Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

the aviator

Options
  • 17-01-2005 2:37am
    #1
    chewy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭


    went to see this last night, wasn't expecting that much, but its very good...
    impressive...

    i don't know how people who knew him would consider him but the movie put in in good light apart from going mad at the end....

    leo was good, he didn't age but im glad they didn't do they old age makeup like they usually do...

    i never imagined katherine hepburn as an (annoying) pale redhead????

    has anyone ever watched one of howards movies

    hells angels
    scarface etc

    sometimes it was easy to think this was just a movie and alot of this things didn't happen in real life... eg. a massive plane made from wood? corrupt senators...

    i hope the dvd will have lots of original footage and a docu on the events as they happened


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    trotter_inc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭trotter_inc


    Looking forward to seeing this - probably go some time during the week - not a huge fan of Leonardo though!


  • Options
    #3
    Trip Hazard
    Registered Users Posts: 382 ✭✭Trip Hazard


    It looks pretty good in the trailer, but for months when i first heard about it i just kept thinking it wasnt going to be Scorsese enough for my liking. i mean take any old Scorsese film from the 70s 80s or 90s and look at his last project Gangs of new york, is the aviator Scorsese esc at all.


  • Options
    #4
    trotter_inc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭trotter_inc


    Guy from work here seen it over the weekend and he said it was rubbish - far too long and boring - will still give it a chance though.


  • Options
    #5
    chewy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭chewy


    it was long, proably slightly too long in the second half but I like long films, it was much better then gangs of new york imho


  • Options
    #6
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    hawkeye from MASH (tv series) is in it...thats why i want to see it :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    JoeSchmoe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 463 ✭✭JoeSchmoe


    saw it last night and thought it was very good, certainly more scorcese than gangs of NY, especially the nightclub scenes, thought Dicaprio was very good in it. reccomended


  • Options
    #8
    Ajos
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭Ajos


    JoeSchmoe wrote:
    saw it last night and thought it was very good, certainly more scorcese than gangs of NY, especially the nightclub scenes, thought Dicaprio was very good in it. reccomended

    I liked it, but I have to disagree with you about it being more Scorsese. It's more polished, better made, and less compromised than Gangs of New York, but Gangs is much more of a Scorsese film (albeit a flawed one). Aviator is brilliantly directed, but it doesn't have the depth and breadth and ambition of Gangs. Scorsese for hire.

    Still better than pretty much anybody else!


  • Options
    #9
    D!ve^Bomb!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,089 ✭✭✭D!ve^Bomb!


    chewy wrote:
    apart from going mad at the end....

    i don't care if this doesn't even mean anything in the movie, i still didn't want to know it untill i goe see the thing!!!

    Please use spoilers in future!


  • Options
    #10
    Ajos
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭Ajos


    Is that a spoiler? That's like letting slip that the Titanic sinks!


  • Options
    #11
    D!ve^Bomb!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,089 ✭✭✭D!ve^Bomb!


    Well AS I SAID, i don't care if it is or not, i still didn't want to know it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    saw aviator....loved it...Amazing film.

    i'd agree elements of scorsese's other works are missing, such as the city itself being a *character* in his films. but they are very minor i felt. (argueble according to housemate)

    It is more of a scorsese film then Gangs of New york i felt.
    compared to his other big works (Raging bull, goodfellas and casino) I felt it was similar in structure (Focused on one characters life over a large time span) Unlike G.O.N.Y which focused over the events of a few months.


  • Options
    #13
    Ajos
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭Ajos


    No, I see Gangs as much more Scorsese. It deals with the effect of violence in a group, or on an individual. Aviator doesn't. Taxi Driver takes place over a short span of time, as does Mean Streets, and even Bringing Out The Dead.


  • Options
    #14
    chewy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭chewy


    its a biopic, ok so you probably don't know much about Howard Huges but the few things i did know was that he was a rich playboy who few planes and locked himself in his hotel room at the end of his life, now thats not a spoiler its general knowledge, i better not tell you Ray Charles goes blind in "Ray"

    idiot!

    such as the city itself being a *character* in his films

    how would that fit into the Aviator?

    imho the GONY was a terrrible film


  • Options
    #15
    D!ve^Bomb!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,089 ✭✭✭D!ve^Bomb!


    chewy wrote:
    its a biopic, ok so you probably don't know much about Howard Huges but the few things i did know was that he was a rich playboy who few planes and locked himself in his hotel room at the end of his life, now thats not a spoiler its general knowledge, i better not tell you Ray Charles goes blind in "Ray"

    idiot!

    such as the city itself being a *character* in his films

    how would that fit into the Aviator?

    imho the GONY was a terrrible film
    well to some people it's not general knowledge:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #16
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    chewy wrote:
    such as the city itself being a *character* in his films

    how would that fit into the Aviator?


    read it again i was saying it DIDNT fit into aviator.


  • Options
    #17
    Zounds
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Zounds


    Did anyone else notice that for the first half of the film all of the vegetation was blue? and i don't mean all the greens where blue it was jsut vegetation, green wallpaper still came out green. Can anyone explain why this was or was it just a weird problem with UGC's projector?


  • Options
    #18
    Zounds
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Zounds


    chewy wrote:
    sometimes it was easy to think this was just a movie and alot of this things didn't happen in real life... eg. a massive plane made from wood? corrupt senators...

    http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0400652/bio


  • Options
    #19
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    Zounds wrote:
    Did anyone else notice that for the first half of the film all of the vegetation was blue? and i don't mean all the greens where blue it was jsut vegetation, green wallpaper still came out green. Can anyone explain why this was or was it just a weird problem with UGC's projector?


    on purpose effect to mimic the visual effects of the early films of howard hughes. i have a quote here somewhere on it:

    Scorsese is imitating two strip Multi-color, an early type of color used in a part of Hell's Angel. The idea was to make the film look like an early (1930s) color film.
    Check out this month's issue of American Cinematographer for an interview with DP Robert Richardson. He and Scorsese wanted the first act of the film to emulate the two strip color process (emphasizing the reds and blues UN-naturally) and the middle act to resemble the "Technicolor" three strip color process where green is also emphasized. Remember the glowing green golf course with Hepburn? An interesting goal to say the least.


  • Options
    #20
    lamda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 726 ✭✭✭lamda


    Saw it today and was pleasantly surprised.Im not a big Leo fan either but he was actually really good, Cate Blanchett was great as Hepburn too, really had all her mannerisms down to a t.
    As biopics go at the mo its much better than Ray which I thought was a bit light in the story department.


Advertisement