Movies: 19831 | TV Series: 3309 | Added today: 16 | Storage: 74747 GB
|Starring:||Ben Kingsley, Jude Law, Richard Griffiths, Christopher Lee, Ray Winstone, Emily Mortimer, Kevin Eldon|
Hugo is an orphan boy living in the walls of a train station in 1930s Paris. He learned to fix clocks and other gadgets from his father and uncle which he puts to use keeping the train station clocks running. The only thing that he has left that connects him to his dead father is an automaton (mechanical man) that doesnt work without a special key which Hugo needs to find to unlock the secret he believes it contains. On his adventures, he meets with a shopkeeper, George Melies, who works in the train station and his adventure-seeking god-daughter. Hugo finds that they have a surprising connection to his father and the automaton, and he discovers it unlocks some memories the old man has buried inside regarding his past.
chrismsawin 18 May 2013
Martin Scorsese is a well respected director known for R-rated filmsusually revolving around crime or gangsters in some capacity. Sayingthe F-word nearly 300 times in one movie, stabbing someone with a pen,flushing a stash down the toilet, getting whacked, getting blown up,and getting your mind blown to such extremities in the last twentyminutes of a feature that you win an Oscar for it even though somebodyalready made that movie before; these are the things that come to mindwhen you think of Scorsese. Scorsese hadn't really worked with childrenmuch over his career or at least not to this extent. So that wasinteresting to keep in mind when Hugo started making the rounds. Afamily friendly Martin Scorsese film seems so surreal, but is more thana worthy addition to an already overflowing resume full of fantasticcinema.It takes a while for Hugo to really get going, but it's certainlybeautiful in the meantime. The film is a visual spectacle while eachframe is an absolute joy to look at. You're taken through the intricateinsides of various clocks at a train station; seeing their gears moveas the use of steam adds just the right amount of mystery. It's not somuch the fact that Hugo is slow because it isn't. There's this veil ofmystery that isn't lifted until Hugo (Asa Butterfield) finally cavesand tells his story. The various clocks and train station setting keepsyou occupied and the long introduction with no dialogue is extremelynoteworthy. It's just for nearly half the film, you have all theseelements (clocks, the train station, a notebook, an automaton, andHugo's father) without much of a connection. But it does all cometogether in extraordinary fashion.The cast is really superb. Asa Butterfield is so passionate andemotional. Those blue eyes of his tell the story better than words evercould. Chloe Grace Moretz is so optimistic and eager for a chance at anadventure. You can't help but adore the Isabelle character. Sacha BaronCohen seems to step way out of his element here. The Station Inspectorseems like a complete 180 from Bruno or Borat, but his sense of humoris still in his performance. He just happens to have a bit more depthin comparison. Ben Kingsley's Georges MÃ©liÃ¨s goes through such atransformation in the film though that he's able to display such a widerange of emotion. He plays the broken old man impeccably.There are times when movies affect you in a way that let you know theyare special. For me, it's like I'm suddenly overcome by a wide range ofemotions that make me want to laugh, cry, scream at the top of mylungs, and the overwhelming sensation of never wanting that moment orthe movie to end. I'm not ashamed to say I felt that a few times duringHugo. James Cameron called Hugo a masterpiece and it's really difficultto argue with that. There isn't a weak point in the cast, the visualsare outstanding, and you find yourself connecting to the story. You'resucked into this world right from the start. Hugo is one of the mostbeautiful and charming films of the year.
Ignatiy Vishnevetsky 17 May 2013
The energy that's behind all of [Scorsese's] films is definitely present here.
CaptMTS 16 May 2013
Hugo is an enchanting film that will dazzle the viewer with itsbeautiful scenes, real characters, and simple emotional story. Thiswonderful film reminds me of one of my favorite Italian films "CinemaParadiso", as they both stir up strong emotions in a simple andbeautiful way.Hugo is an orphan who lives at a train station and cares for thestation's clocks. Hugo is devoted to fixing a mechanical robot (anautomaton), hoping for a message from his deceased father. Hugo stealsfrom a toy shop owner, constantly dodges the train station policeman,and befriends a young girl. These characters become an important partof Hugo's life, as he works to uncover the mystery of the automaton.I haven't been a big fan of 3-D technology, which has beendisappointing in most films that I've seen in 3D. However, Hugo's 3-Deffects are stunning and really make you feel part of the scenes. Thedirector Martin Scorcese does a magical job with this 3-D medium increating a visual masterpiece.While billed as a children's movie, this film will be more appreciatedby adults and older children. The story moves slowly, but, since themovie pulls you into Paris of many years ago, you don't even notice.Overall, Hugo is a wonderful and unique film that we'll be a rewardingmovie experience.
