Today on Blogcritics
Home » The Aviator Review; Plus DiCaprio & Alda in Person; and Notes on Kill Bill

The Aviator Review; Plus DiCaprio & Alda in Person; and Notes on Kill Bill

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

A few nights ago I attended a screening of The Aviator, followed by a Q&A session with actors Leonardo DiCaprio and Alan Alda.

I was surprised that DiCaprio actually showed up, considering he’s not much for public appearances. “I hate talk shows,” he told Harper’s Bazaar in 1995, “And you know what? I’m never going to do one again.” However, he’s since broken that promise, and with multiple award shows coming up, I think Miramax has pushed him to go out and schmooze up some votes—and given that this particular screening was centered around union actors (who will be voting in the much-coveted-by-actors SAG and BAFTA awards, for which DiCaprio and Alda are both nominees) and a few journalists, it must’ve seemed like a worthy opportunity to discuss his craft.

One would half-expect a mega-star like DiCaprio to shuffle in and out as quickly as possibly, but he showed up promptly at the end of the film, around 11 pm, and stuck around till nearly midnight, despite ear-splitting technical problems involving the shabby cordless microphones the actors were supposed to use. He was gracious and generally intelligent and provided a lot of insight into the making of the movie. I almost feel bad for referring to him as DiCRAPio for most of my life. But, my god, he so often seems like such a whiny, scene chewing, overrated thespian. I mean, have you scene The Beach? What dreck! And I won’t even get into his preening in Titanic. . .

But that makes me think: The reason journos so often write lovingly about celebrities in magazine profiles isn’t because they’re star-struck (journalists are a jaded lot) or because they’ve been paid off by the studios (well, crap mags like Movieline’s Hollywood Life are willing to occasionally kiss ass in exchange for favors, but I’m talking about higher-brow publications). No, it’s because when you speak to a star in real life, you’re instantly struck by just how damn real they are. Heck, sometimes they’re even literate. There are plenty of prima donnas out there, but when a guy like DiCrapio (oops, I did it again) turns out to be a nice fella, it’s hard to take jabs at his pretty face.

That being said, Alda is much better in front of a crowd. When the mikes went out, his theatre training kicked in and his voice expanded clearly to the back of the movie house. Whenever the moderator ran out of questions, Alda picked up the slack by interviewing DiCaprio himself. And whenever DiCaprio’s sentences puttered off, Alda filled in the gaps with one amusing anecdote after the next. He was unstoppably funny and gregarious.

I didn’t have my trusty tape recorder on me, so I paraphrase the following:

DiCaprio: “On Gangs of New York there was a scene where Cameron Diaz was supposed to slap me, right before we make love against a wall. So Marty [Scorsese] pulled me aside and said ‘Listen, if Bob [Robert De Niro] were doing a scene like this, he’d do it for real. So I said, ‘Stop right there. If Bob would do it, of course I’ll do it.’ So we do the take and Cameron slaps me. With an open hand. Pretty hard. And the take is good, you know? But Marty says we need another. So we do it again. And again. And I ended up getting slapped for 47 takes, until my face was swelling up. But Marty’s like that. He’s a perfectionist. But he doesn’t overdo it, like some directors, he just gets what he needs. But it’s not easy getting slapped that hard 47 times in a row, and it’s not always pleasant having to do these things for real, but when you can, you do it.”

Alda: “You must not have minded doing the second part of that scene for real.”

DiCaprio: “Huh?”

Alda: “After you got slapped, you made love to Cameron against the wall.”

DiCaprio: “Oh, well . . . “

Alda: “I mean, how did you do that 47 times in a row. That’s stamina!”

DiCaprio: “Well, um, we didn’t. . .”

Alda: “Scorsese really is a perfectionist. But this job certainly has its perks.”

