Leo

I saw The Aviator last night.

Thoughts:

1. It was stylistically all over the place. Very uneven. I would give anything to have the old Martin Scorsese back.

2. It was overambitious. I wish he'd made this movie 15 years ago. I wanted the entire film to be like the meltdown scenes. In this movie, they stood out as old-school Scorsese, which was great, but then the movie would revert back to overused conventional crap. Blah.

3. It didn't have much depth.

4. It didn't really have a beginning. Or a good story arc.

5. I kept thinking it was over, but it never was!

6. The Howard Hughes character didn't make sense - he had no emotional depth whatsoever - sometimes he was neurotic, sometimes not. Sometimes OCD, sometimes not. Sometimes germaphobic, sometimes not. Very inconsistent. Without explanation. Did I care? No.

7. I still, apparently, have a crush on Leonardo DiCaprio. His eyes are so blue. I wanted him to be more nuts. I wanted psychotic camera angles and fucked up music and, well, I guess I just wanted it to be Taxi Driver. I thought, however, he handled greatly what he was given.

8. Cate Blanchett is exquisite.

9. And you can imagine how thrilled I was to see Jude Law! Delicious. I spent the rest of the movie wondering if he would reappear.

10. The star cameos, though, were a little distracting. Rufus Wainwright? Gwen Stefani? What? Willem Dafoe? YES!

11. The editing was atrocious. It seems like they didn't get all of the footage they needed, and then just threw things together. There was one scene in which Howard Hughes and his recently hired 15-year-old girlfriend were at a table discussing the future of TWA with somebody or other. I don't really know, because I couldn't concentrate on what they were saying because the editing was killing me! The girl was eating ice cream, and the spoon kept disappearing, or she'd have it, and then it would be in a different place. Howard Hughes was sipping coffee, and the same thing was happening. He's be drinking it, and the shot would be over-the-shoulder and the coffee was gone!!! And its nominated for best editing! Wtf!??!

12. The period piece-ness and epic-ness were nice. People love a good epic. This is the only explanation as to why it is nominated for 11 academy awards.

13. It had the token gory Scorsese scene, although it caught me off gaurd because I forgot I was watching a Scorsese film. You know the kind - blood all over the face, loud sounds of violence, that sort of thing. I wish the entire movie had been like that.

14. The story, though, man! Does anyone know anything about Howard Hughes? I need to pick up a biography or at the very least do some reading today. I don't know how much of the movie was true. I don't know much about him at all, other than the fact that he funded my research at UMass and thanks to him I got $1000 for writing my senior thesis. The idea of an eccentric, brilliant billionnaire who throws money around without thinking into inventions and movies thrills me. Does this happen anymore? What ever happened to the rich and neurotic eccentric who pursues his passions without consequence? What happened to inventions? Have we stopped evolving? This guy was nuts - he's like "Build a bigger plane!" and didn't care if it was practical or cost effective or possible. He was focused and obsessive and could be, because he had money, which gave him complete freedom. It's also weird to think of a time when there weren't passenger planes, and how some nut job was like "We could fly people across the Atlantic!" and people were like "Noooooo! It cannot and should not be done!"

15. This was a harsh review, and far more harsh than I actually felt. I wouldn't recommend it, but if you really want to see it, I wouldn't discourage you either. It's a very interesting story, and the acting is superb.

I guess 2 out of 5 stars. Well, maybe 3 out of 5. Yeah. 3 out of 5 stars.