Fun to watch... but nothing to get frantic about either.

Rating: 7/10 (20 December 2004)

I felt that the performances were good. Not amazing. Not excellent. Good.
To me that means these actors delivered the lines well, nothing the director recommended or framed them in got in the way and I enjoyed watching the film.
Audiences and Critics (even armchair) are a bit too quick to throw recent movies into the "Great!" category. Leo's portrayal of Hughes was admirable. He did a good job... but was he fabulous? Cate Blanchett... OK, I can buy the Hepburn act for 3 hours. Still, is it really great acting or a great impression? I'll give her a break and say she was good at both.
Great is Denzel Washington in Glory, John Turturro in Barton Fink or even Clark Gable in The Misfits. Somehow, this one seems a little too close to made for TV if it wasn't for the incredible cinematography and amazing pace that only Scorsese can master.
I can't pick any actor out of this and say they were bad. That's the best thing about this one. I was caught in the story.
Leo DID seem too young and skimpy throughout the film.
Anyway, hats off to all of 'em. It's a movie worth watching, and that's better than most of the junk coming out of Hollywoodland these days.