DiCaprio and Alda later went on to boldly dispel a famous acting myth—the idea that actors can get so lost in character that they actually believe they are the character, and they’re truly in the scene, and not on a movie set. Again, I paraphrase:

DiCaprio: “People keep asking me if I had any trouble getting out of the character of Howard Hughes, but the truth is that it’s very difficult just to stay in character. When you’re on set, and 40 crewmembers are there, and giant klieg lights are shining down on you, and a grip is standing five feet away, staring at you and scratching his balls, and you have to say a particular line at a certain time as camera on a dolly rushes toward you, it’s not easy to pretend you’re somewhere else. So getting out of character is never the hard part.”

Alda: “It’s true, you know. Those moments when actors forget where they are, where they get lost in the scene, they’re very rare. You’re lucky if that happens for two seconds out of every week.”

DiCaprio: “And when it does happen, it’s usually a moment that’s not in the script—where the actors make a mistake or forget a line and begin to improvise. One of the things I like about working with Scorsese is that he cherishes those moments as much as the actors do, and he puts those takes on the screen, even if it wasn’t part of the screenplay.”

The only DiCRAPio thing DiCaprio did the entire night—the only nuance that really stuck in my craw—was his abuse of the word “literally.” He never got the word completely wrong, but he kept using it over and over again, mostly in ways that were not quite right. “These early aviators were literally like astronauts,” he repeated more than once. No, DiCrapio, they were “like astronauts” or they were “like early astronauts” or maybe they were “literally the predecessors of astronauts”—but combining literally (definition: in the sense of being without interpretation, embellishment, or exaggeration) with like (resembling or similar, sort of, in some way) is akin to mixing whiskey with tequila. You can do it, but it’s not very pleasant. Choose one liquor and stick to it for the night, bucko. At least he didn’t really screw up and say, “They were literally astronauts.” If he had, my urge to yell “DiCRAPio!” would have literally overwhelmed me.

To further digress: The word “virtually” at one time was a synonym for “literally,” but in popular parlance it now means “in essence or effect but not in fact.” So virtually could be a perfect word here—” Early aviators were virtually astronauts, since their work led directly to outer-space aeronautics.” But Leo had to kept handing out literally’s every chance he got, reminding me of a bang-up David Cross routine where Cross pronounces his loathing for people who says things like, “I laughed so hard I shat myself,” when, in fact, they didn’t shit themselves at all.

Back to the film: In a case of truth being stranger than fiction, the most unbelievable scenes in The Aviator are the one’s most steeped in fact. Hughes really did survive dangerous, explosive plane crashes (in fact, he survived three or four, and not just the two shown in this film). And the seemingly implausible sequences where Hughes impishly, potently, and uproariously stands up to a grievous congressional investigative panel—turning the tables on the committee’s chair, powerful Senator Ralph Owen Brewster—are based almost verbatim on genuine transcripts (Alda noted that in real life, Sen. Brewster was so trounced by Hughes that in the end Brewster had to step down and become a witness before his own investigation, defending himself against Hughes’ allegations of mischief). Instead, it’s the smaller details that are skimmed over to form a fluid narrative (e.g., Hughes’ wives are ignored by the film in favor his celebrity liaisons).

Regrettably, for a motion picture that runs like a non-stop homage to “Citizen Kane,” Scorsese never manages to find even a third of the depth, inventiveness, and empathy that “Kane” delivers. And yet it’s gorgeous to look at, and hard to immediately pinpoint the flaws.

Notably, the film fails to soar for at least an hour. It’s a noble effort—with splendid cinematography by Robert Kill Bill Richardson, sumptuous sets and costumes, good acting, and an exciting beginning and end—but, as with most biopics (including the recent “Ray”), the viewer’s emotional connection to the film is sustained only through the knowledge that this is a “real” story being watched. If it were revealed to be fiction, it would not be as watchable. Just as reality television is the device of a lazy TV industry, the biopic can fall into the same trap of laziness, shouting “Look, ma! It’s real, so it’s gotta be good! Forget the fact that this scene is ho-hum and pointless, it’s friggin’ real, dammit!”