primevalsoup 15 May 2013
Spoilers from right now:When I realised that nothing was going to happen in this film, and thatthe robot wasn't going to do anything, kill anyone, or even be a bitscary, I figured this might be about how Martin Scorcese wanted to beremembered in the future.Professor: Hey kids. Are you reading about Martin Scorcese? He was oneof my idols during my years, working my way up to be the Professor of'Knowing stuff about Films'.Little girl: I had no idea my uncle Martin was a film director!Hugo: Wow. How spiffingly amazingProfessor: Well since he died, during the Great 'War on Terror', timehas not been kind to his movies. However, we have managed to keep holdof this one.Little girl: But my uncle isn't dead.Professor: What? But I'm sure I saw him die...Hugo: Dear sir, can we watch one of his movies?Professor: Of course! Allow me to introduce you to the genius of MartinScorcese.Later-Knock knock- Helen: Hello children.Little girl: Hey Aunty Helen, I had no idea uncle Martin was a famousdirector!Hugo: Like, yeah, you know what I mean? How did we not know about dat?What a wise guy. Did he pay off the cops?Helen: Hugo, why are you wearing sunglasses?Little girl: You can take them off now. We're indoors.Hugo: Hey, quit breaking my balls!Helen: Yes, uncle Martin made films. But he does not like to talk aboutit any more since the War on Terror ruined his business. Be quiet, orhe'll hear us and start emotionally manipulating us into feeling bad.Martin: It's too late for that.Little girl: Uncle Martin!Hugo: Hey what's up Marty? I had no idea you were such a guy, you know?I had you down as one of those goody-good people who worked shitty jobsfor bum paychecks and took the subway to work every day, and worriedabout their bills. Making dumb toys in your shop, which I'd just stealto make my terminator in some random part of the station no one evergoes in, because property is so cheap in Paris there's no incentive tomake maximum use of all available space.Martin: Hugo, before you were an irritating thief but now... what'shappened to you?Hugo: Fuhgeddaboudit.Little girl: Why did you stop making movies uncle Martin? And why werethey so... violent?Martin: Well, after the War on Terror, all everyone wanted to watchwere films and stories about terrorists, corrupt politicians and globalwarming. No one was bothered about mafia films any more so I went intoa strop and burnt all my films and my set. Then I decided to make aterminator to get revenge on society, but all it could do was drawpictures.Little girl: The academics at the university think you died in the war.Martin: It's true that my position was nearly overrun during OperationMichael of 2018 in the Franco/Luxembourg war that had been triggered byJihadists throwing toilet roll at the Centre Pompidou. However, Icalled in Robert Deniro to help me out. He owes his career to me.Little girl: What were you doing in the war? Weren't you 75 in 2018?Martin: I was loading artillery for the Hershey bar fusiliers.Hugo: Wow. You musta whacked some guys. But life on the streets ain'tnothing like the army, where you shoot 'em a mile away. You gotta getup close like this... badaBING! You blow their brains out all over yournice NYU suit.Martin: I didn't direct 'The Godfather'. How many films have you justwatched?Hugo: You're breaking my balls too!Martin: Hugo, go and oil some clocks and get out of my house.Hugo: What did you say m********?!
mrwarnemunde 15 May 2013
I was actually angry leaving the theatre after this movie. Although itis well acted and nice to look at, I was very let down by this movie.The previews make it seem like a different movie than it is. The storyline is non-existent. I kept waiting for something to happen and ITNEVER DID. I thought the robot was going to come alive and that is whatthe movie is centered around; DOES NOT HAPPEN. The exciting parts ofthe movie are in the previews. Instead, you have a sleeper of a storyabout Kingsley. Shacha Baron Cohen's performance will be raved about bycritics, when actually it's very predictable. Kids around me weretalking the whole time because they did not understand the movie and itwas so boring. The whole movie is not worth the money.Overall, If you are looking for a "fantasy"/"adventure" this movie isdefinitely not it. -and don't bring your kids.
