Aviator

Preamble
Greetings and Salutations. Hope everyone is (safely) enjoying their New Year's (Eve and Day - depending on time zone).

It's been awhile since I went to see a movie in a theater. My catch-up list is a mile long. I had absolutely no intention of bumping The Aviator up to the top. In fact, because I don't actively lust after Leonardo and because it was a movie about that reclusive Howard Hughes dude - it just didn't seem like my cup of tea.

But then, I saw the trailer for it. I saw that two of my favorite actresses - Kate Beckinsale and Cate Blanchett - were in it. And oddly enough, Mr. DiCaprio caught my attention - and not just because of the Victoria Secret model he's hooked up with. (If you have to ask...ugh! Talk to me in the comment section about this...)

Now I was just a babe in the woods when Mr. Hughes was in his last years. He died in 1976 and I vaguely recall that period of time (sandwiched somewhere between Patty Hearst stuff and Bicentennial celebrations). I remember sitting in front of the television - watching whatever the incarnation of ABC World News was (with Harry and Barbara) - and hearing about this eccentric billionaire who had died in a plane, on his way to seek medical care. The bizarre part was hearing all of the weird things about him - what he did (occupation wise), who he did (movie star wise), and how sad he looked and acted. I think it was my first lesson that money can't buy you happiness. Third grade was a good year.

Anyway - that was my frame of mind, going into the movie theater at noon today.

What The Movie Is About
That's pretty simple. It's about a man. His name is Howard Hughes (Leonardo DiCaprio). It takes place over a twenty (give or take) year span (1920's-1940's). We get a glimpse into the infamous world of a rich, reclusive, paranoid-schizo-bizarre-playboy-obsessed-with-tits, man.

Now I'm not going to outline the entire plot of the movie. If you need a history lesson regarding this period of time in his life - do a web search my friend.

The Short Analysis
* This is a well-acted, character-centered movie. One of the best of the year.
* Leonardo is excellent.
* Cate is excellent.
* Although the movie is somewhere close to three hours, you'll probably be too sucked in to care.
* I walked away wanting to know even more about Mr. Hughes.

The Long Discussion Points - Why It's Worth Your Time AND A Few Nit-picky Issues...
I've enjoyed seeing Leonardo in several movies. I was a sucker for Titanic (hubba-hubba...loved those steamed up windows), thought he was irritating, but-lovable in What's Eating Gilbert Grape?, and although a bit misplaced (in my humble opinion), he was charming in Romeo + Juliet.

He's a youngster and to be honest - I really didn't think he could pull off someone like Howard Hughes. First, there's that age gap thing. Leo has the face of a 16 year old boy. Still. Somehow though, Sandy Powell (head of make-up), removed that challenge within just a few minutes. This woman does great work (see what she did in Interview With The Vampire, Shakespeare in Love, and Far from Heaven).

Once the physical part was removed as a credibility issue, the next thing on my list was the fact that Leo had three main audiences that he had to please. The first audience was those individuals who grew up in the Hughes era. They either loved him or hated him and Leo really needed to tread lightly on how he would portray this individual... polarize this particular audience in one extreme or another...and alienation could set in early. The second audience was those individuals like me - who had only heard about Hughes from a distance but were never aware of all of these other things about him. The importance for this audience was for us to understand that Hughes was more than just the freak that the media made him out to be. Call it an educational process - A Schoolhouse Rock type of biographical account that was laid on Leo's shoulders. The third audience was there to oogle him (Leo). Believe me. I know what I'm talking about.... And really, as long as the man had all of the screen time, they didn't care otherwise.

What I noticed is that I really didn't have much time during the movie to analyze the reactions of all three audiences. Afterwards though, I took stock and realized that the man had creatively satisfied all of us. Even though the movie wasn't a fast-moving, sit on the edge of your seat flik - I was mesmerized by Leo's portrayal of a man who teetered back and forth between sanity and the looney world. He created this character that you couldn't help but have empathy for. Sure, he was filthy rich and bizarre at times, but on the other hand, he had an almost-Citizen Kane-child-like mentality.

