Hugo

Every once and a while in the library of cinema, there’s always that movie that claims to be ‘’magical’’ in spirit. Directors like Steven Spielberg, Robert Zemeckis and Baz Lehrman basically bank on their movies being considered whimsical and odd because it helped shaped their film-making identity but their version of magical can sometimes be overtly so, feeling sappy and too schmaltzy rather than capturing legitimate magic. While they still make good movies, they haven’t reached that exact level yet, but what’s really strange is that the man who is notorious for making dark, messed-up, bloody and violent adult movies, Martin Scorsese, made a movie that actually manages to capture that elusive magical feeling. That illusive film happens to be the 2011 film, Hugo. Set in Paris during the 1930s within a railroad station, a 12-year-old boy named Hugo (played by Asa Butterfield) lives and maintains the clock within the station after being orphaned when his father, a clock-maker (played by Jude Law) died in a tragic accident, only leaving behind an automaton which needs to be fixed. Needing to steal food in order to survive, he’s eventually caught by an old toy maker named Georges Méliès (played by Ben Kingsley) who forces him to make up for his thefts by working for him in his toy shop, which gets Hugo acquainted with his goddaughter, Isabelle (played by Chloe-Grace Mortez). The two slowly discover that they have the pieces that are needed to fix the automaton, and it gives them a message that tells them that Georges was once a film director who has become broken after the war destroyed his career. Learning of his past works and seeing the light that has lost from his eyes since his departure from the screen, the two kids need to try and reinvigorate that spirit once again in, all the while being pursued by the station’s inspector, Gustave (played by Sacha Baron Cohen), who plans on sending Hugo away to an orphanage once and for all. Hugo had a very split reaction when it was released; the critics fell in love with it, it earned over 11 nominations at the Oscar (the most for that year), and managed to take home a total of five, and was considered to be one of the best movies of 2011. However, the story was difficult to advertise due to its conflicting nature, and its poor release window and lack of word of mouth from anyone seeing it made it a box office flop. However, for those that have seen it, Hugo is truly something special and captures an enchanting element that nobody would’ve ever expected from a filmmaker like Scorsese.

Based on a 2007 historical fiction book made by Brian Selznick, the story underneath this tale about a boy in the clock tower fixing a little robot is actually a real-life retelling of Georges Méliès, the famous actor and film director who led some of the greatest achievements ever performed in the early days of cinema, even being responsible for the famous 1902 film, A Trip to the Moon (or Le Voyage dans la Lune). Since the film doesn’t fully embrace this angle of dissecting this man’s life until the second half of the film, this results in the movie’s first act feeling slightly slow-paced and even padded in nature. Its handled nicely with great care and likeable atmosphere, but its really when the movie starts to talk about the art of cinema where this movie really takes off. Its incredibly hard to make a movie without fantastical elements feel enchanting, yet Scorsese managed to pull it off flawlessly with an atmosphere that can only be described as magical. It has this innocence that is very rarely capture in movies, where it feels extravagant yet never overblown, which is how this movie would have been portrayed if it was given to anyone else. It feels brutally honest without having any real stakes attached; its fantasy in everything other than its source material, almost like a silent movie or a play. The moments that are about discovering the origins of cinema and the emotions felt when making or witnessing a film are so phenomenally engrossing that it allows an audience member to even ignore elements about the movie that wouldn’t normally work. While the directing for this film is pretty spot on, the script for this film written by John Logan is not as effective. Parts of the story in the first act don’t really come into play later on or are even explained that effectively, the symbolism and metaphoric connections are decent, but maybe a little too obvious and cut-and-dry, and in terms of a whole picture, any part not related to Méliès isn’t something that’s incredibly memorable, deep or interesting (if anything it feels a little too redundant of other storybooks tales of its kind that contain a quirky yet ground concept) it’s the strength of the acting, the visuals, the music and the atmosphere that really carry this movie.

The set-up of having a majority of this story take place within a railway station provides opportunities to have a lot of enclosed and singular interactions with a small and recognizable cast of simple characters. It’s not an amazing cast of roles, but when you have good actors who are able to provide quality stuff with little effort, you can go a long way with it and this movies have a ton of great names attached, including others like Christopher Lee, Emily Mortimer, Jude Law, Sacha Baren Cohen, Helen McCrory, Ray Winstone, Frances de la Tour, Richard Griffiths, etc. The leads are mostly acted pretty well (especially Butterfield who can really sell his crying scenes), but its also done in that ‘’kid’’ kind of acting where it feels slightly off and stilted in moments, but with the correct amount of passion. If a child actor isn’t able to feel 100% convincing, they need to at least sound invested and genuine in their emotions, and both Butterfield and Grace-Mortez do manage that well enough. More serious roles like Ben Kingsley and Helen McCrory are nicely handled, and while Sacha Baren Cohen’s character is handled a little too overly goofy, his more somber moments highlighting his broken leg are actually pretty nice and show that despite his eccentric and even risky stage persona, he can handle a more grounded film if given the opportunity to do so. The cast is taking this subject mattered as seriously as they can with whatever they’ve been given; it has that weird extra element of odd intensity that most kids’ movie of this type don’t have (most likely coming down to who’s in the director’s chair), but it creates a fantastic balance beam of jumping between tones without coming across as messy.

The film was considered to be one of the best 3D movies of its time for how it incorporated it into the filming of the movie and even without the technology, that can be felt throughout the movie in a positive way. This movie looks fantastic; it is so inviting, distinct and has a look that feels like shades of a painting, but with camera angles of a Hitchcock film by Robert Richardson, its expertly done and allows the 3D to actually engross the audience instead of taking them out of the moment due to how the scenes are composed. The environments, colors and the production design by Dante Ferretti can be overly pronounced and not very realistic in moments, but the entire movie operates in this weird fanatical reality that more feigns realism than actually portrays it, allowing this half-measure visual design to create its own identity. The music by Howard Shore strangely doesn’t become too annoying despite there being very little rest throughout the whole movie; usually a never-ending score is painfully obnoxious and shows signs of not taking your audience seriously, but the rich subtleness of a lot of the score along with its roots in classical and cultural music makes it beautiful and memorable to listen too. Almost everything to how this movie is paced, to how its acted, to even how its composed and filmed, drips with the passion that can only come from someone who truly believes that cinema is truly magical. There’s just something to how this movie handles this sense of fantastical energy that never feels corny or too in-your-face, it totally feels genuine and could almost make you giddy with how it portrays it so effectively.

Hugo can’t even really be considered a cult classic or a recently discovered hidden gem because despite how many critics raved about it, nobody really talks about this movie. It’s a film that would have been very difficult to advertise and even more difficult to get people to watch as it doesn’t look like anything that remarkable from the outset. The beauty of this movie is that it’s a kid’s movie, but it isn’t really meant for them; rather its meant for those that wish to feel like a kid again. It has that sense of wonderful heart and soul that even some of the best kids’ movie sometimes don’t achieve and that comes from its clear passion. The acting is appropriate, the film is beautiful to look at, it has great music, it tells a wonderful true story underneath its fairy-tail structure, and it’s a unique approach that might not be perfect but does a lot of things so charmingly sweet that it doesn’t even register on the first viewing. See for yourself if you too will get engrossed within this film’s love for the arts and appreciate the workings of a true cinematic master both in and out of the screen.