Screenwriter John Logan is one of the hottest properties in Hollywood right now, with “Gladiator,” “The Last Samurai,” and The Aviator under his belt and big-name directors knocking on his door. And he’s certainly more literate than your average Tinsel Town hack. But come on—he can be so longwinded, lugubrious, and self-indulgent. Is this really the best money can buy? Then again, it may not be his fault—even Logan’s scripts go through multiple rewrites and have to be approved by numerous stars, creative personnel, brain-dead executives, etc. His first drafts might be brilliant. But somebody has to be blamed for the dithering, forgettable 60 minutes scattered throughout this 166-minute epic.

And, yeah, I would’ve preferred Billy Crudup in the role of Howard Hughes, but DiCaprio does a fine job. Especially after he gets past the DiCrapio whine in the first half hour and grows a mustache (Film Fact: DiCaprio mentioned during the Q&A that the mustache is a fake, administered with glue. The poor kid can’t even grow proper facial hair—too bad, since he looked good with a beard. Normally the chap looks 12). His portrayal of Hughes slipping into madness veers dangerously between brilliance and annoyance, but he pulls off a nice feat when he credibly shows Hughes regaining sanity for long enough to defeat the evil Senator—a tricky character bit. He doesn’t deserve the Oscar for The Aviator, but I’ll award him this: I’ll retire the tired DiCRAPio joke for a while. It literally wasn’t that good anyway.

***

ALSO: I finally saw Kill Bill (Volumes I & II) and I’m now in total agreement with Quentin Tarantino—Uma shoulda gotta Osca’ noma. I’d resisted watching the film in theatres because I wanted to see both parts back to back. And I resisted renting it because I wanted to wait for the rumored super-ultra director’s cut that’ll combine the two halves with new editing work and some gory action footage so far only seen in the Asian release. Also, I was worried I wouldn’t like the flick, ‘cause it looked cheesy. And cheesy it is, but in a brilliant way, with the campiness purposeful and handled with masterful aplomb, the action intense, the pathos palpable, and the character-depth ever expanding. Kill Bill is at the pinnacle of what every action-comedy should aspire to be.

***

FROM: Celebrity Cola: A slipshod agnostic guide to the universe.

Also archived at:

  • Celebrity Cola: “The Aviator” Review, DiCaprio Q&A, “Kill Bill,” and Aussie Lamb All Taste A-OK

  • Powered by

    About Lucas Brachish at CelebrityCola.blogspot.com

    • Nina Villarimo

      I think Leonardo is literally like a hot fudge sundae! His constant use of “literally” doesn’t make me crazy but his constant use of the words “surreal” and “certainly” in his conversation do.I hope I didn’t make any faulty grammatical errors in my post lest I be dissed….when we are speaking people tend to not concern themselves too much with grammatical correctness unless one is painfully anal.

    • A

      Your comment about Leo’s false mustache shows a bit of ignorance on your part. If Sean Connery had played the part, he would’ve needed to fake it, too. You see, the film was shot wildly out of sequence: mustache one day, none the next, etc. Use some common sense and you’ll make more yourself.

    • http://celebritycola.blogspot.com Lucas Brachish

      I realize that shooting films out of order is a common practice. But, you know, since DiCaprio was not only the mega-star on the project, but also the producer of the film, he could have had some control over this. And it’s ridiculous that an epic blowing tens of millions of dollars can’t afford to shoot in a more consistent and logical pattern. Shooting particular takes or scenes out of order due to location, time, or lighting constraints is one thing, but the scattershot piecemeal shooting of a project like this, where a character is aging and developing over time? Not a good idea. And inexcusable when you have millions at your disposal.

      For instance, Scorsese wouldn’t have done this during Raging Bull, where he elicited one of the greatest performances in film history. He might have shot all of the apartment scenes in the course of the week, say, but they weren’t going to force De Niro to dramatically change physically and emotionally from hour-to-hour or day-to-day. They gave him room for consistency, time to sink into character, time to gain weight.

