quote:

---

I thought that the color timing was rather poor on the print that I saw,

---

Part of the odd color timing was that Scorsese was doing a history lesson on how early color processes and stock looked in that era. Remember the early half of the film is the early 30's. The first few reels have an early 2-strip Technicolor look to it. The coloring changes during the middle of the film again for the 40's and finally the 50's brighter color look.

I enjoyed the film, but it does have a few slow spots that could have been cut.
 

---

Posted by William Valdes (Member # 2690) on 01-11-2005, 10:41 PM:
 
I found this film entirely entertaining, all three hours of it. Howard Hughes led a fascinating life, although not everyone is as interested as others. I personally would have to put The Aviator in my Top Five for 2003.
 

---

Posted by Jason Gazaille (Member # 2846) on 01-12-2005, 12:53 AM:
 
um, Will... 2003?? OK.
Anyway, I thought it was pretty good, also. My boss however, thought it was pointless. I never knew much about Howard Hughes, so I wish they had maybe told what happened later in his life somehow.
 

---

Posted by Josh Kirkhart (Member # 1046) on 01-12-2005, 04:01 AM:
 
I agree with William {except for the whole 2003 thing}, I like d this move quite a bit. I did feel like the show had another good hour to really finish his story, and feel like Scorcese missed a few notes but it gets into the top ten of the year(2004, that is!!). Loved the color timing and the directing, coulda used a little more detailing in the special effects. out.

8.5/10
 

---

Posted by William Valdes (Member # 2690) on 01-13-2005, 03:06 AM:
 
Well, technically the film was probably in pre-production in 2003 so maybe it could be considered umm... ok I goofed! anyway you know what I mean. This film is in my Top Five for 2004 . I'd have to disagree with your boss Jason, there are few biopics this interesting without completely exaggerating (or in many cases rewriting) history. What Scorcese didn't include was how Howard Hughes lived the rest of his life as a recluse, alone until he died of liver failure in 1976. While it would have been nice to include this information at the end of the film, dramatically I think he wanted to end the film on somewhat of a higher note. Still, not such a bad fate considering everything he survived through and managed to accomplish.
 

---

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-16-2005, 05:56 PM:
 
I thought the film could have been much better, but I was glad MS didn't concentrate on every negative thing HH did, as many 'history' films do today. As it was, I agree it should have been made shorter. The old Howard Hughes TV movie (with Tommy Lee Jones) was on the other night .. now that was boring!
 

---

Posted by Ryan Powers (Member # 1059) on 01-30-2005, 10:58 PM:
 
A little long, but over all a extreamly well done picture that captured the life of Howard Hughes. It is worthy of an Oscar nomination.

Theater/Presentation. Actually saw this movie twice. First screening Carmike Cinemas in Winston Salem. THX auditorium. Excellent Sound, and presentaton. ***1/2 out of Four. Second Screening Consolidated Theaters in Charlotte, The Arboretum. Small auditorium Average sound and presentation, seating could use refurbishing. **1/2 out of four.

The Aviator- ***1/2 out of Four
 

---

Posted by Don Cross (Member # 2980) on 02-01-2005, 12:01 AM:
 
This film for tntertainment value: 8 out of 10.

Historical accuracy: 2 out of 10.

Has anyone ever heard the stories that HH may have done work with the Central Intelligence Agency on several occasions. The most notable one being the construction and use of his "rescue" ship to retrieve a downed submarine?

Sometimes the truth is even stranger than fiction.

Pardon me, as its now time for me to return to my ward
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 02-01-2005, 03:21 AM:
 
The submarine thing is a later episode. I believe it happened in the early 70s.
He did manufacture spy planes and other planes for military purpose, so it is almost self-understanding that he was involved with the CIA and other intelligence agencies to a certain degree.
I was a little puzzled by the sudden ending.
Overall, I liked the movie. I generally like long epic movies (except for Postman). But I found that Scorsese celebrated his stylistical virtuosity as a director too obviously and did not achieve a coherent picture. There was too much of the "look, what a great director and creator of images I am!" stuff for its own sake.
 

---

Posted by John Anastasio (Member # 607) on 02-04-2005, 08:26 PM:
 
The ship was the "Glomar Explorer" and it was built to hoist a soviet nuclear submarine off the sea floor. It failed and led to a major embarassment for the U.S. Anyway, not to get off the subject, I liked a lot of the film, but I wouldn't sit through it again until it shrinks. The whole sequence with him sitting around naked in the screening room probably got a lot of teenage girls all hot about DiCaprio's butt, but I think it was too long, too phoney and too "look at what I can do with a camera". I thought that the color changes were effective. Unfortunately, I sat through three hours at a Loews in Freehold where the projectionist must have cataracts. Even after audience complaints, the film was NEVER in focus. It looked sharper when I took my glasses OFF.
 

---

Posted by Don Cross (Member # 2980) on 02-06-2005, 12:54 AM:
 
More strange but true stories abour Howard Hughes:

Was actually working on almost a daily basis with the military up until a few weeks before he passed away. He had interesting contributions in designs of many military and civilian planes not mentioned in the movie such as- the U-2, SR-71 and others. He also worked on a regular basis for NASA; even before it was officially given the name NASA.

Has anyone ever heard that he may have fathered two children?

That he got to work on several occasions with Albert Einstein.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-11-2005, 02:03 PM:
 
Excellent print and presentation at Loews Cineplex 34th Street (Screen #9) in NYC last night, but the trailers/ads that were analog sound had noticeable wow and flutter (warble). Staff was too busy afterward to contact about the problem. Fortunately, the digital sound was fine.

[spoiler]

Movie was very well done, rating a 4 out of 5 from me. Some have criticized Cate Blanchett's role as Hepburn, but I thought it was very much in character. The only part that dragged for me was near the end when HH is naked in the screening room. Yet the congressional testimony right after was a highlight.
 

---

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 02-12-2005, 06:07 PM:
 
The last I heard, the "Glomar Explorer" was docked in San Jose, CA. It was pointed out to me, as it was clearly visable from the freeway. Anyhow, from my memory, it almost looked like a rusting hulk.

Cheers

K
 

---

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 02-13-2005, 04:30 AM:
 
Liked the movie. Could have done without the way too movie-ish scene with Hughes and his mom bathing him. Ridiculous reading into a past incident that probably did not take place.

Other than that, Leo was good, Cate was better. Alda and Baldwin were pretty good as we would expect. Didnt care for Kate Beckinsdale as Ava Gardner. The one weakness with the movie was the Hughes-Gardner relationship. I never got the sense why Gardner liked Hughes by watching the movie.

Scorsese did a good job though I get the feeling he is mellowing out as he ages.

Robert Richardson met the challenge of different looks, and for him I guess the nomination in this movie makes up for his Kill Bill snub.

Michael, i understand why they ended the movie abruptly. There is really no where else for the story to go after that point.
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 02-13-2005, 06:12 AM:
 
Would the rest of his life not have been interesting enough?
 

---

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 02-13-2005, 02:18 PM:
 
I didn't mean there was nothing interesting in his life after that point. But the story arc comes to a natural conclusion at that point. Unless you want to see more episodes of Hughes in his isolated state.
 

---

Posted by Don Cross (Member # 2980) on 02-14-2005, 01:02 AM:
 
Sorry, but I must disagree based upon historical facts.

They almost could have made a trilogy based on the life of Howard Hughes- and it all would have been just as interesting (if not much more so) than the original release.
 

---