Amazon.com

From Hollywood's legendary Cocoanut Grove to the pioneering conquest of the wild blue yonder, Martin Scorsese's The Aviator celebrates old-school filmmaking at its finest. We say "old school" only because Scorsese's love of golden-age Hollywood is evident in his approach to his subject--Howard Hughes in his prime (played by Leonardo DiCaprio in his)--and especially in his technical mastery of the medium reflecting his love for classical filmmaking of the studio era. Even when he's using state-of-the-art digital trickery for the film's exciting flight scenes (including one of the most spectacular crashes ever filmed), Scorsese's meticulous attention to art direction and costume design suggests an impassioned pursuit of craftsmanship from a bygone era; every frame seems to glow with gilded detail. And while DiCaprio bears little physical resemblance to Hughes during the film's 20-year span (late 1920s to late '40s), he efficiently captures the eccentric millionaire's golden-boy essence, and his tragic descent into obsessive-compulsive seclusion. Bolstered by Cate Blanchett's uncannily accurate portrayal of Katharine Hepburn as Hughes' most beloved lover, The Aviator is easily Scorsese's most accessible film, inviting mainstream popularity without compromising Scorsese's artistic reputation. As compelling crowd-pleasers go, it's a class act from start to finish. --Jeff Shannon

DVD Features
In his commentary track, director Martin Scorsese offers his own impressions of Howard Hughes and rattles off his memories of experiencing Hughes's films.He mentions how he made Cate Blanchett watch every Katharine Hepburn film from the '30s on the big screen, and observes that Kate Beckinsale had "a real sense of the stature of a Hollywood goddess."But in general he doesn't talk much about the craft of making the film.That area is covered better by editor Thelma Schoonmaker, who also appears on the commentary track, and producer Michael Mann makes a few appearances (all were recorded separately).The picture is brilliant, but the 5.1 sound is not as aggressive in the rear speakers and subwoofer as one might expect, other than some nice surround effects in the Hell's Angels flying sequence.

The second disc collects almost three hours of features.There's one unnecessary deleted scene, and an 11-minute making-of featurette that's basically the cast and director heaping praise on each other.More interesting are the short featurettes on visual effects (including the XF-11 scene, of course), production design, costumes, hair and makeup, and score, and Loudon Wainwright discusses his and his children's musical performances.Historical perspective is provided by spotlights on Hughes's role in aviation and his obsessive-compulsive disorder, and a 43-minute Hughes documentary from the History Channel (part of the Modern Marvels series, it focuses on his mechanical innovations and spends less than a minute on his movies).More unusual are DiCaprio and Scorsese's appearance on an OCD panel, and a half-hour interview segment DiCaprio did with Alan Alda.--David Horiuchi

The Personalities ofThe Aviator

Click the links to explore more movies by these stars.

Leonardo DiCaprio as Howard Hughes "Sometimes I truly fear that I... am losing my mind. And if I did it... it would be like flying blind."

Cate Blanchett as Katharine Hepburn Howard Hughes: "You're the tallest woman I have ever met." Katharine Hepburn: "And all sharp elbows and knees. Beware."

	Kate Beckinsale as Ava Gardner Howard Hughes: "Does that look clean to you?" Ava Gardner: "Nothing's clean, Howard. But we do our best, right?"

Gwen Stefani as Jean Harlow Jean Harlow in Hell's Angels: "Would you be shocked if I put on something more comfortable?"

Jude Law as Errol Flynn Errol Flynn in Captain Blood: "Up the riggings, you monkeys! Break out those sails and watch them fill with the wind that's carrying us all to freedom!"

Director Martin Scorsese "You get a sense of Howard Hughes being Icarus with the wax wings. Those wings were great for a while, but he flies too close to the sun." --Martin Scorsese

Other Movies by The Aviator's Oscar® Winners

Production Designer Dante Ferretti
Film Editor Thelma Schoonmaker
Costume Designer Sandy Powell
Cinematographer Robert Richardson
See all the Oscar® winners atOscar Central

The Aviator at Amazon.com

The Aviator soundtrack

The Screenplay

Howard Hughes: The Real Aviator

Howard Hughes movies

Great movies of the 1930s

The films of Martin Scorsese

Reviews (147)

"Bring in the milk!"
Let me state a few facts about myself and, in doing so, set up a very sincere question about "The Aviator."

1) I'm a huge fan of Howard Hughes, an absolute buff on the guy.I've read two biographies of him and have to say he's one of the most interesting historical figures of the past century: His brilliance, his wealth, his flaws, his successes, his peculiarities and the periods in which he lived all combine to create a fascinating figure.

2) I'm a tremendous fan of Martin Scorsese.He's made some of my favorite movies and I think he's probably one of the top five greatest directors working today.There's just something about the way he photographs images and people that makes even his worst movies worthwhile.

3) I also think Leonardo DiCaprio is a really good actor, a fact that has been publicly obscurred (but not hampered) by the "Titanic" hype and by some poor choices (or lack of choices, in recent years).

4) And I think "The Aviator" was probably the best produced movie of 2004.The cast is excellent, the sets and costumes and designs are fabulous, the cinematography is exquisite.

So, THAT SAID, why didn't I like the movie more?It's an impressive achievement but I seem to appreciate the parts more than the whole.And as good as DiCaprio is, I think he may have been miscast.Only a star of his level could've gotten this kind of budget, but he simply doesn't look right in the part.It's not until after he grows a moustache that he really start to resemble Hughes.Most of the time, Hughes looked like a guy who was quietly trying very hard not to leap out of his skin but DiCaprio seems more intent on burrowing deeply *into* his body.
He just doesn't have the same kind of intrinsic uncomfortability.

Still, it's an impossible movie not to recommend.There are long stretches of space but every so often, there's a brilliant explosion.

The opulance and scope. Brought to you by Scorsese.
This film is entertaining, and much more effective than any one biography of Howard Hughes. The pace of the movie, coupled with the fantastic acting by Leonardo DiCaprio as the livid Howard Hughes, gives an aura of 3hrs much in the way of inspiration. For underachievers this is a shockingly, unbelievable film. You can feel the energy pulse out of the life of Howard. Sharing his passions for aviation. Revealing the breadth of his contributions to air america. The esprit de corp is flavorful, in symbolisms of the fastest jet planes and the hardest hitting reality at zero hour. A much more breaking of the usual norm of film. It is so wonderful to think that movies such as these aren't being overlooked by the latest craze. When will Scorsese win a *(**( academy award for best director!

IT WAS OKAY!
THE AVIATOR WAS OKAY I REALLY DIDN'T CARE TOO MUCH ABOUT IT IT WAS TOO LONG!

FROM KIRSTEN

Another Oscar-worthy epic from Martin Scorsese.
Director Martin Scorsese makes filmmaking look so easy sometimes.With "The Aviator" he once again breaks from the Gangland themes of his more famous films such as "Mean Streets" and "Goodfellas" and journeys off on yet another unexpected road (e.g. "The Age of Innocence," "Kundun," "The Last Temptation of Christ").Yes, he recently directed "Gangs of New York," but he followed that with yet another left turn by doing a biography on the intensely eccentric Howard Hughes, "The Aviator."Leonardo DiCaprio owns his role here of the off-center genius who has frequent and exponential mental breakdowns, leaving all around him wide-eyed and wondering why he keeps repeating himself as if a record in his brain is skipping.This is easily the best work he has done in years.There are two other actors here that match him.One is Cate Blanchett who nails her characature of the late, great Katherine Hepburn and her short-lived romance with Howard Hughes.Her performance is a breath of fresh air amid all the seriousness of the story.The other is a diabolical and utterly slimy turn from veteran actor Alan Alda.It doesn't hurt that he has some of the best lines in the script, but his scenes with Leonardo DiCaprio have some of the best ebb-and-flow, subtelty acting that I've seen in a very long time.The two pros are butting heads and enjoying every minute of it!There are many solid acting performances from a stellar cast of name actors, though it would have been nice to see the character of Ava Gardner, played competently here by Kate Beckinsale, in depth and her more substantial connection to Howard Hughes.But the movie was long enough, anyway.The visual effects and overall production value are excellent, and the scope of the picture is epic and professionally done.This is top-notch filmmaking in every respect, and is easy to recommend.

