long. Feeling like an eternity at times, the film varies from absorbing to repulsing. When Hughes switches his attentions from cinema to aviation, the story stalls and takes a while to get going again. Then at the height of Hughes' film madness (excluding his obvious later life), the true insanity is dragged out to an excessive degree. In effect, the film suffers from this strange Hollywood notion that a film can only be good if certain scenes are dragged out, thus extending the film time by an unnecessary hour. This occurred with "Alexander" (2004), it occurred with the second and third parts of the "Matrix" trilogy (2003) and it even occurred with the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy (2001-2003). It is an annoying habit of Hollywood in recent years, and it needs resolving.
The other major problem with "The Aviator" is that it doesn't really conclude properly. Without wanting to ruin plot, the film ends at a point when we really could do with seeing another year of Hughes' life. Not wanting to explore the Las Vegas time is perfectly understandable, and it helps us to actually feel a sense of respect for Hughes, rather than pity, but there surely must have been a better way to conclude the film than the way it was done. It just doesn't feel that well thought out.
Either way, whatever the criticisms people might have of "The Aviator", be sure that by February 2005 it will have nominations galore. Depending on opposition, it might even win a few. All it deserves however, is a round of applause, and a Best Supporting Actress award for Cate Blanchett.