User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 410 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 36 out of 410
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 23, 2015
    10
    A spectacular film that goes into great detail about the life of Howard Hughes, the ultimate aviator. The costumes are great, the sets are great, the cast is great, and the acting is top-notch. This movie is near-perfect in every way. 10/10 (Masterpiece)
  2. Aug 25, 2014
    8
    The great detail and enormity of The Aviator is astonishing. Leonardo DiCaprio's portrayal of the billionaire and mad-man is unmatched. Martin Scorsese will instantly engage you, and you'll remember this one.
  3. Aug 24, 2014
    10
    Simply fascinating I bought this movie a few weeks ago and never got around to watching it I don't know why I waited so long this film is a masterpiece on its own right Leonardo DiCaprio has always managed to create a completely different and unique character each time he puts on a performance and it is never disappointing is always a spectacular show with beyond perfect execution oSimply fascinating I bought this movie a few weeks ago and never got around to watching it I don't know why I waited so long this film is a masterpiece on its own right Leonardo DiCaprio has always managed to create a completely different and unique character each time he puts on a performance and it is never disappointing is always a spectacular show with beyond perfect execution o haven't seen all of his films but kits been this way every single time and he did that with this film right here and every other character in this film was interesting and none of them felt like throw away characters they all had there place but they weren't the focus and shouldn't be the main character Howard Hughes was and is one of the best played characters to date it was amazing to watch his life played out in this movie and it was genuinely grieving to see how he lived with his fears and mentality I would recommend for anyone given the chance to see this movie. Expand
  4. Jul 11, 2014
    8
    This undoubtedly a very good film. Leonardo DiCaprio is phenomenal in the lead role and really embodies Howard Hughes. Throughout, it barely felt like acting, rather it felt like I was watching Howard Hughes in a documentary, which is truly amazing. John C. Reilly, Cate Blanchett, and Alan Alda also really stood out in what was a very large and talented cast for this one. Martin Scorsese'sThis undoubtedly a very good film. Leonardo DiCaprio is phenomenal in the lead role and really embodies Howard Hughes. Throughout, it barely felt like acting, rather it felt like I was watching Howard Hughes in a documentary, which is truly amazing. John C. Reilly, Cate Blanchett, and Alan Alda also really stood out in what was a very large and talented cast for this one. Martin Scorsese's direction is also fantastic as usual. Thanks to his direction, we get a very clear picture of what was a very troubled genius due to the great storytelling. Also thanks to his direction, the almost three hour run time feels more like an hour. The cinematography is also something to behold here, as the entire film is really beautifully put together. Sometimes with Scorsese, though I love his films, I can feel that little bit, "Well I liked that, but I thought it would be better," but here, there was no such feeling as this really lived up to the hype for me and more and really stands tall as a great biopic of one of the brightest men in recent times. Expand
  5. May 18, 2014
    8
    This is one of Scorsese and DiCaprio's most underrated, DiCaprio is just so astonishing as Howard Hughes in a well studied portrayal, Cate Blanchett like always gives an amazing performance as Katharine Hepburn. Do not care about its 170 min length it's very good
  6. Feb 21, 2014
    8
    Great story, great actors, great director. Not much anything else to say except that the movie is pretty long, if you have no problems with that, go watch it!
  7. Feb 12, 2014
    9
    Really amazing interpretation by Di Caprio and the cast. Considering Hughes was a really complex character considering his severe OCD (possibly better detail than Nicholson in As Good as it Gets). The film itself is a little bit slow in some parts but overall really good quality
  8. Feb 11, 2014
    10
    Perhaps one of the more underrated films of Scorsese, The Aviator is an exhilarating look at the aviation pioneer with DiCaprio filling in his shoes with never seen before intensity and some grand set design.
  9. Jan 7, 2014
    8
    Scorsese matém uma boa forma depois de Gangues de Nova York, O Aviador sem sombras de dúvida se mostrou ser um bom filme, porém não um dos melhores mais está entre.
  10. Nov 13, 2013
    7
    The Aviator flies.
    With the duo of Scorsese and Di-caprio, The Aviator takes a solid script and brings it to life. Amazing performances and a well paced story makes it take-off.
  11. Nov 12, 2013
    10
    Howard Hughes had a dream for the future, and put everything he had on the line to build it. Scorsese has brought his dream to life, flaws, foibles, failures, and all in a stunningly dramatic masterwork. This is Scorsese at his most breathtaking and cinema at its best.
  12. Sep 22, 2013
    7
    Although a little long, Aviator is an okay attempt at what Scorcese sought out to do. The movie is very slow at times, but nevertheless a powerful film. The performances are there, and DiCaprio as Howard Hughes is mesmerizingly good.
  13. Jun 8, 2013
    8
    Cate Blanchett is stunning and the cinematography is gorgeous. I strongly dislike Leonardo DiCaprio, though he's okay here; I think he's a highly overrated actor and so I find most of his performances incredibly annoying. With that in mind, I really liked him in The Aviator. This is his movie and he carries the film well. He works well with Scorsese and this film is proof of that.