Hughes Air West
You have to give credit where credits due. "The Aviator" is a fantastic film.I think it will be more appreciated by film fanatics, it's not what I would call a "popcorn movie".I enjoyed the cinematography more than anything.I have never seen a film using the shades of colours they used.It was enough to wake up the senses.The acting was phenomenal, Leo was fantabulous as were the rest of the cast.Cate Blanchett soared as Katheren Hepburn, in some scenes emulating Ms. Pac Man with those outrageous red lips flapping away."The Aviator" soared with creativity and good quality film making.The score, which evokes a deep yet frantic appeal tells the story of a flawed, troubled soul as it unravels into a quary of intense and manic emotions. Martin Scorsese directs another classic film, although overlooked by the Academy (which seems to have cast a blind eye).R U blind or do u have 20/20 vision, "The Aviator" paints an abstract portrait of someone who had too much and didn't know what to do with it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

No one uses color like Chinese director Zhang Yimou--movies like Raise the Red Lantern or Hero, though different in tone and subject matter, are drenched in rich, luscious shades of red, blue, yellow, and green. House of Flying Daggers is no exception; if they weren't choreographed with such vigorous imagination, the spectacular action sequences would seem little more than an excuse for vivid hues rippling across the screen. Government officers Leo and Jin (Asian superstars Andy Lau and Takeshi Kaneshiro) set out to destroy an underground rebellion called the House of Flying Daggers (named for their weapon of choice, a curved blade that swoops through the air like a boomerang). Their only chance to find the rebels is a blind women named Mei (Ziyi Zhang, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon) who has some lethal kung fu moves of her own. In the guise of an aspiring rebel, Jin escorts Mei through gorgeous forests and fields that become bloody battlegrounds as soldiers try to kill them both. While arrows and spears of bamboo fly through the air, Mei, Jin, and Leo turn against each other in surprising ways, driven by passion and honor. Zhang's previous action/art film, Hero, sometimes sacrificed momentum for sheer visual beauty; House of Flying Daggers finds a more muscular balance of aesthetic splendor and dazzling swordplay. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (153)

DO NOT buy this crap!
OK! Who the hell gave this movie 4 stars??!! Poor story, poor dialog, poor EVERYTHING!!! This movie sucked. Get stabbed by a dagger and the girl stays alive until the unnecessary long fight between two bad actors is over??!! Come on! This movie is worse than the Hindi crap that comes out of Bollywood. Wish I could give it zero stars, but I can't. Amazon, will you please see that movies of this low quality get zero stars?

Technically breathtaking, but left this viewer a little cold
Zhang Yimou's HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS continues where the director's HERO left off: it is a film of immense visual beauty and amazing choreography, supporting a plot with melodramatic elements to it. But whereas HERO could conceivably, amidst the dazzling imagistic pageantry and big emotions, be interpreted as a political statement (the film ends with a ruler having to sacrifice a hero for what he considers the greater cause of unifying feudal China), HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS is content to be romantic melodrama, plain and simple.

Personally, I kinda prefer the extra intellectual and thematic stimulation offered by HERO. At the end of that film, you really had something to think about; at the end of HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS...well, the story is over (and a song sung in English by soprano Kathleen Battle plays over the closing credits). Nothing of great consequence, I felt, had really happened in this film; it is basically one ravishing image and one amazing fight sequence following another, interspersed with (admittedly well-acted) moments of intimacy or high drama. If Zhang Yimou was aiming for thematic subtlety in HERO, here he goes for operatic emotions and visual spectacle. And for all its technical brilliance, the whole thing ultimately left me a little cold---maybe a bit too melodramatic and soapy for my taste.

That is a very personal reaction, of course. The technical brilliance Zhang Yimou brings to HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS is not to be denied; these are some of the most breathtaking (and breathtakingly filmed) fight sequences seen since the last notable "wuxia" film, Ang Lee's CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON. And the actors bring as much conviction as possible to their basically two-dimensional characters: certainly, as House of Flying Daggers member Mei, Ziyi Zhang brings convincing passion to her role, as do Takeshi Kaneshiro and Andy Lau as, respectively Jin and Leo, two police deputies who rescue Mei from prison and try to trick her into bringing them to the House of Flying Daggers to stop their rebelliousness once and for all.

Perhaps the best way to appreciate HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS is to look at it as a cinematic opera. Zhang Yimou is clearly not afraid to work on a big canvas, and he brings all the big emotions and spectacular sights he can to tell his melodramatic story. Those who go into this film expecting to be dazzled will most likely be satisfied; it is a genuine technical marvel. For me, though, I was expecting more substance to the film than it delivered. HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS may be more purely enjoyable than HERO, but the latter, to me, is a much more interesting movie than this one.

Super Cool Movie!!!
The action and special effects sequences in this movie are incredibly fun to watch.Zhang Ziyi is flawless as usual, and her perfomance and beauty justifies buying this DVD in itself.

Great cinematography, weak story
Genre: Foreign, Martial Arts, Romance

Genre Grade: B+

Final Grade: A-

This was another great film from Chinese director Yimou Zhang. Although not even close to comparing to his last film, Hero, it still was a great movie. Zhang is an artist, it is as simple as that. His locations are perfect, the colors are vibrant, and the characters are passionate. This is much more a love story than anything. It offers some good surprises concerning the characters and keeps the mystery of the "House of Flying Daggers" a secret to even the viewers. Actress Ziyi Zhang should learn to speak English because she could be a huge star in the United States.

I recommend this film to anyone who enjoyed Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon or Hero. It is dubbed in English so you don't have to read subtitles if you don't want to.

stunning
Yimou is a true artist of cinema. Hero and House of Flying Daggers are beautiful and spiritual adventures in Asian cinema. Both films are remarkable acheivments that are lost on the reviewer who gave this film one star. True art is often missunderstood by the masses. ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of the best films of 2004, Kinsey pays tribute to the flawed but honorable man who revolutionized our understanding of human sexuality. As played by Liam Neeson in writer-director Bill Condon's excellent film biography, Indiana University researcher Alfred Kinsey was so consumed by statistical measurements of human sexual activity that he almost completely overlooked the substantial role of emotions and their effect on human behavior. This made him an ideal researcher and science celebrity who revealed that sexual behaviors previously considered deviant and even harmful (homosexuality, oral sex, etc.) are in fact common and essentially normal in the realm of human experience, but whose obsession with scientific method frequently placed him at odds with his understanding wife (superbly played by Laura Linney) and research assistants. In presenting Kinsey as a driven social misfit, Condon's film gives Neeson one of his finest roles while revealing the depth of Kinsey's own humanity, and the incalculable benefit his research had on our collective sexual enlightenment. With humor, charm, and intelligence, Kinsey shines a light where darkness once prevailed. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Pretentious Attempt
In retrospection, Kinsey is over-rated. It rides on the 21st century's fetish of sexuality and pretends to be another "Beautiful Mind" but fails and flops. It is one of those pretentious artistic attempt.

Truth or Perversity?
This became more and more difficult to watch as the movie went along.A selected biography in the style of Ray or Delovely, but quite a different choice of subject matter.

Kinsey's father set the tone of Kinsey's own life, with a certainty that becomes obnoxious.The certainty that he knows what the answer is, in this case to the issues of human sexuality and its associated ignorance and taboos, and as with all people who think they know, there is a fall.At the time that Kinsey was achieving his fame there were restrictions on the entire subject of sex practices and sex mores.It stands to reason that the only people who were working in this area were strange themselves, or at least unconventional.That's where I had difficulty.Were Kinsey and his associates really as perverse as they appeared in the movie?Or were their banter and actions exaggerated for the sake of a good story.

I found no sympathy for Kinsey nor for anyone else in the movie.And some of the conclusions that they reached seem so counter-intuitive that they defy belief.I didn't know whether they were trying to find truth or to present perversity.

Potent Film with Certain Foundation for Heated Debate...
Galileo Galilei and scientists alike announced through in-depth research that the Earth was not flat and faced heavy persecution.Their different thinking broke the standards of the 16th century pious beliefs, which had been used a long time before scientists questioned the validity and reliability in what they observed.This offended the Catholic Church who proclaimed that they held the highest truth, a truth deeply rooted in unquestioned morality.The questioning of the religious beliefs triggered a witch-hunt of the scientists that disagreed with the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.However, the truth eventually emerged, as Galileo's theories are still the instruments of current astronomical research that continues to evolve the human existence beyond the earth.

