Hugo (PG)

Film

Fantasy films

Time Out rating:

<strong>Rating: </strong>4/5

User ratings:

<strong>Rating: </strong>3/5
Rate this  

Time Out says

Wed Nov 23 2011

What an exceptionally un-Martin Scorsese-like film ‘Hugo’ appears to be on the surface: a 3D festive kids’ adventure with a boo-hiss baddie set on the not-so-mean streets of 1930s Paris. And yet it is possible this is one of the director’s most personal films: a love letter to cinema, to the magical emotional imperfection of celluloid just as its days are numbered. It’s a film about making films, about losing your heart – and finding yourself – in a pitch-black movie theatre.

On one level ‘Hugo’ is simply a dazzling children’s fairy tale adapted by John Logan (‘The Aviator’) from Brian Selznick’s 2007 graphic novel and deploying the latest CG technology bewitchingly to create its Paris setting. This isn’t real Paris, but reel Paris – bigger and better, more magical than life. Fourteen-year-old Londoner Asa Butterfield stars and has exactly the right sad little soulful face and intelligence to play the orphaned Hugo – who lives secretly in the eaves of a Paris station winding up the clocks. He’s trying to fix an automaton that his watchmaker dad (Jude Law) worked on before his death – a little mechanical man holding a fountain pen. Hugo believes the automaton will summon up a message from beyond the grave and enlists the help of gung-ho tomboy Isabelle (Chlöe Grace Moretz of ‘Kick Ass’, a dash too peppy).

The mystery of the automaton leads not to Hugo’s dad but to the movies – specifically the birth of cinema and director Georges Méliès, played superbly by Ben Kingsley as a study in wounded pride. This part of the story is borrowed from life: Méliès was a magician-turned-early cinema pioneer. After falling from grace, most of his 500 or so films were destroyed; Méliès was discovered years later working as a toymaker in Paris’s Montparnasse station. Here’s an irresistible autobiographical parallel: Scorsese famously ‘found’ director Michael Powell in the ’70s – like Méliès, forgotten and on his uppers. And one of his enduring gifts to cinema has been preserving and restoring films.

Scorsese takes us on a whistle-stop tour of cinema history (which may leave smaller kids squirming and bored). Hugo and Isabelle watch Harold Lloyd. There’s a flashback to Méliès seeing the Lumière Brothers’ film of a train pulling into a station. The audience ducks – as they really did. It’s a terrifically cinéastic defence of 3D: movies were always meant to jump out of the screen at you, Scorsese is saying. And he puts 3D to good use: yes, in the complex machinations of the station’s huge clocks, but most satisfyingly in his actors’ faces which light up the screen with depth and beauty.

The cast is mostly British, giving the whole thing a Dickensian feel, with many nods to the slapstick of early silents. Sacha Baron Cohen plays the villain of the piece, the station’s policeman, like a cross between the Child Catcher in ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’ and Mr Bumble the beadle in ‘Oliver!’ Some of this is broad and the gags wheeze a little. It’s all a little too patchy to be truly great and the story splutters along in places, but ‘Hugo’s quixotic faith in movies is intoxicating: ‘If you ever wondered where your dreams come from, they’re made here,’ says Kingsley’s Méliès. It might be curtains for celluloid, but Scorsese, a boyish 69, clearly isn’t leaving the stage any time soon. He directs every film with the passion of his first. And it shows.
39

Comments

Add +

Release details

Rated:

PG

UK release:

Fri Dec 2 2011

Duration:

122 mins

Share your thoughts
  1. * mandatory fields

Comments & ratings

Rated as: 3/5 (35 ratings)
  • What a tedious and disappointing film! It is poor on most levels - script, story, acting, pace... only the recreation of swinging 20's Paris is worth a look. I was really surprised that Scorsese could not extract more from his actors and the story. The story crawls along with almost every scene dragging longer than it should. The two main child actors are unconvincing and have little chemistry. Maybe Scorsese was aiming for quaint, Amelie style Parisian quirkiness and double guessed his normal instincts? Difficult to recognize the man behind the Departed or Cape Fear here... without his name and the Hollywood mega budget this film would have gone quite unnoticed.

    Francois Mon Jan 21
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • The film in my opinion was slightly boring, but it definitely had it's moments and the right atmosphere

    Emily Wed Oct 3 2012
    Rated as: 3/5
    Report
  • Absolutely beautiful for adults and children. CLASSIC IN EVERY WAY.

    Gladys Mon Jun 25 2012
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • Three satisfied customers aged 10, 34 and 66 all watched entranced by the central characters and the 3D recreation of reel Paris. Even the 10 year old boy who rapidly gets bored with non-action sequences lasted the course. Yes, its a little too long, and could have been approached very differently, but it's an interesting absorbing and valid take.

    cineast633 Sun Apr 8 2012
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • What a disappointment. This film was so hyped and it turns out to be quite boring. It contains pointless scenes that were inserted simply to satisfy the 3D gimmick. It is maudlin and utterly predictable. The cinematography and set design are attracrive but ultimately the film is vacuous.

    lexstra Thu Mar 1 2012
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • Wish I'd been able to see it in 3D. Wasn't really disappointed [I usually am when I see a film that I've been looking forward to for a long time] but I would have liked it to be about 30 minutes shorter. Thought it was a tad over sentimental, but then found myself wiping away a tear at the end.

    mo Sat Feb 25 2012
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • Any movie which puts a permanent smile on my face throughout its length is good enough for me. However, personal emotions apart, this is one master of the cinema's homage of love to the art form which gave him his life. The passion which is evident in any interviews Scorcese has given over the years on his feelings for film, shouts from every frame. And each frame is stunning; the CGI is state of the art and, if Paris has never looked lovelier, so what? It's a simple tale of fantasy beautifully told and the canvas on which it is painted is stunningly beautiful. The acting, for the most part, is superb and believable, the cinematography is to die for.All-in-all, for a feel-good movie without the usual mawkishness, Hugo stands among the best.

    Gerry Mac Thu Feb 23 2012
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • Disappointment does not adequately describe the difference between the hype and reality of this film. While some of the cinematography is interesting, this is tedious film without an obvious plot/theme. Without an explanation of what the film purports to be, one struggles to derive any sense of the story line, plot or purpose. Yes, it is different to the usual Hollywood pap but that, of itself, does not justify the accolades for what is a tedious film with a bemusing plot. Don't trust the star rating but read the critiques.

    Kate Sat Jan 21 2012
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  • Lovely thoughtful children's film. Beautiful to look at and the details of the scenes and references through the movie would make if worth watching again. Agree with the reviewers that a little of the acting could be a bit more convincing, but the rest of the film more than made up for that. My children of 8 and 10 also enjoyed it. A welcome relief from the usual children's movie fare.

    jennitpk Tue Jan 3 2012
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • I fell for all the hype and went to see Hugo on New Year's eve. The movie was visually beautiful, but the acting lacked any credibility (with the exception of Jude Law)....every one either over acted or were totally unconvincing in their roles (especially the two children) The plot was extremely boring and predictable. I expected to see the two children exchange rings in the end, almost as corny as the two dog lovers, the flower girl and the station guard and on and on ...god I wanted it to end sooner. The director will probably get all of the 'hollywood hyped' credit, but isn't he supposed to be responsible for the actor's performances as well? Makes one mistrust reviews.

    cliff williams Sun Jan 1 2012
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  • Hotwise
  • Cool brands
  • Star