      Also, an argument could be made that the wildly non-sequential shooting order of this film is what causes the inconsistencies in DiCaprio’s performance and the lack of deep emotional resonance in the movie itself.

      However, that was not the point I was trying to make — all I was doing was pointing out that DiCaprio’s mustache was glued on and that, from looking at him, I didn’t think he’d be able to grow a proper mustache of his own, which is too bad, because he looked more like a proper, grown-up leading man when he had facial hair in the movie. (I didn’t say that made him less of an actor.) It was a joke rooted in fact. Or, as DiCaprio would say: “Literally, man. Literally.”

    • A

      “Scattershot piecemeal?” Who ARE you anyway and why the hell did I get this URL? The Aviator dealt with a much bigger canvas than Raging Bull. It’s international cast was significantly larger and their availability had to be properly scheduled. It also utilized locations in two countries while Raging Bull was shot in New York and Los Angeles. But for such an epic production, The Aviator took less time to shoot and even less to edit. Maybe that’s why it won the PGA.

      You really should find out how films are made. Raging Bull was shot around the three stages of Jake’s weight. There was the super fat bastard at the beginning and end, and the tubby Jake between bouts. So I guess you could say Raging Bull was shot in a “scattershot piecemeal” way, too. But Bobby rose above it, just like Leo, toward an Oscar nomination. Way to go, Bobby!

    • Isabelle

      DiCrapio? Exactly how old are you? Making fun of people’s names is so kindergarten. And you have zero knowledge of the movie business and production when you say that Leo as a producer on the film should have been able or even want to call the shots on scheduling the scenes and not the director – what a ridiculous ridiculous statement.

    • http://celebritycola.blogspot.com/ Lucas Brachish

      I seem to have offended DiCaprio’s number one fan (or the Press Agent of The Aviator). I do apologize. Good luck with the Oscars, champ. No hard feelings. Didn’t mean to spark a war here.

    • Eric Olsen

      sounds more like press Agent

    • http://www.wakeupreaders.blogspot.com Thomas

      What is the prognosis for the next Scorsese-Dicaprio pairing The Departed? I saw Infernal Affairs, the film it is remaking, and I loved it. I think Dicaprio and Matt Damon are the right ages for the roles as played by the two leads in the original.

    • http://celebritycola.blogspot.com/ Lucas Brachish

      The Departed would seem to be exactly the kind of film Scorsese excels at (crime, duality, complex character-based thriller elements, a strong base-story to string his unique visuals around), so I’m looking forward to it.

      If he keeps the story tight, I’d guess it’d be excellent, since we know the original narrative is top-notch (Casino and some of his recent efforts feel a bit bloated/weighted down to me, but after these recent epics he might be ready to make a more streamlined and focused film, I hope).

      Also, the typical onscreen presences of DiCaprio and Matt Damon have some eerie similarities, with their high-wattage all-American charm laced with creepy/snotty undertones, so they’re good choices for a two-sides-of-the-same-coin tale (assuming poster-boy celebs are crucial for Scorsese’s films to make cash these days). Remaking such a recent movie (Infernal Affairs/Wu jian dao was made in 2002) is a bit sketchy, but Scorsese did truly interesting things with Color of Money (a sequel to the classic The Hustler) and his Cape Fear remake. Arguably, neither of those films are as brilliant as the originals, but they stand strongly in their own right.

      Likewise, I was interested to see what kind of performance Robert De Niro would get out of DiCaprio in the upcoming The Good Shepherd (De Niro being a guardian angel of sorts for Leo’s career over the years) but Damon has replaced him in the role (presumably due to scheduling conflicts, but I haven’t heard any details on that).

      By working with De Niro, Scorsese, and Terry Gilliam (The Brothers Grimm) in the near future, Damon has one of the most enviable line-ups around. A far cry from his poor buddy Ben Affleck’s dismal drivel.