  14. Nov 7, 2012
    8
    The Aviator contains moments of greatness. It also contains some boring stretches, but make no mistake, the greatness is not overshadowed. Some key scenes in this film make it unmissable.
  15. Sep 2, 2012
    4
    The Aviator is a very boring film that is stretched to the end in too many parts. Leo is not at his best when he puts on a phony accent, in which i can't take him seriously. The art direction was nice though.
  16. Jul 8, 2012
    10
    The way the story fit together was magnificent, the way how every intricate detail contributed to the story was amazing. A great movie I would recommend to anyone who likes this sort of movie.
  17. Apr 6, 2012
    9
    What a movie! Engaging, interesting, refreshing, witty! A movie with different hues! It was long, but never boring. Di Caprio's performance was excellent! I can't find real flaws here...yet it is not a 10...but close! I would love to see more historical-even if not very accurate- movies that are delightful as to me, this was.
  18. Jul 4, 2011
    9
    Leonardo DiCaprio deserved an Oscar for this movie. his performance was excellent. this is one of my favorite movies by him and Scorsese. it was genius. the acting was great. and the storyline was once again good. near perfect movie.
  19. Jan 18, 2011
    6
    I am not quite sure why this film didn't resonate with me. Technically perfect, amazing sets and costumes, great cast, but it just wasn't what everyone told me it would be. I guess I was waiting for that POW to knock me off my feet and it never came around. I really don't have any complaints about this movie (other than it was pretty long) just that it didn't really catch my attention. II am not quite sure why this film didn't resonate with me. Technically perfect, amazing sets and costumes, great cast, but it just wasn't what everyone told me it would be. I guess I was waiting for that POW to knock me off my feet and it never came around. I really don't have any complaints about this movie (other than it was pretty long) just that it didn't really catch my attention. I will say however Leonardo DiCaprio's performance was Oscar worthy, not sure why he is overlooked by some. Though The Aviator didn't really do much for me that shouldn't turn anyone off from seeing it as I am sure others will be much more impressed than I. Expand
  20. JeremyE.
    Feb 22, 2009
    6
    It really pains me to write this review because this movie had soooo much potential. The acting by dicaprio and blanchett was PERFECT. They portrayed their characters so well. Another bright spot was the sound and cinematography. Everything about this film looked and sounded phenomenal. However, all of that goes down the drain because the plot is terrible. It's scattered, jumping It really pains me to write this review because this movie had soooo much potential. The acting by dicaprio and blanchett was PERFECT. They portrayed their characters so well. Another bright spot was the sound and cinematography. Everything about this film looked and sounded phenomenal. However, all of that goes down the drain because the plot is terrible. It's scattered, jumping from one thing to the other all the time and it doesn't really go anywhere. There's not really a story, more like a series of events. and the movie lasts about 40 minutes longer than it should. it's really sad because this could have turned out great but it sucked Expand
  21. masoudm.
    Nov 12, 2008
    7
    I agree with those who say dicaprio was not the best choice for playing howard hughes' role, but this doesn't mean he is a bad actor.I have seen people with these kinds of mental diseas (i guess it was germ phobia ), and he depicted it so well that you thought he was suffering from it right in front of your eyes. But the problem is leo's face. He still looks like a teenager I agree with those who say dicaprio was not the best choice for playing howard hughes' role, but this doesn't mean he is a bad actor.I have seen people with these kinds of mental diseas (i guess it was germ phobia ), and he depicted it so well that you thought he was suffering from it right in front of your eyes. But the problem is leo's face. He still looks like a teenager and when he plays a grown up person's role you just can't accept it. But as always martin scorsese's direction was awesome and although the movies runtime is nearly 3 hours but you never get bored. The other actors also were good, specially alec baldwin. I have seen it 3 or 4 times and I'm going to watch it in the future. Expand
  22. GigiM.
    Apr 24, 2008
    3
    It looks great, but that's it. Tedious and overrated. DiCaprio is horribly miscast; his Howard Hughes comes off like an arrogant teenager. Cate Blanchett, always good, reaffirmed my dislike of Katherine Hepburn. Not worth the time investment. Watch "GoodFellas" again instead to see what Scorsese is capable of.
  23. JasonB.
    Jun 30, 2007
    0
    I'm here to expose the good people at netflix as a bunch of charlatans, for the movie I saw last night delivered by these good people apparently bore no resemblance whatsoever to the film the above and below appeared to be gushing over. The film netfix sent to me was a meandering, overwrought pile of self-indulgent arse. How can a film made about an airplane test pilot millionaire I'm here to expose the good people at netflix as a bunch of charlatans, for the movie I saw last night delivered by these good people apparently bore no resemblance whatsoever to the film the above and below appeared to be gushing over. The film netfix sent to me was a meandering, overwrought pile of self-indulgent arse. How can a film made about an airplane test pilot millionaire who slept with most of the best looking people in Hollywood turn out to be so dull? This my friends is a truly mystifying. I guess part of the blame must be leveled on that dufus Decraprio, I Expand
  24. ChadS.
    May 11, 2007
    8
    A LLLLOOONNNGGG movie, and it manages to keep your attention the entire way. Leonardo and the rest of the cast do a great job, and Scorsese's directing is unmatched, other than Spielsberg. The story, character development, and overall film is top notch. I would recommend this to anyone interested.