The Catholic Church and Lutheran Church persecuted people with different ideas of Christianity.Those who desired to exercise their own freedom of religion sought refuge in America where they could exercise their freedom to express their own ideas of religion.After the War of Independence, the founding fathers formed the Congress that drafted the 10 amendments.The first amendment brings the people freedom of speech, which includes religion.However, the very same ideas that sought freedom in America later turned from being the persecuted to the persecutor, as these notions harassed new different thinkers.The notion of cyclical history comes to mind when scientists like Alfred Kinsey are being silenced based on morality and unfounded facts.

Kinsey (Liam Neeson), a biologist, was brought up under strict puritan rules, as his father consistently proclaimed being the ultimate source of knowledge.In a sense he grew up with similar persecuting standards as Galileo, but instead of conforming to the rules he broke the bond with his father when he accepted a partial scholarship to Bowdoin to study biology.Kinsey's father wanted him to become an engineer, which has a certain level of irony to it, as his father believed that all modern inventions at the beginning of the 20th century were evil.The pursuit of the biology degree brought him through Harvard to Indiana University where he took a position as an assistant professor while studying stag beetles and later the American Cynipidae also known as the gall wasp.

Years of research and collecting the American Cynipidae allowed Kinsey to meticulously catalogue his gall wasp library.During this time Kinsey met his wife Clara (Laura Linney) with whom he had three children.However, before having the children they had difficulties in the bedroom, as Clara assumed it was because they physically would not fit together.This was an unacceptable answer for Kinsey who approached the problem, as if there were an answer, which there was.It simply was painful for Clara to have sex as her hymen was too thick, and with a quick procedure by a doctor she had this fixed.Consequently, Kinsey continued to help other couples with problems of sexual nature, but realized that he did not have any real answers to the questions that were posed to him.

In the 1940s, Kinsey got his chance to do teach a marriage course in regards to sex and the social aspects of sex between husbands and wives.As the class went on his interest deepened through the vast number of questions people asked in regards to sex.This concluded in Kinsey beginning to research the taboo ridden topic, which so many have been taught to avoid at all costs except for the purpose of having children.Kinsey opposed the abstinence with his statement, "society has interfered with what should be a normal biological development..."

The sex research forced Kinsey to travel uncharted waters, as he had to find a way to collect data that were valid and reliable.Through this process he design an interview style that had to be nonjudgmental in order for the interviewee to reveal everything without having to feel any negative feelings.This process gave them surprising facts about sex, as they also encountered homosexuality, extramarital affairs, and premarital affairs.They also found evidence of deviant sexual practices, which most of the society rightfully did not tolerate such as pedophilia.An important note to this is that Kinsey was only collecting data, he did not advocate harmful sexual practices.However, in the eyes of the society Kinsey was in the end drawn into the mud, as much of his intentions was misunderstood.

Nonetheless, Kinsey helped breaking the ice of the forbidden issue that in the end opened up the society to understanding this hushed, but normal behavior.If Kinsey did not push the envelope the society might have continued its intolerance towards sexual issues, an intolerance that would force many to hide their true identity in the fear of repercussions and prejudice based on hatred and fear.For example, John Edgar Hoover created a profiling center for homosexuals and other undesirables.The very same intolerance would function as a shield that would have protected many of the Catholic priests that have been uncovered to molest children.It is thanks to Kinsey and researchers alike that it has become acceptable to discuss this taboo topic in media, where horrendous crimes such as child molesting can be caught.Yet, there are still many who believe that Kinsey was wrong to do what he did, and they are naturally free to have their own opinions.As they should let the truth be unveiled from darkness and not let erotophobia, i.e., learned negative emotional response to information of sexual nature, affect any decision-making that could help human beings discover a better future.

Kinsey is a political and potent film that will undoubtedly make many feel awkward and uncomfortable.Yet, it is also an important film, as it displays the importance of learning the truth and not hiding behind groundless rules and laws based on fictionalized morality.The film also has historical value to our contemporary society where many laws often are passed based on morality, which ends up hurting a fraction of the society and slows the progress of humanity.When this happens, history seems to be have drifted into oblivion as prejudice and intolerance continues to haunt the society.Hopefully, the film Kinsey offers an opportunity for debate and insightfulness, and not continued narrow-mindedness.

On balance, a positive contribution to human understanding
Alfred Kinsey did a great service to the study of sex.Yes, some of his methodologies were suspect, "self-selection" throwing a monkey-wrench in the whole randomization requirement.His subjects were perhaps not the most representative sampling of the population.Furthermore, he and his staff became too personally involved in the work.His assistants comprised a sort of swinger's club.Kinsey could be faulted for not having anticipated the conflicts brought about by such activities among colleagues.

Unfortunately, these aspects of his life and the film will obscure - for many - the more significant meaning of his work: Bringing the discussion of sex out of the dark corners of human consciousness and into the light.Also, by removing the shame factor from sex, a natural healthy aspect of the human animal, Kinsey legitimized the scientific study of sex.

As far as the film per se, I was impressed with the honesty of the piece.Contrary to what some reviewers have said, this film does not make Kinsey a hero.It rightly credits him for his work, yet reveals a conflicted, troubled psyche at the same time as Kinsey tries to navigate the line between his objective scientific observation and his subjective sexual experiences.This blurring is where Kinsey erred.

Interesting insight into groundbreaking study
Alfred Kinsey was a pioneer in the study of human sexuality. He was a professor at Indiana University and spent the first 20 years of his career studying an insect, the "gall wasp." This movie, starring Liam Neeson in the title role, depicts Dr. Kinsey as having an obsession with his study of the gall wasp, collecting hundreds of thousands of specimens and devoting his life to studying this species. Tapped to teach a course on marriage and the family, Kinsey developed an interest in human sexuality and he bacame as obsessive in this study as he was in his earlier endeavor. He was driven and pushed his staff hard. He employed interviewers who spoke with thousands of people in taking sexual histories. Kinsey was very hands on as he personally instructed his staff on how to put subjects at ease as they conducted the interviews.

Dr. Kinsey was the son of a morally strict father, convincingly played by John Lithgow. Neeson's depecition of Dr. Kinsey shows the results of this upbringing. His characterization of Kinsey comes across as very stiff and uptight. He is not one to really let his hair down yet, in his groundbreaking study, there is no taboo that he is unwilling to explore. Indeed, he explores his own sexuality as he has an extramarital gay affair. Despite serious misgivings at first, his wife, played by Laura Linney, is accepting.

The studies were very controversial, having been done in the 1940s, long before the "sexual revolution." Some people found his findings to be very liberating in that they discovered that they were not alone in their sexual feelings. Other people were shocked, believing that the subject was taboo and should not be discussed. There is one brief scene in which a woman, who agonized over her lesbian inclinations, was liberated by Dr. Kinsey's findings and, thereby allowed herself to enter into a relationship. Others, including Kinsey's father, were scandalized. Ultimately, however, Kinsey's father allows himself to be interviewed by his son and reveals his own, painful secrets of a repressed childhood.

We live in a more sexually open era than we did, generations ago. This movie gives an insight into one of the reasons this is so. I recommend this dvd. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Rarely has The Merchant of Venice, one of Shakespeare's most complex plays, looked as ravishingly sumptuous as in this adaptation, directed by Michael Radford (Il Postino). In a decadent version of renaissance Venice, a young nobleman named Bassanio (Joseph Fiennes, Shakespeare in Love) seeks to woo the lovely Portia (newcomer Lynn Collins), but lacks the money to travel to her estate. He seeks support from his friend, the merchant Antonio (Jeremy Irons, Reversal of Fortune); Antonio's fortune is tied up in sea ventures, so the merchant offers to borrow money from a Jewish moneylender, Shylock (Al Pacino, Dog Day Afternoon). But Shylock holds a grudge against Antonio, who has routinely treated the Jew with contempt, and demands that if the debt is not repaid in three months, the price will be a pound of Antonio's flesh.