    • carla

      Read in Variety a couple of weeks ago that DiCaprio dropped out of The Good Shepherd because of, as you mentioned scheduling conflict (official story, but who knows?) and DeNiro was furious with him. Also, the group that was financing The Good Shepherd (same group that financed The Aviator) dropped out after Leo dropped out so TGS is looking for new backing.

      Read rumors on Oscarwatch that Nicholson had join the cast of The Departed to play the role of the police commander but haven’t seen it confirmed.

    • http://entertainmentbizcritic.blogspot.com Crystal E.

      I hear you on the literally annoyance, it kills me how misused words get through grammatical ignorance. I also hear you on the tean icon of Dicaprio’s career, with Romeo + Juliet, Beach, and the horrendous Titanic. But i can’t shudder on much else from Dicaprio, i think he’s a hell of an actor, and no, it’s not because i’m female. It’s because the kid’s got talent and charisma, this type of energy is rare, and Scorsesee undoubtedly fell for this leading attribute in the actor, for falling so hard for him in all recent projects. Crudup could have done this role, but he doesn’t seem like the kind of actor Scorsesee’d usually cast in films.

    • lippsey

      Hi do you happen to know if Leo and Alan signed autographs before or after the screening? my bro was there he bought me the book of the screen play and the musical score cd .. now hes a terrible teaser and he says he got both actors autographs on there .. and its killing me to know if they are real or not … it was pretty chilly in New York on that night lol Id be greatful if you could take the time to answer me this burning question and im glad youve changed youre mind and stopped calling Leo Dicrapio …because he is the best actor of his generation imhop and with or without an Oscar I think this is his year:)

    • http://celebritycola.blogspot.com/ Lucas Brachish

      Thanks for comments everyone…

      LIPPSEY: Yes, DiCaprio and Alda stuck around after the screening for a few minutes to sign autographs, discuss the acting biz, and have their pics taken by fans and the press. Alda quietly excused himself from the gathering and snuck out while a group crowded around Leo, but the Titanic icon stayed in the room while a Weinstein brother looked on in deep satisfaction.

      On the same cold night, there was a special industry-screening of Sideways across the street, so the upcoming Oscar/BAFTA/SAG competition between the two films was palpable, with the future glory reapers metaphorically doing battle on opposing sides of 42nd Street.

    • lippsey

      Hi Lucas

      thanks a lot for clearing this up for me;) and that is too funny about the rival movies..I know which one my money is on… Aviator I hope it cleansup at all the awards:)

    • http://www.rodneywelch.blogspot.com/http://www.rodneywelch.blogspot.com/http://www.rodneywelch.blogspot.com/http://www.rodneywelch.blogspot.com/http://www.rodneywelch.blogspot.com/http://www.rodneywel Rodney Welch

      I think your views are pretty much on the money, Lucas. For most of the movie, Scorsese didn’t seem all that engaged with the material, and it didn’t really come alive until half way through. It starts out as a draggy boring epic about a famous weirdo; about halfway through, we begin to connect with that weirdo’s struggle, when he has to battle his demons in public to save his company. DeCaprio comes alive and Alda and Baldwin are perfectly matched against him.

      I felt that in that crackling, frenetic scene before Congress that Scorsese was finally back at the top of his game — which he hasn’t been for awhile, at least since
      Goodfellas. He needs to get back to making movies that have his own personal pulse to them, rather than all these arthritic hot-project A-list epics. And I mean new and fresh ideas. The latest news is that he and De Niro are talking about a sequel to Taxi Driver — positively the worst idea I’ve ever heard.

      The Aviator will probably win Best Picture, I’m guessing. To me, there’s no question Sideways is the best American film of the century so far, let alone the year.

    • sammy-lynn

      i need the recorder notes to titanic”mt heart will go on” if u have them plzzz e-mail them to me luv ya’ll
      [deleted]