  25. BlakeJ.
    Mar 11, 2007
    7
    Not Scorsese's best, but "good" nonetheless. Leo is a wonder. Cate IS Katharine. A biopic in every sense of the word. Not for the simple minded or children, that much I can safely say.
  26. PlixikW.
    Jul 13, 2006
    10
    amazing movie. awesome directing by scorsese and awesome acting by dicaprio.
  27. PeterB.
    Feb 23, 2006
    9
    This movie was very well-done and well-casted. Dicaprio was perfect as the eccentric, brilliant, odd-ball, Howard Hughes. Parts of the movie were positively creepy, and other scenes were very humorous. Overall a very effective movie.
  28. FrankO.
    Jan 28, 2006
    7
    Better than I expected, great special effects, DiCaptrio was excellent thanks to direction of Sorcese; Blanchett was over the top as Katherine Hepburn, too much of a caricuture..long but plot kept moving...
  29. annonymous
    Jan 6, 2006
    10
    Great movie slow in some parks but it was so good All of you who gave it a 0 2 or 3 have no life!!!!!
  30. michaelb.
    Nov 27, 2005
    2
    Terrible movie. Horribly edited. Casting DiCrapio for this part was a wrong decission, he looks too young, too clueless. The only redeeming quality of the whole film is the actress that plays Katherine Hepburn. That's a phenomenal rendering of her. That I enjoyed. Otherwise I would wish I had never seen it at all.
  31. mygga.
    Aug 19, 2005
    0
    Flatliner.
  32. IlzeS.
    Aug 6, 2005
    1
    Movie was a big disappointment to me. So boring, and Di Caprio also was stupid. I like his movies, especially Titanic, but this was dumb. Yeah, its better than Million Dollar Baby,but make no sense. Hughes was ill. There is nothing more to say about this movie.
  33. DaveF
    Jul 21, 2005
    9
    Fascinating, engrossing and original. I feared it would be another empty, stiff, Oscar-fodder biopic. It is in fact a scathingly real movie, a deeply personal account of a brilliant and tormented engineer, playboy, producer, and OCD sufferer. Don't get me wrong, the movie is formal in tone and lush with period detail--but this extravagance empowers the movie instead of overpowering Fascinating, engrossing and original. I feared it would be another empty, stiff, Oscar-fodder biopic. It is in fact a scathingly real movie, a deeply personal account of a brilliant and tormented engineer, playboy, producer, and OCD sufferer. Don't get me wrong, the movie is formal in tone and lush with period detail--but this extravagance empowers the movie instead of overpowering it. The pivotal crash scene was particularly fantastic. Aviator is not unlike the Spruce Goose--with such long, lumbering, big-budget bulk who would've thought it could fly? Expand
  34. NickiC.
    Jul 16, 2005
    5
    Long-winded and not that interesting. was very disappointed after all the big reviews.
  35. Shayla
    Jul 1, 2005
    9
    Very interesting look at the life of the famous Howard Hughes. This movie was well cast. The actors did a fabulous job, Scorsese was brilliant, and the costumes did the piece proud. This was a great movie.
  36. Tonydannie
    Jun 18, 2005
    10
    The Best movie of the year it was released! Scorsese Has once again created a masterpiece. Although it is nearly three hours long, the time just flew.I was taken with all the performences! Everytime Lonardo DeCaprio And Allan Alda were on screen together I was blown away! this guys looked like they truly hated each other. The visuals are breathtaking and The Dialogue is proper for the The Best movie of the year it was released! Scorsese Has once again created a masterpiece. Although it is nearly three hours long, the time just flew.I was taken with all the performences! Everytime Lonardo DeCaprio And Allan Alda were on screen together I was blown away! this guys looked like they truly hated each other. The visuals are breathtaking and The Dialogue is proper for the time it was depicting. Howard Shores music is simple yet brilliant. There is one flaw and thats the editing. How it got the Oscar for editing is beyond me. But thats one flaw i can overlook. Expand
  37. Chrystal
    Jun 15, 2005
    7
    The movie was great at first then it got kind of boring. Leonardo DiCaprio was the only thing that kept me watching. Great effects and overall I think it was good but not great.
  38. [Anonymous]
    Jun 13, 2005
    0
    A hollow shell of a movie. Lacks any insight into Hughes aside from his illness.
  39. gregj.
    Jun 9, 2005
    9
    I wish US audiences weren't so quick to discount any film over 2 hours that even slightly deviates from the cookie cutter crap that Hollywood churns out. Granted, this film is far from perfect but it is extremely well acted/directed and deserves a second viewing because it does contain much to ponder. Good job, Marty. Loved it!