The Merchant of Venice is famous as a "problem play"--the gritty matters of moneylending and anti-Semitism sit uncomfortably beside the fairy tale elements of Portia and Bassanio's romance, and some twists of the plot can seem arbitrary or even cruel. The strength of Radford's intelligent and passionate interpretation is that he and the excellent cast invest the play's opposing facets with full emotional weight, thus making every question the play raises acute and inescapable. Irons is particularly compelling; kindness and blind prejudice sit side by side in his breast, rendering the clashes in his character as vivid as those in the play itself. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (38)

"How Sweet the Moonlight Sleeps"
This is, generally, a very satisfying filming of a very problematic play.Director Radford, who also adapted the screenplay, deserves credit for his bold choices in casting and for his not shying away from some of the more troublesome aspects of the text.Is Pacino a successful Shylock?I think so, although by way of Brooklyn.He is especially powerful in the famous courtroom scene, which otherwise comes dangerously close to being exploitative on the screen.There is much to recommend here, including a stellar supporting cast.Few actors can hold their own next to Pacino, but Lynn Collins comes close.After an unfortunate entrance as the young lawyer (she looks uncomfortably like Sonny Chiba), Collins makes us forget the incongruities in her role and attend, instead, to Portia's masterful polemics.The quality of makeup is not strained!(Collins, by the way, is an actress from Texas, but this does not become an issue.She has been linked romantically with Keanu Reeves, her costar in "Il Mare."Perhaps these two will at some point treat us to a film of "Anthony and Cleopatra"?--another of Shakespeare's plays that has been criminally neglected by Hollywood.)Other actors worthy of mention are MacKenzie Crook and Ron Cook as the younger and older Gobbos, and Kris Marshall and John Sessions as Gratiano and Salerio.Heather ("Kinsey") Goldenhersh as Nerissa and Allan Corduner as Tubal are also fine.Several up-and-coming young actors appear in supporting roles, including Tony Schiena, Julian Nest, and Tom Leick, who is soon to be seen in "House of Boys," with a screenplay by J.T. LeRoy.

I have given the film 4 stars, but I would like to give the DVD itself 5. Watching the film, I had many questions for the director--for instance, why are certain scenes deleted, while others are out of sequence?--and I'm happy to say that most all of these are answered in the delightful director's commentary, for which Michael Radford is joined by Lynn Collins.I learned a lot about the rationale behind certain casting and directorial choices and came to appreciate the film itself better as a result.For example, the director has choreographed certain scenes to reflect a love triangle among Antonio, Portia, and Bassanio, something that is heavily debated in Shakespearan criticism.Radford even gives us a rationale for his having asked the actresses playing prostitutes to appear with their breasts exposed!See this film, certainly; it has many qualities to recommend it, not the least of which are a lovely soundtrack by Jocelyn Pook and location filming in both Venice and Luxemburg.But, to get the whole experience, see it on DVD and then watch the director's commentary.

Not Bad
Good sets.Good costumes.Al appears to be reading from cue cards off camera in some scenes, although I think he plays a believable part. I wish Jeremy could speak up a little. No subtitles in English, only French; kinda dumb isn't it?

Pacino and Shakespeare save this movie from itself
Shakespeare's lines will carry any movie above the waterline, and the same can be said of Pacino's acting. They both make this movie presentable and even excellent at times. However, the angle of the movie seems to be one of contradiction to the text, beginning with the introductory text prior to the film's dialogue (text from the Director NOT Shakespeare). This text attempts to excuse the very play itself for its characterization of Christians and the Jew, Shylock. If the play needed an intro, Shakespeare would have written a prologue. It certainly works to bias the audience in a way. The other attempt to do this is several scenes where the "Christian" characters are carousing in a bawdy house with a bunch of half-naked prostitutes. Clearly, the director attempts to make a martyr of Shylock and hypocrites of all the non-Jew characters: however Shakespeare's text is what it is. The nudity is utterly unnecessary and detracts from the integrity of the play--plus it cannot now be shown to young people.

Other than those detractions, I think the film is excellent. The trial scene is superb and brings the tension of the moment to life. Besides Pacino the other actors do a fine job. Unfortunately, though I am a lover of Shakespeare, I would not want to watch this again.

Author of "Shakespeare on Spirituality: Life-Changing Wisdom from Shakespeare's Plays"

gratuitous nudity
While this film is a relatively accurate and well acted version of the Shakespeare play, it has nudity in it where none is called for. This makes it unusable in the American classroom and cheapens the play itself.

Great production of a play that is hard to like!
This is an outstanding production of the one work of Shakespeare that is the most difficult to like.It is impossible to get around the anti-Semitism.This production tries very hard to put the anti-Semitism in context and I think to tone it down, but in the end it is impossible to eliminate it.To some extent Shylock is being punished for being vindictive and not showing mercy, but it is impossible to ignore that in the end the play seems to celebrate Shylock's foced conversion to Christianity.

Al Pacino's performance is disconcerting as he seems to be playing Shylock with a New Yawk accent.But Lynne Collins is truly oustanding as Portia.This version of Merchant really shines in the comic portion of the story where Portia masquerades as a man and successfully entreats Bassanio to give up his wedding ring (which he had earlier promised Portia he would never part with).This is one of the few Shakespearean productions I have seen where a woman masquerading as a man is actually credible.

The settings, costumes, and photography are all spectacular.I found I was able to focus on the positive elements and not get bogged down with the more distressing parts of the plot.But I sympathize with those who find the anti-Semitic aspects of the story too distressing. ... Read more

Album Description

Import only NTSC/Region 1 DVD. Megan Follows, Tony Award-winner Colleen Dewhurst & Academy Award-nominee Richard Farnsworth give unparalleled performances in this critically-acclaimed motion picture, based on the international best-selling novel. Filmed amidst the spectacular scenery of Prince Edward Island, Canada, this Emmy Award-winning production follows the provocative life drama of orphan Anne Shirley (Follows), from her struggles as an adolescent to her triumphs as a young woman. A delicate epic full of wit, style & emotional power. Special features include behind-the-scenes clips, missing scenes, director's commentary, cast bios, previews, Megan Follows' audition. production stills & scene index. 1995. ... Read more

Reviews (231)

Excellent film!
This is a terrific adaptation of the classic L.M. Montgomery coming of age story. It centers on young Anne Shirley, a strong willed, independent orphan who is adopted by siblings Marilla and Matthew Cuthbert. They originally wanted to adopt a boy to help out at their farm, but instead received a surprise when Anne arrived at the train station. Anne's adventures growing up are both funny and heart-warming. This is a fantastic movie that will please youngsters and adults alike, as there is something here for everyone! Megan Follows is excellent as Anne Shirley, Colleen Dewhurst is wonderful as the stern but loving Marilla and Richard Farnsworth is great as gentle Matthew. The supporting cast also give splendid performances. Highly recommended!

Timeless memories of a Canadian childhood
I can still remember the excitement I felt when I first saw Anne of Green Gables almost fifteen years ago. It accurately and lovingly captures the thrills of childhood, of breathless anticipation, the joys of friendship, and the final moment when we must bid our childhood goodbye and take our place in the grownup world. The performances are flawless and capture the original flavour of each of the characters from the book. Megan Follows IS Anne Shirley, Shuyler Grant is a kindred Diana Barry, and Colleen Dewhurst is the stern Marilla Cuthbert who finds her heart unexpectedly embracing the joys of motherhood.

Everything about Anne of Green Gables is done with the utmost love and respect in regard to the original novel by Lucy Maud Montgomery. Anne is every child, with her eyes open to the world, her thirst for knowledge, her immediate trust, her quest for adventure, and most of all her imagination. Megan Follows captures the timeless appeal of the orphaned Anne with spirit, grace, and wit. Her humorous mishaps, personal struggles, and her newfound love for the Cuthberts as well as her love for Avonlea make her an enduring heroine throughout the ages. Who knows? After seeing this film you may discover that you are a kindred spirit as well!

its a classic!!!
What can i say, I LOVE this movie. I grew up watching this one and Anne of Avonlea(now the sequel) I also read the books when i was young. I still enjoy watching them as an adult. I just wish i had a daughter to watch it with and enjoy with me. (we have two wonderful boys and most likely wont have any more) The characters fit the roles perfectly and are excellent. You just fall in love with them all.