daddyofduke 14 May 2013
When I think of Martin Scorsese I think of violence, Robert De Niro,Joe Pesci, and a ton of profanity. I think of brilliant films aboutgangsters and one about a psychotic taxi driver. But now I think aboutHugo, Martin Scorsese's latest directorial effort. In fact, I thinkabout Hugo a lot. It is a brilliant film. Not perfect, but brilliant.Hugo is brilliant on a multitude of levels: as a fable, as aninterpretation of film history, as a venue for stellar actingperformances, as a triumph of cinematic photography which involves 3Dimagery, and as a vehicle for wondrous entertainment. That Hugo isdirected by the same guy who directed films in which two men aresavagely beaten by men with baseball bats and then buried still barelyalive, a boxing ring's ropes drip the blood of a combatant, a taxidriver becomes a revered mass murderer, and a police captain is thrownoff a roof, is testament to the genius that is Martin Scorsese.The story involves an orphaned waif named Hugo Cabret (played tenderlyand effectively by Asa Butterfield) who steals to survive and livesamong the gears and levers of the enormous clocks in a train station.His life is tormented by the owner of a toy shop ( Ben Kingsley at hisbest) in the train station and his freedom is in jeopardy due to theefforts of a weirdly pathetic police officer, played by Sasha BaronCohen (who was the "hero" of Borat). Hugo dedicates enormous effort torepairing an automaton his father (played briefly by Jude Law) found indisrepair at a museum. During the course of his travails, Hugo meets ayoung lady named Isabelle (touchingly brought to life by Chloe GraceMoretz) who is the same age as he is. Turns out that Isabelle is cared for by the toy shop owner. And it alsoturns out that the toy shop owner is Georges Melies, the onetimedirector and star of some of the first movies ever made. Melies, incase you don't know, is a real person who did in fact transform moviesinto the medium we now know. The film also accurately references theLumiere brothers and their camera. The skills with which fantasy isweaved with fact alone compels watching this film.In the film, and in fact, when Melies' success fades, partly out ofdepression and partly in need of money, he melts his films for thecellulose he can sell. Largely as a result of Hugo's efforts to repairthe automaton, Melies stature is dramatically and appropriatelyresurrected. As I said, the film isn't perfect. The police officer who harasses Hugois played competently enough by Cohen, but the character just doesn'tfit into the film's contextual essence or tone. Picture Gilligan takingthe place of Ugarte in Casablanca and you get my point. Visually, Hugo is a miracle; its cinematic imagery, nuanced by 3Dtechnology, merits a thunderous standing ovation. The film'scinematographer, Robert Richardson, has helped fashion a film that hasset new standards to be emulated for years to come.I recently read that Martin Scorsese obsesses over every detail, nomatter how minute, of every facet of his films. Annoying as that traitmay be to those who work with him to make a movie, it has resulted insustained artistic excellence spanning more than four decades. Any listof the best directors ever inevitably includes Martin Scorsese.Consider just some of his films, Casino, The Departed, Good Fellas,Taxi Driver, The Last Waltz, Raging Bull, Gangs of New York, AliceDoesn't Live Here Anymore, and you understand why.As for all time great films, add Hugo to the list.
Keith Uhlich 12 May 2013
An odd combo of Babe: Pig in the City and Godard's Histoire(s) du cinéma, Hugo is the strangest bird to grace the multiplex in a while.
Matt Pais 11 May 2013
Recognizes the fragility of youth while affectionately saying, 'Believe it or not, kids, your parents had lives before you came along. And they went to the movies too.'