  40. AlyE.
    Jun 7, 2005
    0
    Bad. Bad. Bad. Overrated. Overdone. Over-dramatic. I wasn't impressed with DiCaprio, and certianly not with Blanchett. She over-acted Hepburn to the point where I hated everything that came out of her mouth. There was ZERO chemistry between DiCaprio and Blanchett (God, I hope it was better for Hughes and Hepburn). Whoever said it looked like he was with his mom was right on point. I Bad. Bad. Bad. Overrated. Overdone. Over-dramatic. I wasn't impressed with DiCaprio, and certianly not with Blanchett. She over-acted Hepburn to the point where I hated everything that came out of her mouth. There was ZERO chemistry between DiCaprio and Blanchett (God, I hope it was better for Hughes and Hepburn). Whoever said it looked like he was with his mom was right on point. I especially hated the way Scorcese tried to explain Hughes' compulsive disorder. What did it have to do with "the coloreds"???? I'm sure Hughes' life was much better than this movie depicts. Another Hollywood mistake... Too long. Too boring. A complete waste of time. Expand
  41. JohnC.
    Jun 5, 2005
    9
    Cate Blanchett blew me away. DiCaprio and, surprise, Alan Alda were excellent. Fascinating.
  42. Mik
    Jun 4, 2005
    7
    Overlong, underwritten by the overrated John Logan, and possessing a screenplay that is practically snakebitten by cliches and bland dialogue. Call it Martin's miracle, because he and his crew elevate the flat, disorganized script to high art through kinetic camerawork and wonderful editing. The film is literally carried by a brilliant performance by DiCaprio, as well as great Overlong, underwritten by the overrated John Logan, and possessing a screenplay that is practically snakebitten by cliches and bland dialogue. Call it Martin's miracle, because he and his crew elevate the flat, disorganized script to high art through kinetic camerawork and wonderful editing. The film is literally carried by a brilliant performance by DiCaprio, as well as great supporting performances from Alan Alda and a limited Alec Baldwin. Cate and Kate both offer interesting but ultimately one-dimensional supporting performances. Expand
  43. richardc.
    Jun 4, 2005
    1
    Only watch this film if you don't have anything more exciting to do; like watching paint dry. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
  44. SalmanH.
    Jun 1, 2005
    10
    Very entertaining movie, caprio at its best.
  45. PaulS.
    May 27, 2005
    5
    Very slow and not really exiting... Great acting, but very boring writing.
  46. TonyB.
    May 25, 2005
    6
    This was far too long for its own good and certainly not worth all the hype it received, but thanks to some fine acting, excellent cinematography, generally good editing and a great production design, it was well worth the price of admission. However, I couldn't for a minute accept Leonardo DeCaprio as Howard Hughes. He's a good actor when he is not out of his depth as he was here.
  47. CharlesR.
    May 23, 2005
    10
    Terrifickly enterntaining, Leo and Cate are wonderful.
  48. AliciaM.
    May 23, 2005
    10
    Great performance by Dicaprio.
  49. GarethC.
    May 22, 2005
    9
    Very good biopic. Informative and entertaining at the same time. Some great performances from great actors. Wasn't sure that Leonardo had the capacity to pull this one off, but he was outstanding. A very mature performance. You've got to see this one. It's very long, but worth the time!
  50. JoseH.
    May 13, 2005
    8
    This film has a great story in its center. The actor's were fantastic specially Cate Blanchett and the directing was fabulous. I really liked the crash scene because it was really well made. The cinematography was excelent and the costumes were good. The negative things of the movie were: The art direction because the colors were not well combined. Example: The green was bue at the This film has a great story in its center. The actor's were fantastic specially Cate Blanchett and the directing was fabulous. I really liked the crash scene because it was really well made. The cinematography was excelent and the costumes were good. The negative things of the movie were: The art direction because the colors were not well combined. Example: The green was bue at the beginning. The film editing was horrible. Let me demonstrate: The title writing war horrible the film was to long and there were parts that I got bored. The makeup was really bad also because I could see that Dicaprio had lipstick and Dicaprio never got older. He looked like a child. But, the best thing of the film was the sound having great music and great sound effects. Expand
  51. ChrisR.
    May 7, 2005
    8
    The Aviator stars Leonardo DiCaprio as the eccentric Howard Hughes. The film focuses primarily on a 20 year span in Hughes' life (from approximately 1927 to approximately 1947), displaying his knack for coming up with ideas for "the wave of the future" in the aviation and motion picture industries while illustrating his obsessive/compulsive behavior and fanaticism for cleanliness. He The Aviator stars Leonardo DiCaprio as the eccentric Howard Hughes. The film focuses primarily on a 20 year span in Hughes' life (from approximately 1927 to approximately 1947), displaying his knack for coming up with ideas for "the wave of the future" in the aviation and motion picture industries while illustrating his obsessive/compulsive behavior and fanaticism for cleanliness. He was both a genius and self-absorbed/self-destructive fool. DiCaprio does a fine job portraying Hughes. The film is nearly 3 hours long but I was entertained the whole time and at no time did the movie seem to drag. Indeed, the airplane crashes were quite exhilarating. I give it a 8.65. Expand
  52. BraulioS.
    Apr 29, 2005
    10
    The Film is E-X-C-E-L-L-E-N-T !!! The Best! Just Thi film is PERFECT!!