DVD QUALITY GREAT ! I can see the print of the wallpaper
After watching this often on vhs I bought a DVD and I noticed the difference right away! You can see the print of fabrics, wallpaper, and details of everything much better. This is a wonderful story and the music is beautiful. All the actors are excellent. Great movie for little girls with red hair! Its not easy growing up with red hair. I love the way Anne is portrayed in this movie. There is a black and white version made in the 1930's and its okay. This movie also shows a girl taking her education seriously. The only thing I didn't like was that Gilbert is a little too much the lovesick fool. I think most guys would have given up on her, she was very mean to him.

A Favorite For Any Generation
This series has always been in my heart and always will be. I can always see myself in Anne Shirley, just as I'm sure every other young girl will. Kevin Sullivan did a beautiful job of bringing to life the works of Lucy M. Montgomery's series of Anne of Green Gables. I loved this movie the first time I saw it on television on PBS and I was thrilled to finally find it on DVD. Anne Shirley is a young orphan girl with a huge imagination, daydreams, and a huge talker. She's transferred from home to home and then back to the orphanage until she is finally picked to live in a town called Avonlea. She lives with a family Marilla & Mathew Cuthbert (played by: Colleen Dewhurst & Richard Farnsworth). After worrying she wouldn't be adopted because she's not a boy she warms their hearts and starts a new life with them. And she then soon meets her bosom friend Diana Barry (Schuyler Grant) and of course Gilbert Blythe (Jonathan Crombie). We follow the lives of these characters that Anne meets along the way. This series is for any young girl or for any girl at any age to enjoy and the entire family. The fun part is you can also see parts of the cast that end up being in Kevin Sullivan's production of Road to Avonlea. But this series is wonderful, charming, and full of adventures. The supporting cast is quite amazing as well they include: Rachel Lynde (Patricia Hamilton), Miss Stacy (Marilyn Lightstone), & Aunt Josephine (Charmion King) just to name a few of my favorites. This movie is also about life and the human heart that we see through Anne's eye's. The DVD is full of tons of great stuff such as Megan Follow's audition, a small behind the scene's moments, missing scene's, & tons more. So I do highly recommend this film for everyone. ... Read more

Amazon.com

From Hollywood's legendary Cocoanut Grove to the pioneering conquest of the wild blue yonder, Martin Scorsese's The Aviator celebrates old-school filmmaking at its finest. We say "old school" only because Scorsese's love of golden-age Hollywood is evident in his approach to his subject--Howard Hughes in his prime (played by Leonardo DiCaprio in his)--and especially in his technical mastery of the medium reflecting his love for classical filmmaking of the studio era. Even when he's using state-of-the-art digital trickery for the film's exciting flight scenes (including one of the most spectacular crashes ever filmed), Scorsese's meticulous attention to art direction and costume design suggests an impassioned pursuit of craftsmanship from a bygone era; every frame seems to glow with gilded detail. And while DiCaprio bears little physical resemblance to Hughes during the film's 20-year span (late 1920s to late '40s), he efficiently captures the eccentric millionaire's golden-boy essence, and his tragic descent into obsessive-compulsive seclusion. Bolstered by Cate Blanchett's uncannily accurate portrayal of Katharine Hepburn as Hughes' most beloved lover, The Aviator is easily Scorsese's most accessible film, inviting mainstream popularity without compromising Scorsese's artistic reputation. As compelling crowd-pleasers go, it's a class act from start to finish. --Jeff Shannon

DVD Features
In his commentary track, director Martin Scorsese offers his own impressions of Howard Hughes and rattles off his memories of experiencing Hughes's films.He mentions how he made Cate Blanchett watch every Katharine Hepburn film from the '30s on the big screen, and observes that Kate Beckinsale had "a real sense of the stature of a Hollywood goddess."But in general he doesn't talk much about the craft of making the film.That area is covered better by editor Thelma Schoonmaker, who also appears on the commentary track, and producer Michael Mann makes a few appearances (all were recorded separately).The picture is brilliant, but the 5.1 sound is not as aggressive in the rear speakers and subwoofer as one might expect, other than some nice surround effects in the Hell's Angels flying sequence.

The second disc collects almost three hours of features.There's one unnecessary deleted scene, and an 11-minute making-of featurette that's basically the cast and director heaping praise on each other.More interesting are the short featurettes on visual effects (including the XF-11 scene, of course), production design, costumes, hair and makeup, and score, and Loudon Wainwright discusses his and his children's musical performances.Historical perspective is provided by spotlights on Hughes's role in aviation and his obsessive-compulsive disorder, and a 43-minute Hughes documentary from the History Channel (part of the Modern Marvels series, it focuses on his mechanical innovations and spends less than a minute on his movies).More unusual are DiCaprio and Scorsese's appearance on an OCD panel, and a half-hour interview segment DiCaprio did with Alan Alda.--David Horiuchi

The Personalities ofThe Aviator

Click the links to explore more movies by these stars.

Leonardo DiCaprio as Howard Hughes "Sometimes I truly fear that I... am losing my mind. And if I did it... it would be like flying blind."

Cate Blanchett as Katharine Hepburn Howard Hughes: "You're the tallest woman I have ever met." Katharine Hepburn: "And all sharp elbows and knees. Beware."

	Kate Beckinsale as Ava Gardner Howard Hughes: "Does that look clean to you?" Ava Gardner: "Nothing's clean, Howard. But we do our best, right?"

Gwen Stefani as Jean Harlow Jean Harlow in Hell's Angels: "Would you be shocked if I put on something more comfortable?"

Jude Law as Errol Flynn Errol Flynn in Captain Blood: "Up the riggings, you monkeys! Break out those sails and watch them fill with the wind that's carrying us all to freedom!"

Director Martin Scorsese "You get a sense of Howard Hughes being Icarus with the wax wings. Those wings were great for a while, but he flies too close to the sun." --Martin Scorsese

Other Movies by The Aviator's Oscar® Winners

Production Designer Dante Ferretti
Film Editor Thelma Schoonmaker
Costume Designer Sandy Powell
Cinematographer Robert Richardson
See all the Oscar® winners atOscar Central

The Aviator at Amazon.com

The Aviator soundtrack

The Screenplay

Howard Hughes: The Real Aviator

Howard Hughes movies

Great movies of the 1930s

The films of Martin Scorsese

Reviews (148)

Hughes at His Peak But Epic Biopic Not Quite a Masterpiece
This is an audacious, surprisingly amusing piece of Hollywood filmmaking by a veteran craftsman of the first magnitude, yet for a number of reasons, not necessarily of Martin Scorsese's sole doing, the movie does not resonate as much as you wish it would. In staying true to the spirit of multimillionaire magnate Howard Hughes between the late 1920's and the late 40's, Scorsese and screenwriter John Logan are stuck with the facts as they happened, and consequently, the film feels episodic with a great, sometimes dazzling story in the first 2/3 of its epic 166-minute running time and a pedantic, only occasionally involving last hour.

You need to have some familiarity with Hughes' life to understand his halcyon years proving himself as a Hollywood tycoon worthy of respect, and his legendary excess during the three-year production of the now-forgotten "Hell's Angels" is captured perfectly here with truly thrilling aviation sequences. Scorsese then focuses on Hughes' romance with Katharine Hepburn and captures the oddball chemistry of burgeoning eccentrics amid the frenzied environment of studio-owned Hollywood, in particular, the Cocoanut Grove nightclub. These sequences remind me a lot of Scorsese's failed musical, "New York, New York", but this time he seems far more assured. Ava Gardner enters the picture in the forties, as Hughes builds luxury airplanes that can't fly and his obsessions and paranoia start to take over. There's a magnificently filmed sequence of Hughes crashing his XF-11 plane in the middle of Beverly Hills.

Once he recovers from this incident, the film starts to drag, as the story focuses on his power struggles of positioning Hughes' airline TWA against the European-route monopoly of Pan Am and the machinations of Pan Am CEO Juan Trippe and the corrupt Maine senator Owen Brewster who investigates Hughes' WWII government contracts. Even the legendary mini-flight of the Spruce Goose fails to excite this late in the story. Only Scorsese's famous "Taxi Driver"-like, mind-bending touch brings off the surrealism of the sequences where Hughes locks himself up in his room. The film ends rather anticlimactically with Hughes' successful 1947 appearance before Brewster's committee before he drowns in his obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD).

