I often say that while I like to think I am more informed than the average movie viewer but not as stuck up as the average movie critic, I’m probably just dumber than the average critic and more stuck up than the average movie viewer. In the case of watching Martin Scorsese’s new film Hugo, I’d like to think I occupy the former position. This is because while I think I can appreciate the love letter to cinema that Scorsese has created in this kid’s movie more than the average movie viewer, I disagree with most of the critics who apparently loved it, because, frankly, it is a pretty boring movie. So let’s break it down…
The film centers on Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield), an orphan who lives in the walls of a train-station and is determined to fix an automaton left to him by his father (Jude Law). Despite being pursued by the station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen), Hugo fixes the robot with the help of Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz), which leads to a surprising discovery about Isabelle’s guardian, Georges Méliès (Ben Kingsley).
The film centers on Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield), an orphan who lives in the walls of a train-station and is determined to fix an automaton left to him by his father (Jude Law). Despite being pursued by the station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen), Hugo fixes the robot with the help of Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz), which leads to a surprising discovery about Isabelle’s guardian, Georges Méliès (Ben Kingsley).
The movie is beautiful – it is the best 3D since Avatar – and the shots that take you around Paris are astounding. And if you are a fan of films, you will appreciate the passion for cinema that Scorsese injects into this film. That being said, the plot is rather thin; Hugo’s motivations shift from wanting to fix his robot, to wanting to earn his notebook back from Méliès (who took it as punishment for stealing), to wanting to research silent films, to wanting to find out the true identity of Méliès. And the movie takes its time with each part. Too much time, in fact.
What you really want to see more of by the end of the film is Méliès. You want to know his story more fully. However, despite being the most interesting character in the film, so much so that I would gladly go to see a movie just about him, Méliès’ part is relegated to the final 15 minutes of the film. A sad waste in my opinion.
This is especially true since neither of the child actors give very good performances. Moretz is decent and her resume shows she has talent. But Butterfield is particularly wooden; not exactly a trait you want in your protagonist. Giving Butterfield a bit of the benefit of doubt, this could also be attributed to Scorsese leaving his comfort zone of violent gangster films and being unsure of how to direct child actors. But Scorsese is a legend in Hollywood, having produced some of the best films of our time, so I’m going to mostly blame Butterfield (Who becomes an actor and keeps the name “Butterfield” anyways?).
On the other hand, Cohen, along with other side characters from Ray Winstone, Christopher Lee, Richard Griffiths, and Frances de la Tour, give us entertaining reprieves from the trudging on of the main story. And the film leaves us with a good message. Hugo says that he likes to imagine that the world is a big machine, because machines never come with spare parts, only the essential ones. This means that we all have a purpose; we just have to find it. Hugo’s purpose is special because his purpose is to fix things. And not only things, but individuals. Repairmen and healers bring life back to machines and people and Hugo’s journey to fix his automaton certainly helps Méliès come back to life, while giving us hope that it is never too late to find our purpose.
The Final Word: Wait to rent it.
What you really want to see more of by the end of the film is Méliès. You want to know his story more fully. However, despite being the most interesting character in the film, so much so that I would gladly go to see a movie just about him, Méliès’ part is relegated to the final 15 minutes of the film. A sad waste in my opinion.
This is especially true since neither of the child actors give very good performances. Moretz is decent and her resume shows she has talent. But Butterfield is particularly wooden; not exactly a trait you want in your protagonist. Giving Butterfield a bit of the benefit of doubt, this could also be attributed to Scorsese leaving his comfort zone of violent gangster films and being unsure of how to direct child actors. But Scorsese is a legend in Hollywood, having produced some of the best films of our time, so I’m going to mostly blame Butterfield (Who becomes an actor and keeps the name “Butterfield” anyways?).
On the other hand, Cohen, along with other side characters from Ray Winstone, Christopher Lee, Richard Griffiths, and Frances de la Tour, give us entertaining reprieves from the trudging on of the main story. And the film leaves us with a good message. Hugo says that he likes to imagine that the world is a big machine, because machines never come with spare parts, only the essential ones. This means that we all have a purpose; we just have to find it. Hugo’s purpose is special because his purpose is to fix things. And not only things, but individuals. Repairmen and healers bring life back to machines and people and Hugo’s journey to fix his automaton certainly helps Méliès come back to life, while giving us hope that it is never too late to find our purpose.
The Final Word: Wait to rent it.
No comments:
Post a Comment