  53. ChrisQ
    Apr 24, 2005
    8
    This movie managed to capture Howard Hughes most admirably, The acting was impressive and the graphics were ( as expected of Scorsese) spectacular. Despite this it was slightly too long.
  54. TylerN.
    Apr 16, 2005
    3
    A very lackluster film. Once again the critics went for the artsy yet boring movie. It was very choppy and has little in the lines of character developement. In the aftermath, you are left wondering why the hell anyone would give a damn about the main character. Well acted, but dull. Plain and simple. Oh, and its al little too long also.
  55. MattM
    Mar 22, 2005
    7
    Scorsese delivers a visually sumptuous if occasionally flat biopic carried along by a brilliant Leonardo DiCaprio as Howard Hughes. Cate Blanchett is exquisite in her richly deserved Oscar-winning portrayal of Katharine Hepburn, and the rest of the cast (save for a dreadfully bland Kate Beckinsale as Ava Gardner) is in top form. Lengthy and inflated at times, the film is still vastly Scorsese delivers a visually sumptuous if occasionally flat biopic carried along by a brilliant Leonardo DiCaprio as Howard Hughes. Cate Blanchett is exquisite in her richly deserved Oscar-winning portrayal of Katharine Hepburn, and the rest of the cast (save for a dreadfully bland Kate Beckinsale as Ava Gardner) is in top form. Lengthy and inflated at times, the film is still vastly entertaining on a whole, if somewhat overrated. Expand
  56. JohnnyW
    Mar 21, 2005
    9
    Very good. Very well acted, keeps you interested, and I heartily disagree with the people who said it was boring. Yes, it was quite long, but it kept me interested, so who cares? Not quite on the level of Million Dollar Baby, so I am glad that it didn't win Best Picture. Still a fantastic movie though.
  57. Nwa4life
    Mar 19, 2005
    10
    This is the best of 2004 and robbed of BP and BD.
  58. JonathanS.
    Mar 19, 2005
    5
    Good solid acting by all players, some fantastic "cameo" roles by well-known faces, and extraordinairy visuals work. The problem? The movie was boring and drawn-out as heck. Fell asleep twice and couldn't give a darn about the characters or the story for that matter one way or another.
  59. DevinB.
    Mar 16, 2005
    10
    Extraordinarily entertaining. I generally am not a huge fan of Leonardo DiCaprio's work, but he's in top form here, his acting is magnificent in all ways. One totally buys his descent into madness, so much so that I shrank in my seat from being so disturbed at the portrayal. Martin Scorcese is, as usual, a genius. The use of color and movement is wildly creative throughout, and Extraordinarily entertaining. I generally am not a huge fan of Leonardo DiCaprio's work, but he's in top form here, his acting is magnificent in all ways. One totally buys his descent into madness, so much so that I shrank in my seat from being so disturbed at the portrayal. Martin Scorcese is, as usual, a genius. The use of color and movement is wildly creative throughout, and there's not a dull moment in the film. I'm absolutely baffled by those claiming the film was "boring." I was enraptured from minute one to the very end, I mourn that the American attention span has dipped so low. Expand
  60. Chris
    Mar 5, 2005
    1
    Martin scorsesi is so over rated.
  61. ClareD.
    Feb 21, 2005
    2
    Boring. with a capital B. i thought it tried way too hard in terms of video effects, like in the golf scene with howard and katharine, among others. acting was okay, it didnt work to keep me interested, very tempted to walk out, and to top it off, the movie was so long i missed my train and couldnt get home!
  62. BayC.
    Feb 21, 2005
    4
    Boring & couldn't wait for it to be over. Di caprio needs to spend a buck two fifty for a voice coach. otherwise, he'll always be a pipsqueak.
  63. MrDrew
    Feb 21, 2005
    3
    I walked out, don't go unless you need a nap. Poorly directed sums up most of it, leaves you lost between the jumps of different women and him washing his hands. DiCaprio is horrible, unbelieveable in this role and has crooked teeth which is one of the few things I came away with. I left after the 2nd plane crash which was so overdone it was laughable. This is not a good movie, not I walked out, don't go unless you need a nap. Poorly directed sums up most of it, leaves you lost between the jumps of different women and him washing his hands. DiCaprio is horrible, unbelieveable in this role and has crooked teeth which is one of the few things I came away with. I left after the 2nd plane crash which was so overdone it was laughable. This is not a good movie, not even an average movie, if it gets best picture, 2004 will be a dark year for the Oscars. Don't see it. Expand
  64. FabienF.
    Feb 21, 2005
    10
    Most entertaining hollywood movie i have seen in a long time! DiCaprio has captured the spirit of Hughes, shame it only covered a relatively short period of his life ... marty, how about The Avaitor II?