Leonardo DiCaprio's chief asset as an actor is his intensity of purpose, and as Hughes, he has plenty of opportunities to display this attribute with his character's obsessions with aviation, moviemaking, glamorous movie stars and ultimately germs. What he is missing is a level of gravitas that would have made his character's increasing eccentricities more bearable to watch. Even though the reed-thin Texas-tinged voice is accurate, there is something perpetually juvenile about DiCaprio's appearance regardless of the twenty-year span of the story. This unfortunately compromises the chemistry between him and the obviously more mature Cate Blanchett, who initially seems to be crossing the border into parody as Hepburn. She displays the familiar brusque manner without caution and even affecting the even more familiar voice but with an inaccurate throatiness that belies the legendary actress' high, fluttery pitch at the time. But she eventually finds her grounding, especially as she recognizes their too-similar personalities and softens during the Hepburn family gathering scene.

With less to do, the too-patrician Kate Beckinsale is in over her head as Ava Gardner, unable to convey the real actress' palpable sultriness or predatory voraciousness without posturing. On the other hand, Alec Baldwin is becoming a strong character actor with every new film, and he plays Trippe with disquieting authority. John C. Reilly plays assistant Noah Dietrich in his typically hangdog fashion as he subsists more in the shadows. Alan Alda plays Brewster with Hawkeye's familiar mannerisms unafraid to show the underlying sliminess of his character. All the externals are impressive - Thelma Schoonmaker's sharp editing (the pacing never drags...just the story), Robert Richardson's cinematography, Dante Ferretti's production design, Sandy Powell's costumes. Yet for all of this, the movie fall short as a masterwork in Scorsese's filmography.

The first disc has an excellent commentary track by Scorsese, Schoonover and producer Michael Mann - all full of insights without being pedantic. The number of extras on the second disc of the two-DVD set is staggering, really too much for anyone except for those deeply interested in Hughes. There is one deleted scene and twelve separate featurettes and documentaries covering everything from the production to Hughes' role in aviation to OCD to the music. Beyond the sheer number, my complaint about the set is that it's hard to maneuver around the decidedly viewer-unfriendly menus.

"Bring in the milk!"
Let me state a few facts about myself and, in doing so, set up a very sincere question about "The Aviator."

1) I'm a huge fan of Howard Hughes, an absolute buff on the guy.I've read two biographies of him and have to say he's one of the most interesting historical figures of the past century: His brilliance, his wealth, his flaws, his successes, his peculiarities and the periods in which he lived all combine to create a fascinating figure.

2) I'm a tremendous fan of Martin Scorsese.He's made some of my favorite movies and I think he's probably one of the top five greatest directors working today.There's just something about the way he photographs images and people that makes even his worst movies worthwhile.

3) I also think Leonardo DiCaprio is a really good actor, a fact that has been publicly obscurred (but not hampered) by the "Titanic" hype and by some poor choices (or lack of choices, in recent years).

4) And I think "The Aviator" was probably the best produced movie of 2004.The cast is excellent, the sets and costumes and designs are fabulous, the cinematography is exquisite.

So, THAT SAID, why didn't I like the movie more?It's an impressive achievement but I seem to appreciate the parts more than the whole.And as good as DiCaprio is, I think he may have been miscast.Only a star of his level could've gotten this kind of budget, but he simply doesn't look right in the part.It's not until after he grows a moustache that he really start to resemble Hughes.Most of the time, Hughes looked like a guy who was quietly trying very hard not to leap out of his skin but DiCaprio seems more intent on burrowing deeply *into* his body.
He just doesn't have the same kind of intrinsic uncomfortability.

Still, it's an impossible movie not to recommend.There are long stretches of space but every so often, there's a brilliant explosion.

The opulance and scope. Brought to you by Scorsese.
This film is entertaining, and much more effective than any one biography of Howard Hughes. The pace of the movie, coupled with the fantastic acting by Leonardo DiCaprio as the livid Howard Hughes, gives an aura of 3hrs much in the way of inspiration. For underachievers this is a shockingly, unbelievable film. You can feel the energy pulse out of the life of Howard. Sharing his passions for aviation. Revealing the breadth of his contributions to air america. The esprit de corp is flavorful, in symbolisms of the fastest jet planes and the hardest hitting reality at zero hour. A much more breaking of the usual norm of film. It is so wonderful to think that movies such as these aren't being overlooked by the latest craze. When will Scorsese win a *(**( academy award for best director!

IT WAS OKAY!
THE AVIATOR WAS OKAY I REALLY DIDN'T CARE TOO MUCH ABOUT IT IT WAS TOO LONG!

FROM KIRSTEN

Another Oscar-worthy epic from Martin Scorsese.
Director Martin Scorsese makes filmmaking look so easy sometimes.With "The Aviator" he once again breaks from the Gangland themes of his more famous films such as "Mean Streets" and "Goodfellas" and journeys off on yet another unexpected road (e.g. "The Age of Innocence," "Kundun," "The Last Temptation of Christ").Yes, he recently directed "Gangs of New York," but he followed that with yet another left turn by doing a biography on the intensely eccentric Howard Hughes, "The Aviator."Leonardo DiCaprio owns his role here of the off-center genius who has frequent and exponential mental breakdowns, leaving all around him wide-eyed and wondering why he keeps repeating himself as if a record in his brain is skipping.This is easily the best work he has done in years.There are two other actors here that match him.One is Cate Blanchett who nails her characature of the late, great Katherine Hepburn and her short-lived romance with Howard Hughes.Her performance is a breath of fresh air amid all the seriousness of the story.The other is a diabolical and utterly slimy turn from veteran actor Alan Alda.It doesn't hurt that he has some of the best lines in the script, but his scenes with Leonardo DiCaprio have some of the best ebb-and-flow, subtelty acting that I've seen in a very long time.The two pros are butting heads and enjoying every minute of it!There are many solid acting performances from a stellar cast of name actors, though it would have been nice to see the character of Ava Gardner, played competently here by Kate Beckinsale, in depth and her more substantial connection to Howard Hughes.But the movie was long enough, anyway.The visual effects and overall production value are excellent, and the scope of the picture is epic and professionally done.This is top-notch filmmaking in every respect, and is easy to recommend. ... Read more

Reviews (47)

Love & Tumult in 1968 Paris
Once past the excessive, graphic nudity, or perhaps because of it, Bertolucci fashions a jarring glimpse of three fascinating young people against the backdrop of the 1968 French General Strike, which nearly toppled the government. For the three principals, hedonism, narcissism, and intoxication seem to dominate against what appear as lightly held political beliefs - socialism, love, compassion, tolerance. For example, siblings Theo and Isabelle sleep together naked, their sculpted bodies entwined. The All-American Matthew (well played by Michael Pitt) comes upon them sleeping nude (and slowly grows to love them), gathering some deeper yet perplexing knowledge. This learning process for Matthew weaves its way throughout the film: a likable youth from San Diego doing his best to slip into the idiosyncratic lives of these very French '60s eccentrics and their almost invisible, '60s uptight parents.

Bertolucci abruptly intercuts continuously with memorable past film scenes: for example, Garbo's soulful eyes laughing at Gilbert's insipid love from "Queen Christina." There are many of these lovely, thoughtful old film scenes that weld the humanity of these three characters to that of past lovers and haters. I found myself virtually loathing the insouciance of Theo and Isabelle, their adolescent adoration of things kitsch, such as Delacroix's 'Liberty Leading the People" with Liberty's face that of Marilyn Monroe. All this while exchanging drunk, violent words over politics, cinema and ragout when true fighters faced the formidable barricades in the streets of Paris.

But this is a film, I think, that one must settle into. Much of the first half appears about nothing much, perhaps a light titillating comedy. Slowly, we understand it is not that at all. The nudity, arguments, sex, politics, brilliant film cuts, and memorable period scoring give satisfaction to those of us 'lucky' enough to have lived through that tumultuous time. Perhaps younger, less authoritarian generations will view it with more intuition than we boomers. One of the director's realized intentions was to impart with his typical lyricism an inner realization of why love, even silly vacuous sex, is so much preferable to war (the General Strike and Vietnam, here). The ending is doubly startling. But by then, the parts have become the whole, the trivial vital. The significant beauty of this film lies in the director's wise, consummate vision. Well worth seeing. (For an amazingly contrasting view of the same period, see "Fog of War").

