"Hugo is a brilliant film in nearly every regard."
Martin Scorsese’s Hugo is simply the best film of 2011.
But one could take it a step further than that and easily declare it to be the best film he’s ever made.
And easily one of the best films ever made.
Period.
It is honestly that good.
This review won’t be able to do the film justice, mainly due to the fact that in order to fully discuss how and why it succeeds on the levels it does would be unjust to those who haven’t seen it. There are brilliant twists and turns that involve the giant mystery at the heart of the film and to ruin any of those moments would be a sin.
As a result, this review will stay mostly spoiler free, and only encourage you to see the film for yourself. This isn’t standard Scorsese, nor is it a standard Hollywood affair. It’s billed as a children’s movie though it’s really so much more than that.
The film is based on a novel by author Brian Selznick, who has created something that is ‘not exactly a novel, not quite a picture book, not really a graphic novel, or a flip book or a movie, but a combination of all those things.’ Selznick was inspired by children’s author Remy Charlip and after befriending Charlip, even had him provide the illustrations. The book’s first 46 pages are nothing but illustrations, ones which clearly guided Scorsese as he helmed the project.
Asa Butterfield stars as Hugo Cabret, a young thief who lives in a train station in Paris during the 1930’s. His relatives have passed (I won’t ruin why or how) and he’s been left to run the clocks at the train station on his own. He isn’t paid for his efforts, nor does anyone know that he is responsible. But he feels it to be his duty and as such he does it with great care and responsibility.
The film opens with Hugo attempting to steal from a toy maker who sells merchandise out of the train station, only to be caught in the act. In an exchange for not reporting the thief, the toy maker (Ben Kingsley) forces Hugo to empty his pockets. The act is meant to relieve the thief of his stolen goods, but instead produces a notebook of personal value to both the toy maker and Hugo.
This notebook sets up the entire story, but again I won’t ruin how or why. Suffice it to say that there is quite the mystery behind it and the reasons Hugo would have it. And that its entire existence fuels a spectacular journey for both Hugo and the audience.
For you see, the story of Hugo Cabret isn’t exactly fiction.
The genius of the story is that it is told from the point of view of the fictional Hugo, though is deeply surrounded by factual events that involve a story so great one couldn’t possibly think of ruining it here. There are key characters and key events which Hugo becomes involved in which are entirely true and entirely worth watching unfold.
The truth behind these secrets, the magic involved, is so touching and so emotionally flawless that it’s hard to think of a better piece of cinema. What Scorsese has crafted here, thanks to the fine story-telling of Selznick, is a work of pure and utter perfection.
But it’s not just the story that succeeds.
There are smaller roles than that of Hugo throughout the film, ones like the Station Inspector played by Sacha Baron Cohen, that add a weight and creative realism to all of the events which unfold. Cohen isn’t necessarily a villain in the traditional sense, but certainly represents a threat to Hugo’s way of living. As Station Inspector, it is his job to see that unattended children are accounted for. It’s also his job to protect the respectable citizens at the train station from thievery, which puts even more pressure on Hugo’s lifestyle. He has to steal in order to survive, but by doing so may cause his very own destruction. He’s a thief out of necessity, not out of enjoyment. But why would a Station Inspector understand the many layers of that?
Or the part of Isabelle, played by Chloe Grace Moretz (Kick-Ass), who isn’t necessarily a love interest but rather a perfect partner for this once in a lifetime chance at adventure. She’s the yin to Hugo’s yang; she has only read about adventures rather than taken one and her family units are still very much intact. They seem more like Scout and Jem Finch than Rick Blaine and Ilsa Lund.
The film is very aware of its time in history and as such, so many of the character references and even the humor references feel perfectly placed of that era. The romance between minor characters feels like something fresh out of a Charlie Chaplin film. And Cohen’s Station Inspector, bent on catching thieves but typically finding more trouble for himself, feels like a character straight out of a Harold Lloyd masterpiece (of which, Safety Last is featured within the film).
Most importantly, Scorsese understands all this and has crafted it precisely this way. Hugo is a brilliant film in nearly every regard.
And then there’s the cinematography and 3D visuals.
Scorsese’s work here is absolutely worth visiting at least once, if not twice, in 3D. This is the first film that is a treat to see in such a ‘fad’ format. What Scorsese has done here with depth, dimensions, and simple interactions is breathtaking. Even James Cameron, director of Avatar, has been quoted as saying “It is magical to watch. This is absolutely the best 3D cinematography I've ever seen.” And it truly is. The experience is exactly what you would expect out of the 3D technology and brings with it a sense of professionalism that has yet to be seen by any other filmmaker. That concept alone is astonishing, considering this is Scorsese’s first work in the 3D field.
As already stated, Hugo is the film of 2011. It’s certainly the best thing to come out this year, which is certainly no knock at any other films or their quality. Rather, it’s a pure compliment on what Scorsese has masterly made here. It is unlike any of his other works, its 3D is unlike anything you have seen, and its story is quite possibly one of the most original ones ever told. The weight behind it, the way in which it is surrounded by real history, and the matter in which it all unfolds brings about one of the best cinematic creations an audience can experience.
(As an aside, it should be mentioned that the marketing for Hugo has been anything but brilliant, and those weighing their opinions on the film from commercials, trailers, or clips have been misinformed. What takes place within the 2hr runtime is nothing like what the advertisements make it out to be, clearly trying to market something that is simply better left for the audience to discover and enjoy on their own. This kind of adventure and story simply can’t be sold. Rather, it must be experienced.)