  65. CaptainCraig
    Feb 18, 2005
    9
    A masterful work by all concerned. DeCaprio may have been just a bit young for the part, but as usual, turned in a great performance. Left me wanting more!
  66. Catherine
    Feb 17, 2005
    6
    I'm sorry, but what a snooze. The first interesting thing happens two hours into the film, when he crashes into the Wilshire Country Club. Didn't know that happened and it was gorgeously and imaginatively shot. The rest was boring, boring, boring.
  67. TyS
    Feb 16, 2005
    3
    A gigantic over pompous mess covering a overtly boring subject matter. Not Academy material at all.
  68. JulieC
    Feb 14, 2005
    8
    This movie is for Martin Scorsese addicts and film snobs. The film may have successfully recreated the obsessive-compulsive world of Howard Hughes with an epic story of sex and power, but it will leave most audiences edgy and bored after nearly three hours of slow progression. Leonardo DiCaprio is faultless as the neurotic, breast-obsessed Hughes, making audiences laugh and cry, although This movie is for Martin Scorsese addicts and film snobs. The film may have successfully recreated the obsessive-compulsive world of Howard Hughes with an epic story of sex and power, but it will leave most audiences edgy and bored after nearly three hours of slow progression. Leonardo DiCaprio is faultless as the neurotic, breast-obsessed Hughes, making audiences laugh and cry, although nervously. Although the film is elegant and visually gratifying, it is too bad Scorsese did not cut an hour off the film. Expand
  69. ok
    Feb 12, 2005
    10
    As another poster said, I don't understand how anyone could give this movie less than a seven. This is easily one of the best movies I've seen all year--but I admit to having a thing for epic characters studies. Fantastic direction, fantastic acting--I thought it ended too SOON if anything.
  70. Tim
    Feb 11, 2005
    7
    It's gloriously entertaining, but at the same time, it kind of just exists. There's no central theme to hold it all together, and it suffers as a result.
  71. KarenW.
    Feb 10, 2005
    5
    Another darling of the critics that's way overrated. Its OK, many scenes are just way too long. DiCapprio is inadequate. Cate Blanchet's Katherine Hepburn is the best thing about the movie. The movie taught you facts about Howard Hughes, but it makes no emotional connection with the audience what so ever.
  72. Dublin
    Feb 10, 2005
    4
    Boring and drawn out ad nauseum. Not worthy of so many nominations.
  73. Chuck
    Feb 8, 2005
    0
    Embarrasingly bad mess. What is the Academy and the critics smoking?
  74. MarioS.
    Feb 4, 2005
    9
    The remaining star I kept for myself because I felt the ending somewhat ... incomplete. A Great movie!
  75. MadeleneS.
    Feb 4, 2005
    10
    Great movie! Enjoyed every minute of it!
  76. Jensen
    Feb 3, 2005
    9
    Fantastic movie, well shot, well acted, and fun to watch. I honestly have trouble understanding how someone could give this less than a 7. If you have the attention span of, say, a 5 year old the movie may not be for you. If you're interested in a well done film that has much to offer, check out The Aviator. It deserves the nominations it recieved.
  77. tosh&vera
    Feb 3, 2005
    4
    Oh God! this was the longest movie ever! What was it? five hours or what? the music was driving us crazy all the time and the whole sound effects were just terrible!The aviation stunts were fine and the acting was good, especially Dicaprio's and this are the only reasons we give 4 points. don't really understand how it desrved 11 nominations for the Oscars....
  78. M.A.Moran
    Feb 2, 2005
    8
    Leonardo DiCaprio is so amazing in the role, I wonder how he played the part so well without actually losing his mind. The film totally humanizes Howard Hughes and tells a compelling story. Kudos to Scorsese, Alda and Blanchett as well.
  79. BrianB
    Feb 1, 2005
    1
    Overhyped Hollywood junk. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Leonardo DiCaprio playing Howard Hughes. Kate Blanchett's attempt at portraying Katherine Hepburn is too forced and fails to capture any of Hepburn's warmth and grace. They are both utterly unconvincing. This film is the opposite of Hotel Rwanda; the Academy should be ashamed of giving such cudos to this self-absorbed exercise in Overhyped Hollywood junk. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Leonardo DiCaprio playing Howard Hughes. Kate Blanchett's attempt at portraying Katherine Hepburn is too forced and fails to capture any of Hepburn's warmth and grace. They are both utterly unconvincing. This film is the opposite of Hotel Rwanda; the Academy should be ashamed of giving such cudos to this self-absorbed exercise in Vegas-style impersonation while largely overlooking an important, powerful, and well-crafted movie like Rwanda. Finally, Scorcese throws everything but the kitchen sink at us; effects should be used for effect. Too much budget to work with perhaps? Take my advice: don't bother with this one! Expand
  80. Susan
    Feb 1, 2005
    9
    Really great movie. It has its flaws, but they are indeed very minor. As for the length of the film, I can only say that the three hours "flew" by.