An Incisive Criticism of the '60s and Hypocrisy
The Dreamers is a new, primarily English-language film from the Italian king of cinematic controversy, Bernardo Bertolucci. If you've seen his past works, including 1900 and Last Tango in Paris, they provide a fairly clear idea of what to expect in this NC-17 foray into 1960's youth culture in France. The film is an extended analysis, really, of radicalism and some of the hypocrisies seemingly inherent in it. It forces us to confront the question of what truly is revolutionary, or conservative for that matter. The film answers that question in a way many of us will find unexpected.

Matthew (Michael Pitt) is an American student spending time abroad in France. He takes in the student protests with wide eyes, gazing in awe at the pure passion igniting these young people. Though the period is the '60s, Matthew still reflects the tucked-in conservatism of a decade past, wearing a jacket and tie almost as a shield from the craziness surrounding him. He soon meets two French siblings, Isabelle and Theo (Eva Green and Louis Garrel), both of whom are full of the revolutionary spirit. They are new and therefore attractive to Matthew, who shares a mutual love of movies with both. Not long after, he moves into the home of his two new friends, whose parents have gone away on an extended trip.

Now is the time audience members may begin to squirm. In between quoting movies to one another and acting out favorite scenes, Matthew begins to notice an unnaturally clingy relationship exists between Isa and Theo--they sleep and bathe together, and play sexually-laced games that often leave one in some state of undress. But this quasi-incest has a strange effect on Matthew, as slowly, the jacket and tie disappear, he begins to walk around barely dressed, and he starts to take part in the sex games, at first begrudgingly and then yearningly.

But as intoxicated as Matthew becomes with the lifestyle, he also is disturbed when Isa confides in him that she's never been on a date before. Harboring some genuine feelings for the young beauty, Matthew tries to lead her away from a life entirely dependent upon Theo and toward one of independence. In this way, the film draws a very interesting parallel. It really is conservatism--a resistance to change--that is keeping so-called radicals Isa and Theo in their exclusive relationship. The young innocent, Matthew, has become the revolutionary in trying to shatter what has become the comfortable tradition.

The film boasts three good, but not great performances. With stronger leading work, a good film could possibly have reached the next level. Gilbert Adair's screenplay, based on his own novel, is wonderfully subtle in weaving its critique of the radical movement, but is in fact so subtle that in some ways the film feels "small." Nevertheless, the film raises probing questions, particularly in the last scene, as a throng of protesters march down a street, all chanting in unison, not a single one distinguishable from the next. It begs the old question, "If a group of anarchists organize an anarchists' meeting, are they really anarchists anymore?"

Finally, credit must be heaped upon Fox Searchlight for not yielding to any suggestion that Bertolucci's vision be compromised by editing the film to achieve an R rating. Even without such censorship, it is disturbing enough that film footage of bare genitals and some sex is considered more damaging by the MPAA than, for example, the wholesale slaughter of recent horror offerings. In any case, when going to see The Dreamers, leave any prudish tendencies (or family members) at home.

Final Grade: B

Bold, brave and inquisitive
Bertolucci displays with this unnecessarily controversial movie more bravery than many other directors half his age. Anyone who is young should see it to observe the contradictions that youth's idealism brings upon the three protagonists. Anyone who is older should watch it to remember the bravery of times gone by, to remember a time when many of us still believed protests could change the world and to acknowledge the validity of both youth's panache and experience's fountain of knowledge.

Not all said up front
There are alot of things that are underneath the serface of this film. You might have to watch the film more than once to get it all. Things that have to obtained from the time and the charecters themselves.(I will not ruin them for you finding them is half the fun) The film is not one that you watch when you are bored with your buddys it is a film that takes all your attention to actually get it.The film ends with no changes in the people only an experience that changed their lives but could not change who they were nomatter how much they tried. I hate movies that charecters change because of an experience this movie seems real in that aspect because the people dont change. It is a little overthe top in certain aspects but it makes you think and is an enjoyable experience.

dreamy
Beautiful, disturbing, erotic, political, comic, thrilling, and thoroughly immersing. One of the most satisfying cinematic experiences I've had in a long time. Not to be missed! Much thanks to Bertolucci, who continues to make exquisite and exciting films! ... Read more

Amazon.com

When 12-year-old Renato, riding through his small Italian town on his new bicycle, sees the voluptuous Malèna, little does he know he's launching on an infatuation that will carry him through the tumultuous days of World War II. Malèna begins as an enraptured depiction of Renato's adolescent mind--the way he stares, hypnotized, at Malèna's garters pressing through the material of her tight skirt, or his frustrated rebellion against the indignity of wearing short pants--but soon transforms into a portrait of small-town prejudice. Malèna's looks spark lust and envy in the townspeople; when her husband dies in combat, the gossip only intensifies, to the point that Malèna is dragged into court to defend herself against accusations of adultery. When the women of the town refuse to sell her edible food at the market, Malèna has little choice but to become what she's been unjustly accused of being. At the end, a twist of fate turns this tale of longing and jealousy into a heartbreaking love story. Monica Bellucci exudes the can't-help-it eroticism that makes Malèna such a lightning rod for everyone's desires; she's like a more zaftig Isabelle Adjani. The movie seems to wander at times, but the ending has a powerful emotional impact. From the director of Cinema Paradiso. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (79)

One of the best!
Malena is truly a great film. It works on so many levels. I have a relative who doesn't usually like foreign films but had to admit this is a great one. Its funny, its sad and it has a message. The story of the beautiful Malena is one that is heart-breaking. Malena is a beautiful woman whose husband is fighting in World War II and is left alone in this town. She is subjected to constant rumours and harassment by the men and women in their village.

Renato is the young boy obsessed with her. He is also the only person who knows the truth about her and knows she doesn't do the things people say she does. Malena wasn't dating everyone, she was sewing for people into the night, carrying her husband's picture and dancing to their favorite music. The sad thing is that Malena has to become what everyone had labeled her once word got back that her husband was killed. Women refused to sell her food and she had to sleep with men to survive. There is a scene towards the end that really upset me. This movie shows how rotten both the men and the women were to her. Malena shows how dangerous lies and assumptions are to a person's standing in their community and their own self-respect.

Malena is a very funny movie at times. There are scenes with Renato that made me laugh out loud. However, its a film that goes deeper than many out there. I would have to say this has become one of my all-time favorites. A beautiful, thought-provoking film.

A Beautiful Film
This lovely and heart-wrenching movie was made even more special by the fact that the two main characters barely speak (well, one of them IS the narrator). I had never heard of the beautiful actress Monica Belluci (Malena) but now look forward to seeing her perform again. She was exquisite and spoke volumes with just her facial expressions.

Giuseppe Sulfaro played Renato, a young boy feeling the first stirring of his sexual awakening who falls in love/lust with the beautiful Malena. His acting was very touching, especially when he goes to the church and lights a candle every day to try to ensure that Malena will come to no harm.

This coming of age film about love, jealousy, ostracism, and hate during four tumultuous years of World War II was filmed on the coast of Sicily - and what beautiful cinematography it was. The score was also magnificent, befitting the gorgeous setting.

ETMR - Malena
1. Humanity: The boy Renato, we learn, is a free spirit. He expresses, out of all the characters in the film, the willingness to step outside his natural, cultural boundaries and grow past his traditional philosophy. This film is not only about the life of Malena, but also about Renato's growth into an adult. What events force Renato to grow into this new kind of thinking?

2. Implications: The film shows the evolution of Europe, and the break from traditional values, not only through Renato but through the insanity of the war. In what ways does the movie show a critical eye to the old world?

3. Evolution: In what ways is the movie distinctly European, and yet more in detail, distinctly Italian? Do you think the film is trying to make a general statement on the madness of war, or is it trying to make a visceral attack on the rigidity of Italian traditionalism?

4. Realism: The story premise is interesting: imagine if you had a guardian angel in the form of a young boy, but you never knew he existed... do you think the set-up of the story was meant to describe an actual sequence of events with the boy, or is the movie playing a more important role with symbolism?