Mick LaSalle 09 May 2013
Ultimately, the biggest disappointment of Hugo is that it fails to make the case for 3-D as a legitimate tool for the serious filmmaker.
gradyharp 09 May 2013
HUGO is a strange film. It purports to be for children despite the factthat the screenplay written by Josh Logan based of the book 'TheInvention of Hugo Cabret' by Brian Selznick has more references towords and people and events that children would not relate to on thesame level as adults. It is a spectacle in the order of director MartinScorsese with some of the most beautiful contraptions and mechanicalwonders ever filmed. It seems in many ways to be an homage to thehistory of filmmaking in the manner in which the rather disjointedstory is presented. Likely it comes across better in 3D than on thesmall flat screen. Not that the film is without special merits: thereare many moments of impressive philosophical values, child/parentrelationships, and a few comedic turns. The cast is solid if somewhatunderused in this visual mechanical Parisian extravaganza spectacle,but it well worth watching as pure entertainment - and that is reallyOK!The story is well known: Hugo (Asa Butterflied) is a lad whose inventorfather (Jude Law) salvaged a broken automaton from a museum to fix itbut dies before accomplishing that: his Uncle Claude (Ray Winstone), adrunk, is let in charge of the lad. Hugo is soon left alone in thebizarre train station in Paris where he tends to the multiple clocks,misses his beloved father, and fends for himself by shoplifting foodand a few 'parts'. He is caught by a rather glum Georges MÃ©liÃ¨s (BenKingsley) who runs a toy store while bemoaning his current lack of thethrill of living, despite the nurturing he receives from his wife(Helen McCrory) and his adopted daughter Isabelle (ChloÃ« Grace Moretz)who longs for adventures. In time Hugo and Isabelle become fast friendsand discover the secrets held by Georges and it is through theirefforts that joy and the dreams of the aged filmmaker are resurrected.There are some sidebars - an injured WW I veteran who serves as StationInspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) who dreams of the attention of the flowerlady Lisette (Emily Mortimer), Madame Emile (Frances de la Tour) whosips coffee while tending her dog and attracting the attention of thehefty Monsieur Frick (Richard Griffiths), cinema devotee and historianRene Tabard (Michael Stuhlbarg) who opens the doors to the mysteriesthat have collected during the story), and the odd Rene Tabard(Christopher Lee) who part is questionable.The cast is strong - especially the children - and the special effectsare very lovely to watch. The film takes us to the land of fantasy andit is worthwhile trip. Though the film seems to be impressed withitself and the revelation of the history of cinema, it offers manypleasures. Not sure it is a DVD to buy, though. Grady Harp
Liam Lacey 05 May 2013
Scorsese's film is a richly illustrated lesson in cinema history and the best argument for 3-D since James Cameron's Avatar.
avadeshb 05 May 2013
Hugo takes you on a journey along the movie to spectacles you see inyour dreams, as rightly mentioned in the movie. Its a masterpiece whereevery scene is skillfully crafted and thoughtfully executed. Thecharacters so beautifully express everything with their emotions thatyou don't need many words. Martin Scorsese, the director guides you andgives you a perspective to look at the movie from angles only greatdirectors can think of. The opening sequences and the many that followhas a rhythmic dance of the camera work that takes you along amagnificent journey where the elemental story background of machines isfantastically brought to foreground with the use of 3D. You canexperience layers in the film, that leaves a lasting impression of themovie even after it is over. Hugo played by Asa Butterfield, portrays achild with a purpose. The pain in his eyes does emote a reaction in theaudience, so does the enthusiasm in the eyes of Isabelle, played byChloÃ« Grace Moretz. Ben Kingsley gives a superlative performance of aman who has lost purpose in life and has become a bitter old man. Theother supporting stories are perfectly interwoven in the main story toprovide some comic relief. Though the movie could have been morecrispier in terms of the storyline but it provides you visuals thatcompensates for the slow pace.
Asko 04 May 2013
Slow paced, from time to time touching and overall deep movie. Thestory of an orphan kid, who lives in the Paris train station and cravesto understand the purpose of his life, is more like an excerpt fromcinematography's history, but presented in a charming fairytale setup.The first 3D movie from Scorsese... the benefit from using the trendytechnology is controversial. The film does not have strong visuals toboast, but 3D, indeed, helps to detach the actors from the backgroundand bring more attention to them. Upon the whole acting is solid, butsometimes the emotions are misplaced (or at least non clear to thecommon user).It's worth to watch the movie just to get to know the way Cinema haspassed in the beginning, especially when it's created with noticeableproduction-value and love.