As Hughes aged through the years, I didn't even think about Leo and his boyish face. I was so drawn into the intracacies of how far he could push the envelope that I was almost sad (minus my bladder) that the movie had ended. And here's the thing - I wanted a happy ending for Hughes. I wanted him to find the right medication to make his polarized OCD issues and other personality traits - "normalized". As Leo portrayed him, I believed in a totally different side of him. Call it the freakishly-genius-screwed-up-royally-individual thought process that I have. That thought process - for those of you new at this game - is that I believe that all highly talented and imaginative people just don't have it all there mentally. Think Kurt Cobain, Mozart, Van Gogh. All misunderstood. All dead. All raving lunatics (in many peoples eyes).

There were lots of other actors cast in this film - notably two - that you've probably heard a ton about - Cate Blanchett (Katharine Hepburn) and Kate Beckinsale (Ava Gardner).

Cate Blanchett is worth every penny (and then some) that she was paid for this film. Although she wasn't originally slated to play this role (Mrs. ex-Tom Cruise was), I just can't imagine anyone else portraying Ms. Hepburn like she did. WOW!!! She had the mannerisms, blunt-language, and many other idiosyncrasies down to an art form. Should they ever make one of these kinds of movies about Ms. Hepburn, I could totally see Cate starring in it AND running away with every award for it.

Now you know that I love and adore Kate Beckinsale but I must say that I wouldn't call her performance stellar. She's stunningly gorgeous but there's not a lot of depth there. There is a scene towards the end of the film where she comes in and helps Hughes clean-up. It was funny and touchy and became one of those might-have-been moments to me where I thought - wow! It would have been great to see that level of interaction (between her and Leo) in other places throughout the movie.

The screenplay, which was written by John Logan (loved his stuff too - see The Last Samurai, Gladiator, and Any Given Sunday ) flows nicely from the perspective of a timeline but it failed me in this one area - the relationship with Ava Gardener (Kate Beckinsale).

I don't know if there was more to it than we saw and Mr. Scorsese cut it out because of the movie's length or if it was mostly disregarded....All I know is that the relationship that Howard Hughes had with Katharine Hepburn was easy to understand. Not with Ava though.

As a side note, I must tell you that chemistry-wise, Leo was sizzling with Kate. The ole hand down the front of her dress was pretty hot. Crazy as he was (as Hughes), I considered switching bodies with Kate for just that one moment.

There are some other well-known actors who show up in this film.

Gwen Stefani's appearance in this movie was overblown - meaning - that she's in it for a few minutes and has a few lines. The way that the media was hyping it up, you would think that she was in at least half of the movie.

* Alan Alda, who continues to be Alan Alda'ish in every character he plays.

* John C. Reilly, who does a fine job as the bean counter.

* Jude Law, who makes a quick appearance as Errol Flynn.

* Willem Dafoe, who makes a quick appearance as a newspaper man.

* Alec Baldwin, who played Hughes rival at Pan Am. I was mostly disturbed by his lack of any performance in this movie. I could have done a better job. No sex change needed even.

It's apparent in this film that the director - Mr. Martin Scorsese - is extremely comfortable with Leonardo DiCaprio (almost in the Robert DeNiro kind of way). I would really love to sit here and heap oodles of compliments on the man however, I think that he really sat back and let Leo do his thang. The only time I felt his influence was early on in the film when he was trying to establish some of Howard's bizarre behavior (food in particular). The camera angles were distinctive and sharp - almost to the point of gross irritation. Never had I felt like red meat was more disgusting than in this movie :).

And last but not least - I have to comment on the music featured in the film. As you can imagine, there was lots of music in it that I didn't care for. The Roaring 20's, 30's music isn't my style. The Wainright's (Rufus and Martha) both performed as vocalists in the movie. I'm sure that they will be featured on the soundtrack. From a score perspective, Howard Shore, used something - not sure if it was original or not - that really captured the mental state of Hughes (or so I felt) in a scene where he's up in the air, filming Hell's Angels. It feels very Mozart like.

The End
The Aviator is rated PG-13 for thematic elements, sexual content, nudity (more please), language and a crash sequence. Probably not a movie that the kids would be interested in anyway...however, I do think that you'll enjoy it quite a bit.

P.S. A special thanks to the Leo groupies for keeping it down to a low roar. This chick greatly appreciated it.