  81. SusanM.
    Jan 31, 2005
    9
    I am surprised to see what low ratings this movie is getting...I really, really enjoyed it, I thought it was very engaging and the acting was just terrific! It's a long movie but I didn't even notice. I say go see it!
  82. ClintM
    Jan 31, 2005
    7
    First, I think the hype around this movie was, in a small amount, overrated. I, personally, thought Finding Neverland was a better film. With that said though, The Aviator was a good movie with even better acting by the nominated cast: Alan Alda was very effective in his part (though I don't see how he snagged that nod for such a small role?), Cate Blanchett was wonderful as always. First, I think the hype around this movie was, in a small amount, overrated. I, personally, thought Finding Neverland was a better film. With that said though, The Aviator was a good movie with even better acting by the nominated cast: Alan Alda was very effective in his part (though I don't see how he snagged that nod for such a small role?), Cate Blanchett was wonderful as always. She's so elegant and poised and she brings much needed charisma and charm to her role as Katherine Hepburn; well deserving of her nomination. And then there's Leo, who is also very deserving of his nomination as the tortured Howard Hughes. Down to the tiniest detail of paranoia, Leo hits it spot on. Though it's a little longer than it needs to be, you'll easily get wrapped up in the fear of living, the glitz of Hollywood, and the joy of flying! A solid 7. Expand
  83. JSSmith
    Jan 30, 2005
    1
    Perhaps this film should get, say, a 3 for gorgeous photography, sets, costumes, etc., and one good airplane crash sequence. But I'm giving it a 1 to try to convey how bad it is. Completely lacking in conflict, filled with the kind of awful impersonations that are, really, one step from "Saturday Night Live," and devoid of any personal meaning except an ambition to knock off "Citizen Perhaps this film should get, say, a 3 for gorgeous photography, sets, costumes, etc., and one good airplane crash sequence. But I'm giving it a 1 to try to convey how bad it is. Completely lacking in conflict, filled with the kind of awful impersonations that are, really, one step from "Saturday Night Live," and devoid of any personal meaning except an ambition to knock off "Citizen Kane" and "Titanic" so that Scorese, too, can win an Oscar, this film is really boring. As Manny Farber, once characterized such films, this is really "white elephant cinema." Most critics are just too chicken to call out Scorses for his recent trilogy of badness. By contrast, as Scorsese grows worse and worse, Eastwood gets better and better. See Million Dollar Baby instead! Or if you've really got a Hughes thing, go dig up Tommy Lee Jones in "The Amazing Howard Hughes," directed by William A. Graham. That one on 1/50th the budget was twice as good. Expand
  84. ASadler
    Jan 29, 2005
    7
    Extremely fun to watch but hard to understand why Alan Alda (doing his Hawkeye best) is called out for best supporting actor. Cate Blanchett steals every scene.
  85. Jesse
    Jan 29, 2005
    2
    Don't understand the hype? All of those nominations and there is absolutely nothing in this flick to capture the imagination. Way too long and self absorbing. Awful.
  86. Bob
    Jan 28, 2005
    5
    Fair and dragged in spots. Nothing to write home about. Soon forgotten as soon as you leave the theater. Can't believe all of the nominations.
  87. Jason
    Jan 28, 2005
    3
    Totally not worth seeing. one of the longest unengaging movies ever created. yes it did have good direction but the story and pace is extremely slow and non existent. i should have seen assult on precient 13 instead because they tried to show just as much action and suspense in this movie as precient, but the aviator sucked way harder!!! don't listen to the people who said it'sTotally not worth seeing. one of the longest unengaging movies ever created. yes it did have good direction but the story and pace is extremely slow and non existent. i should have seen assult on precient 13 instead because they tried to show just as much action and suspense in this movie as precient, but the aviator sucked way harder!!! don't listen to the people who said it's good, they must have thought alone in the dark and house of the dead were good too. Expand
  88. RP
    Jan 27, 2005
    5
    This is an average Hollywood big budget movie. Why all the nominations? I don't get it. Story doesn't engage. Scorsese & DiCaprio have both done better work.
  89. AWelles
    Jan 27, 2005
    6
    Interminably long. Hollywood material was hollow and not believable, most performances overblown caricatures, music way overblown. Aviation aspects were interesting but covered too superficially.
  90. LuisB.
    Jan 26, 2005
    10
    Good film.
  91. DaveV.
    Jan 26, 2005
    10
    Quite simply one of the best films of the year. Scorsese has crafted one of the most enthralling, entertaining films of his career. DiCaprio and Blanchatt are wonderful, as is the rest of the cast. Not to be missed.