5. Stageplay: The script provides for a seedier look at the foundations of Fascist Italy. Do you think what was included was sufficient, do you think it was lacking in raw material, or do you think it contained too much teenage sensuality?

Lopsided film that doesn't have much life
This is a story of an Italian boy who grows a adolescent infatuation with a married woman who is so beautiful that she is horribly gossiped about. Here are the reasons this is a bad film. 1)The film often drifts into the fantasies of the main character(all of them are about Malena). At one point, this is so prevalent you wonder sometimes what's real and not. You also start to wonder why the filmaker did this and I have no real answer except that he couldn't come up with anything else. These dream sequences pull the film away from a grounding reality that the film fails to establish. 2)The title character is almost non-existant as a real character. We see her in real life and in fantasy, but she hardly says anything, or reveals anything about her inner character. This makes her a hollow basis for the film because she is in fact hollow and the character who is infatuated is vacuous as well. 3) The combination of these characteristics makes this film get to its conclusion heavyhandedly and it never feels real even if the results at the time were close to what we see. Dramatically, it's just dumb and vacuous. You wish it were more because you feel that Malena would have something interesting to say, but the filmaker chose not to. These things only approach my biggest gripes with the film. The gossip sequences, which are many, seem flippant and careless, and not the razor-sharped judgement that they would have to be in order to be a real factor in her life, which they are in the film. Sloppy, just sloppy storytelling. How the film ends is also very telling of just how bad this film truly is. He speaks about how he's loved many women, but the one he remembers best is Malena, the ideal that never came to grips with. An ending like this would be good if the film developed a relationship beyond what is in this film. This would be compelling if the protagonist was someone with more of a vocal perspective rather than a visual one. As is, it would have been far more effective to use yet another fantasy to illustrate her historic importance to him, but by then I'm sure that the film would seem incredibly redundant because of the rest of it. If this film had established the strong importance of the difference between fantasy and reality and how the protagonist felt about that it would be better. The film doesn't take this road, however, by putting in the scenes of harsh realism which aren't earned from the deadpan, flippant tone of the rest of the film.

La Bella Bellucci
Titillating, tantalizing, and tragic are just a few adjectives that come to mind...It takes no genius to realize Monica Bellucci is one of the most drop dead gorgeous international beauties of the current cinema. She is the Italian version bonafide beauty of Catherine Zeta Jones ! If that isn't saying much...

Belucci seems to play recurring roles of women in great distress and abuse.She does this so convincingly and makes it look so effortless that she is a rare actress who can say much with her facial expressions and actions without really saying much; It's all in the eyes, baby. Malena is the telling of a 27 year old widow left to fend for herself in a small Italian village after the downfall of her husband during WW2.No one will employ her and the women sell her rotten food;it's cruelty in severe doses for Malena. Her father has disowned her due to false allegations of being the town temptress. Men and boys alike fantasize and want her. The women hate her. In comes a young 12 year old boy named Renato Amoroso who develops an obsessive crush over Malena but guards her and holds vigil from afar. This "crush" is what propels Renato into becoming and maturing into a young man who begins to understand that there is much more to romance and life than just lustful sex. He watches and follows Malena secretly and witnesses the many transformations she goes through to survive in a town that has turned hostile against her simply because of her striking beauty ! All of this will culminate towards an unexpected ending which will leave a strong impression to stay with Renato for the rest of his life!

Cinematography is...well, it's filmed in Italy, what more can I say except stunning panoramic views of the Italian coastline.Plenty of comedic and colorful characters in the beginning. The film starts off with much humor when the viewer is permitted to see into Renato's mind concerning fantasies of farce and romance. But things turn sinister as a town bent on hate begins to enclose on Malena... The film score by Ennio Morricone is extrememly effective, captures the time period and also is very likeable and memorable ! The best surround effects take place during a German air raid over the town. You can also hear great detail in the surrounds of the ocean waves crashing and wind rustling through trees;this transports the viewer to an Italian vacation. The only gripe is that this Miramax dvd version of Malena is missing about 12 to 17 minutes of scenes that were included in the Italian or European release.This was due to more nudity involving Belluci's character and some scenes that raised eyebrows between more explicit sexual fantasies of Renato's. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Sweetness that doesn't turn saccharine is hard to find these days; Finding Neverland hits the mark. Much credit is due to the actors: Johnny Depp applies his genius for sly whimsy in his portrayal of playwright J. M. Barrie, who finds inspiration for his greatest creation from four lively boys, the sons of widow Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (Kate Winslet, who miraculously fuses romantic yearning with common sense). Though the friendship threatens his already dwindling marriage, Barrie spends endless hours with the boys, pretending to be pirates or Indians--and gradually the elements of Peter Pan take shape in his mind. The relationship between Barrie and the Llewelyn Davies family sparks both an imagined world and a quiet rebellion against the stuffy forces of respectability, given physical form by Barrie's resentful wife (Radha Mitchell, High Art) and Sylvia's mother (Julie Christie, McCabe and Mrs. Miller). This gentle silliness could have turned to treacle, but Depp and Winslet--along with newcomer Freddie Highmore as one of the boys--keep their feet on the earth while their eyes gaze into their dreams. Also featuring a comically crusty turn from Dustin Hoffman (who appeared in another Peter Pan-themed movie, Hook) as a long-suffering theater producer. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (245)

A very beautiful movie.
I agree with T burger.I did do some research after watching this & the main point of the movie is the same.He created this world after meeting & falling in love with those boys.If they made every movie that's based on fact word for word they would probably be boring.They're usually loosely based & meant more to entertain than to inform.I loved it.Story, great, sets, great.Johnny Depp Double great.

wow...
This movie is truly captivating. I am a sucker for fantasy-sort and movies packed with lots of imaginiation. I guess its the kid coming out of me. (which doesn't often go away)
This movie really does make you go back and remember all your dreams as a little child. Wishing you could fly, dreaming of far off places, magic, fantasy lands, and so on.
The reason for this movie is to take a look at how Peter Pan related to its author and his life. It is really interesting to see the parallels between the movie and the events and people he had in his life. I highly recommend it. Its touching and captivating.

Handsome-looking, sentimental tripe
Marc Forster's FINDING NEVERLAND isn't a bad movie, I suppose. In its depiction of playwright J.M. Barrie's creation of the classic PETER PAN, it has its occasional moments of real wide-eyed wonder (mostly during re-enactments of moments in the actual play), and it has generally fine performances from its cast---not even the prestige-pic atmosphere of this movie can keep the wide-ranging actor Johnny Depp down. And, of course, the movie looks sumptuous and handsome (which counts for something in my book).

But FINDING NEVERLAND is yet another example of the kind of sentimental, non-threatening tripe that Hollywood has a tendency to produce and foist upon the masses during Oscar season. This particular Oscar-bait picture has as its mantra "Just believe," but the movie rarely ever elicits the same sense of innocent wonder that this film's Barrie clearly believes in. (Its brief "fantasy" sequences---which includes Barrie dancing with a dog, or Barrie playing a pirate with a widower's kids---are too cheesily done to make us believe in anything.) Nor does it have much of a sharp edge to its potentially disturbing depiction of a writer's sudden fixation on the widower's kids; his attraction to the innocence of these kids---at least, in most of the kids; one of them, played by Freddie Highmore, still carries the pain and anger of loss with him---is depicted (and romanticized) by Forster and screenwriter David Magee as mostly pure and rather beautiful. (Yea right; so is Michael Jackson's, too?) By smoothing away almost all of the rough edges, by manipulating events to fit its banal message, by toning down Johnny Depp's usual actorly exuberance, Marc Forster comes up with a film that, for all its impressive production values, is never very intellectually stimulating. It's insufferably pleasant rather than challenging. Is it deeply moving? For me, not really; when Forster finally unveils his visual depiction of Neverland towards the end, it is mawkish rather than transporting; so is its final scene, in which Barrie tells disillusioned young Peter Davies to "just believe" that his relatives still live on.

Look, it's a nice idea, to be able to hold on to your child-like innocence and all that. But, just because you become an adult, that doesn't mean you have to lose your imagination or sense of child-like wonder. (That's one of the things movies can do best---but not this movie.) But it's hardly a good idea either to be as child-like as this film's Barrie is; in this difficult world, you'd never survive if your on