Definitely a good film, just a bit too long for what it needed to be.

Martin Scorscese has a knack for picking out figures or events in history that feature characters that live off the beaten track. It's like he's drawn to them. He gets obsessed by them and that is clearly seen in this biopic of an extravagant man. Now, I do not know a lot about Hughes' history, enough to know the broad lines, but I know the man suffered from OCD. That is brilliantly depicted by DiCaprio, known for expertly playing characters that didn't get all the pieces of the puzzle. Worthy of the Oscar nomination. Cate Blanchett as Hepburn, I don't know, I am in the middle about her. She was convincingly not herself, and if Hepburn was like that in real life, I do not like her personality. A real standout was Allan Alda, excellent as the governor, trying to keep up his front and leave the backroom deals in the backroom. Which is where the movie loses a star for me, it hovers around the character of Howard Hughes too long and too lingeringly, while in the backgroud an excellent political/executive story of corruption is playing out. I find a better balance between those two and a shorter runtime would have benefitted my enjoyment of it more. That said, it is excellent, excuisite filmmaking from an amazing director. Just not his best.

So much pain. But great anyway. Blanchette and Di Caprio can be an irresistible combination

Neste drama envolvente, Leonardo DiCaprio dá tudo de si e mais um pouco para retratar um magnata da aviação delirante e perfeccionista.

One of Scorsese's best shot. Cate Blanchett is incredibly good here.

This is one of the finest films of the 2000s.

Amazing actor and a great film

One of Scorsese's only Pg-13 movies has a great sense of its place in the world, even if that place isn't particularly new or super engaging for a 2 hour 40 minute biopic. However, Leonardo DiCaprio manages to wow me again, asserting himself as one of the top actors in Hollywood. With his dedication to the role and sheer acting prowess, he carries this movie to a special place in the historical biopic genre.

With riveting scenes of airplane action and a deep analysis of an ego-driven man with obsessive-compulsive disorder, The Aviator succeeds in capturing your attention.

An epic biopic of the eccentric, reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes starring Leonardo Dicaprio, Cate Blanchett, Alec Baldwin, Alan Alda and Kate Beckinsale, and directed by Martin Scorcese. The film takes place during the first half of the 20th century, and it's big budget ($110 million) really transports you there. Eleven Oscar nominations with five wins make this masterpiece an absolute must see.

Maddening how this is a true story, and while there's real life twists and turns, it's a bit of a dull story about a guy who pees in jars.

Good movie, i totaly wount except that good colors and cimetagrophy for 2004, i hardly even found any problems whit this movie

Ambitious. And Blanchett gives a grounded performance

While some aspects are surface level, The Aviator is an overall stunning biopic that is both well-considered and dramatically sterling in addition to being incredibly directed by Martin Scorsese and superbly acted by Leonardo DiCaprio.

For a Scorsese movie this is rather dull. It's production values are high and with help of the era it's setting is extremely stylistic, but it comes across as a rather paint by numbers biopic. Blanchett as usual is superb.

After Howard Hughes' film becomes a success, he pursues the growing aviation industry. However, a mental health illness threatens his aspirations. I didn't love the Aviator, I actually thought it was quite bad, definitely my least favorite Scorsese I have watched. Am I the only one, that really thought this movie looked quite awful, especially the first hour, it felt like they just threw a LUT on it and called it a day. The VFX are of course not great, but its the year 2004, what do you want, so I can forgive that. When I looked the Aviator up and saw it won 5 Oscars, my jaw dropped, seriously for best cinematography and best supporting performance? I thought Leonardo Di Caprio gave a solid performance, by nowhere one of his best, but he is still compelling to look at and keeps you invested in it all. This is the first time I really felt the runtime of a Scorsese movie, it was way to long and featured some scenes that could have been cut easily in my opinion, but maybe I don't see it. I am just going to say it as well, I love you Cate Blanchett, but this was not it. It probably has nothing to do with Cate acting bad, but with the direction of Scorsese, but all I can say, is that I didn't like her performance and she won a Oscar for it as well, come on. The first hour had me pretty interested in it all, it starts really great, but then it drags for a long time and we have a lot of scenes, with a phobia that Leonardo's character has, something that I still don't quite understand what the point of it all was. I must say thou, the movie ends on a pretty high note, so at least you leave to people with a satisfying feeling. This definitely feels like the movie in Scorsese's filmography, with the least amount of reasoning behind it all, what's the point behind the movie being made? I thought that the sound design was pretty solid and it features some fun scenes here and there, but for the most part I didn't get this thing, but maybe it will grow on me in the future, but for know, this is by far my least favorite Scorsese.

I was loving the movie which I've never seen before, but I was dismayed when Alex Baldwin appeared! I recorded the movie so luckily I was able to watch it by ff through Baldwin scenes! Not a bad movie, Cate Blanchett & Leornardo DiCapria are just excellent, & the corrupt politician played bt Alan Alda....I hated him, he was that good/sleezy! lol But Alex Baldwin is such a despicable person I won't even watch anything that I know he is in any way involved in!

Leonardo DiCaprio is a great actor. I don't question his acting skill or his acting in this movie. I just question in his casting as he has a baby face that looks nothing like Howard Hughes. I see Leo doing a part. But Cate Blanchett as Hepburn, that is damn good casting. But pacing is also an issue at almost 3 hours long there was parts they could have cut or trimmed. He was obsessed with getting Hell's Angel's movie perfect, we get it. We didn't need to watch every detail of it. Far from perfect but I can see why the Oscars was interested.

Enjoyed it, unexpected use of 2-color for the '20s, an impressive cast. Quite interesting story about Howard Hughes, and it contextualized some things I already knew about him and added a bunch that I did not.

Another great Scorcese movie.