  92. NathanS.
    Jan 25, 2005
    7
    The Aviator managed to overcome a less-than-stellar screenplay, an abrupt ending, and a major hole in the amount of details about the subject's life to be a surprisingly good film. DiCaprio impressed me (and this is coming from someone who was rooting for Jack to die during Titanic) with his working of Hughes, and Scorsese pulled off a stunning masterpiece. However, if you're The Aviator managed to overcome a less-than-stellar screenplay, an abrupt ending, and a major hole in the amount of details about the subject's life to be a surprisingly good film. DiCaprio impressed me (and this is coming from someone who was rooting for Jack to die during Titanic) with his working of Hughes, and Scorsese pulled off a stunning masterpiece. However, if you're looking to get a good view of the life of Howard Hughes, this film isn't the place to go. It ends far too early in his life and glosses over far too much of his childhood. But, if you're looking for an entertaining evening, then I'd definitely recommend it. Expand
  93. AndrewK.
    Jan 24, 2005
    8
    A wonderful film. One of Scorcese's greatest in a long time! Very interesting for anyone, like myself, who previously had little knowledge of the life of Howard Hughes. Dicaprio gives one of his greatest performances as well, for the first time appearing to be a man playing a man, instead of a boy playing a man. His nervous ticks were played without flaw. Cate Blanchett also turns in A wonderful film. One of Scorcese's greatest in a long time! Very interesting for anyone, like myself, who previously had little knowledge of the life of Howard Hughes. Dicaprio gives one of his greatest performances as well, for the first time appearing to be a man playing a man, instead of a boy playing a man. His nervous ticks were played without flaw. Cate Blanchett also turns in an amazing performance as Kathryn Hepburn and deserves an Oscar for it if anyone wins anything for this film. But Dicaprio and Scorcese also deserve Oscars for this film and the film probably does too. Not to be missed! Expand
  94. NathanF.
    Jan 24, 2005
    10
    It was a fantastic movie which should have Leo winning an Oscar
  95. loganf.
    Jan 22, 2005
    10
    Great movie, leo should win a oscar.
  96. MarcD
    Jan 22, 2005
    8
    One of Scorses's better recent works. Not a bd flm, but it feels a little draggy. Another three hour long film which really didn't need the extra 15 mins or so.
  97. MarcoC.
    Jan 19, 2005
    8
    Certainly Scorsese's best film since The Age of Innocence (a criminally underated movie by both critics and public alike), The Aviator is thoroughly entertaining. Di Caprio, though slightly too young looking, is suprisingly convincing as Howard Hughes and both Alan Alda and Alec Baldwin offer brilliant performances. The cinematography, production design and music are of the highest Certainly Scorsese's best film since The Age of Innocence (a criminally underated movie by both critics and public alike), The Aviator is thoroughly entertaining. Di Caprio, though slightly too young looking, is suprisingly convincing as Howard Hughes and both Alan Alda and Alec Baldwin offer brilliant performances. The cinematography, production design and music are of the highest order, however it is Scorsese's restless and sweeping direction, from a somewhat shallow screenplay, that makes this film such a thrilling excperience. Expand
  98. LiamS.
    Jan 18, 2005
    6
    This movie lacked a critical ingredient to good filmmaking...an editor, and a credible ending. Neither of these important elements were present in this film. The film meanders along, blissfully unaware of the march of time, and runs aground approximately 20 years before the end of Howard Hughes' life. In fact, the ending of the movie seemed tacked on and completely rushed, like This movie lacked a critical ingredient to good filmmaking...an editor, and a credible ending. Neither of these important elements were present in this film. The film meanders along, blissfully unaware of the march of time, and runs aground approximately 20 years before the end of Howard Hughes' life. In fact, the ending of the movie seemed tacked on and completely rushed, like someone looked at a clock and said: "Oh oh..this movie is now almost 3 hours long..better end it fast!" It is sad that these two elements were so badly handled, since the acting was for the most part brilliant. I think it is entirely appropriate for Leonardo DiCaprio to win best actor for his role, but it would be scandalous if Scorcese won for best picture when there are other gems (Million Dollar Baby, Closer) out there that were far far better movies. However, knowing the Academy, I bet you the Aviator is a shoo-in. Expand
  99. LaurenS.
    Jan 17, 2005
    10
    Great movie. it was gripping the whole time. diCaprio is brilliant!
  100. StanC.
    Jan 17, 2005
    5
    A terrible script is made almost bearable by inspired acting and impressive special effects. Scorcese seems to have lost his bearings. By all accounts Howard Hughes lived an amazing life, but Scorcese's film is cliched, rambling, and bloated. Scorcese used to make films where he seemed to have a personal mission to tell the stories. After The Aviator I found myself wondering "What A terrible script is made almost bearable by inspired acting and impressive special effects. Scorcese seems to have lost his bearings. By all accounts Howard Hughes lived an amazing life, but Scorcese's film is cliched, rambling, and bloated. Scorcese used to make films where he seemed to have a personal mission to tell the stories. After The Aviator I found myself wondering "What was the point of that? You just wasted good acting, a lot of money and 3 hours of my time on a poor story." I wish he would return to directing something worthwhile. Expand
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 41
  2. Negative: 0 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    100
    An enormously entertaining slice of biographical drama, The Aviator flies like one of Howard Hughes' record-setting speed airplanes.
  2. Scorsese has crafted a rip-roaringly gorgeous-looking, beautifully acted biographical epic. But while firing on all cylinders, there's something oddly distancing about the picture.
  3. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    90
    DiCaprio is astonishing.