A Worthy Effort, But One Which Could Have Flown Higher

Rating: Null/10 (19 January 2006)

I enjoyed this film far more than I thought I would. I like Scorcese, particularly his early films where imagination and narrative focus triumphed over budget. The years following 'Cape Fear' I found a little too self consciously concerned with stylistic tricks (and traps) borrowed from the European film-makers the director admired  there are, for example, parts of 'Casino' that are pure Michael Powell  a reaction, no doubt, against critics who cast him as master of grim-'n'-gritty urban realism, and the only successor to Cassavetes as King of the Indies. One thing which has been consistent throughout his career is his determination to capture cultural snap-shots of Americana  from the discordant Europeaniism of Wharton's 'Age of Innocence' and the chaos of 'Gangs of New York', through the re-invention of the first great US cinematic innovation, the mob-movie, to the contemporary union of dysfunctional family and celluloid-sociopathy, 'Cape Fear'. In a sense all of his films are concerned with the American cultural obsession with identity: Travis Bickle reinvents himself, the city itself is shaped by ethnic divisions in 'Gangs', etc.. In some respects it's surprising that it took him so long to turn his eye upon the life of Howard Hughes.
There are (conscious, I think) references a-plenty to 'Citizen Kane' as Marty tries to make sense of the obsessive-compulsive genius and unwilling celebrity. Hardly surprising given the subject matter. Like Kane Hughes dominates those around him, but is capable of great kindness in their defence, and like Kane his greatest repulsion is the notion of personal hypocrisy. Leonardo DiCaprio gives what I believe to be his best performance, turning in a nicely nuanced disturbing and sympathetic turn as the hero. I've known a few obsessive-compulsives in my time and his performance hits just the right note: we can see why others believed him a freak or a monster, but this understanding is undercut by sympathy for his schizophrenia. In some scenes the overriding feeling is of watching him crash-and burn, both emotionally and literally.
Cate Blanchet's turn as Kathering Hepburn is more problematic. It's astonishingly stilted, but this is a consequence more than anything else of the character being one of the most imitated icons of Hollywood's Golden Age: Katie was astonishingly stilted. Once the myriad of mannerisms settle it's a fine performance  though not, perhaps, one worthy of a Best Supporting Actress gong. Kate Beckinsale has an easier job as Ava Gardner, more famous at the time, but less lastingly memorable as an icon (how many Ava Gardner films can you think of, off hand?). She gets to fluff around in furs looking exotic.
John C. Reilly, as Hughes business manager, is excellent, as always. If someone can find a flick that the bulldog-faced bloke isn't good in I'll be most surprised. He's proof that 'character-actor' is still a valid job description. Alec Baldwin (who, it seems, has been at the pies again) is suitably oily as the Pan-Am CEO.
Scene setting and staging is kept surprisingly simple, particularly given Mr S's predilection of late for tricksy scene-segues and edits, and he spares the CGI gimmicks until the big action scenes when they can be of most effect.
All in all it's no 'Citizen Kane', but it will stand, I believe as a sympathetic but not entirely uncritical tribute to an American Icon  and a reminder of precisely why he was an icon, rather than the twitching freak of more recent memory.