Mikael balanno 03 May 2013
Hugo is a stunning film; Im a 20 year old journalist working for acompany that gives parents suggestive, appropriate entertainment forthere little ones. When I was asked to present a powerpoint review ofthis particular jewel at a not so local PTA meeting, I knew I had towork fast as I had not even heard of this titles existence beforehand.So I began conducting, writing, and charting the pro's and cons to saidfilm. So mesmerized with the characters, story, and fantasy-like plot,I began the film again because the first time, i must admit ended upbeing more for my entertainment. Congratulations to Asa Butterfield,such a very talented, young actor whom I could only hope to one daywork with. While I have only written scripts for small Broadway play's;It would be an honer to work with a director Who is interested in thistalented young lad for lead role. Having said that, your in for amagical ride. So grab some ol' fashioned root-beer and popcorn and justkick back.
hvsteve1 01 May 2013
The Selznick book is considered a modern children's classic. If youread it, you will see how it inspired the film. The opening paragraphsof the book are, almost word for word, the script for the opening sceneof the camera soaring down from the sky into and through the railroadterminal. The book, itself, is a very unusual construct. Some pageshave only a few sentences of text followed by pages that advance thestory with nothing but drawings. Scorcese was very true to both thevisual and textual style of the book.The film, itself, is full of great film and stage actors in small rollsthat are pure gems. There is more depth to the characters than in thetypical family film.As to the 3D, the director shows how it can add to the film withoutdistracting from the art of telling a story. Some reviewers seemunderwhelmed by the 3D because objects don't jump off the screen, butthat's the point. It adds depth to the story, but does not drive thestory. The scenes, especially those set among the clockworks, wouldlook too busy and confusing without the 3D camera layering the movingobjects. The Scorcese technique of following his actors down hallways,up staircases and through crowds becomes stunning with the 3D camera.If you want to know how good this 3D is, see it as I did, in a theaterthat used the opportunity of an audience with 3D glasses to precede thefeature presentation with trailers for a half dozen current andupcoming 3D films. Watch those, then watch Hugo, and see how Scorcesehas, as James Cameron has said, advanced the art of 3D beyond any placeit has ever been.
jburtroald95 01 May 2013
Once again this school holidays we have another family film pesteringserious moviegoers to be seen because of its impressive line-up oftalent on both sides of the camera, its dazzlingly positive reviews,its boastful incorporation of weighty concepts and its self-professedwidespread appeal. People eventually discard their misgivings and hopand board because they feel that they would otherwise be missing out onsomething important. Unfortunately, the film usually disappoints assoon as the audience begins critically examine this critically-laudedfilm and finds its story to rife with revolting clichÃ©s, its themesplucked from easy and overused targets, such as World War 2, and itsuniversality entirely dependent on the younger viewers misunderstandingthe true substance of the piece.For these deficiencies, the critics always make the excuse that onemust re-enter that state of childlike acceptance of the preposterous inorder to fully appreciate the film. However, they condemn those that dowatch films in this same mindset when writing about the way they flockheedlessly to summer blockbusters. It often seems that reviewers justarbitrarily pick out one of the many hackneyed and saccharine familyfilms and refer to them as "heart-warming".Hugo, however, doesn't ask forgiveness for anything. All it requires ofus is two hours of our time to show all the spectacular tricks it canperform. Adapted from Brian Selznick's book The Adventures of HugoCabret is a film in two indistinct halves: one simple, slow andenigmatic, elevated by astonishing visuals, the other more pacey andfascinatingly complex, with more of a focus on story; one exploring thewonders of machinery, the other delving into the rich world of earlycinema.Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) is one of the many orphans left in theaftermath of the Great War, now scraping out an existence stealing foodfrom the shops of a Parisian train station and dwelling inside andsecretly operating the intricate workings of the enormous clock towerthat overlooks the busy swarm of passengers boarding the trains to workeach day. He is constantly dodging and living in fear of the ruthlessstation insepctor (Sacha Baron Cohen), a hardened war veteran whohobbles about in a troublesome, squeaky peg leg. However, it is not theinspector who eventually catches him but the equally humourless andworld-weary owner of a toy repair shop (Ben Kingsley) who catches himstealing parts for a mysterious project. He seizes searches andharasses the poor boy, who he sees as a worthless thief, finding aneerily familiar notebook of mechanical calculations and sketches in hispockets, which he confiscates. Hugo insists on having it returned tohim, no matter how many times the man refuses or threatens him, andgoes to the point of enlisting the help of the man's sympathetic wardIsabelle (ChloÃ« Grace Moretz).It takes quite a while for any light to be shed on the subject of thisall-important notebook, or indeed anything else surrounding the boy orthe old man, but it would be terrible of me to reveal anything as theaudience is very deliberately kept in the dark for much of the movie.As I've said before, the breathtaking 3D imagery of the vague earlypassages prevents the audience from drifting off or becoming impatient.Details such as the camera's swift turns and dips in a fast-pacednavigation through stylistically designed cascading snow-coveredrooftops, jungles of clockwork and fast-moving steam trains make everyscene utterly captivating.Then, as secrets are uncovered, characters fleshed out, relationshipscemented and dramatic events start to occur, the eye candy is eitherpacked away so as not be distracting, or the audience becomesaccustomed the stunning aesthetic Â I'm not sure which Â and the filmtakes flight in a very different way. As describing these climacticsections is impossible to do without ruining its effect Â this is themost prevalent flaw in the concept of film reviews Â let me simply sayfor all its teetering on the edge of toxic contrivances, it pullsthrough with believability and purpose. In fact, it is on these lattertwo qualities where it finds the common ground between the twoaforementioned fields. At least in its early stages, motion pictureswere among the other stupendous carnival attractions that impressedeveryone with its innovative creation of a seamless illusion.Finally, as for the ensemble of accomplished cinematic practitioners,due credit must go to Martin Scorcese, who directs without losing hisartistic integrity or his maturity, but still ensuring that youngeraudiences will have something to marvel at, and some element of thefilm's meaning to hold onto. His cast has been impressively assembled,and do a fine job in their roles. It is a pleasure to see HelenMcCrory, Richard Griffiths, Frances de la Tour (all who are now bestknown for their involvement in the Harry Potter films), the lovelyEmily Mortimer, the charming Jude Law, the irrepressibly robust RayWinstone and the monstrously prolific, now 89-year-old Christopher Leetaking on colourful supporting roles. However, deserving of particularmention are Asa Butterfield, Ben Kingsley and Sacha Baron Cohen. Cohenand Kingsley give terrifically sympathetic and multi-layered portrayalsof two of the war's most miserable victims, and while Kingsley has puthis abilities to good use, Cohen sadly often wastes his lively comiccharisma trying to offend as many people as possible instead of makingthem appreciated in films like Sweeney Todd and Madagascar. Mostimportantly, our young star Master Butterfield has finally found someworthy exposure for his remarkable portrayals of troubled boys who havelong lived in very difficult circumstances, but have hardly grownespecially stealthy or adept at coping with their environment, andstill retain an internal emotional delicacy.So, believe me when I say that Hugo is a must-see remarkable cinematicachievement for the entire family, and, best of all, you can criticallyanalyse all you like, it can take it!
Wayne Malin 30 April 2013
Story that takes place in the 1920s. An orphan named Hugo (AsaButterfield) lives in a huge Paris terminal making sure all the clocksrun correctly. He gets involved in a mystery involving his dead father(Jude Law), a mechanical figure and the mysterious Georges Melies (BenKingsley).The first film directed by Martin Scorsese for a family audience. Toobad it's so terrible. It's boring (I considered leaving a few times),heavy handed, simplistic and slow. The plot is virtually nonexistentand the coincidences that occurred were WAY too hard to believe. Plentyof plot loopholes too. To make matters worse we have a stationinspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) who (I suppose) is supposed to be funnybut just comes across as annoying. On the plus side it LOOKED great(the station and overviews of Paris in the 1930s are astonishing) andthis movies uses 3D better than any other movie I've seen. It also hasa message that books are great and movies are magic--two VERY positivemessages for any child to hear. An extra bonus is seeing the actualfilms of Georges Melies on a big screen in great condition with thehand colored frames of the originals. The acting was OK and it was atreat to see Christopher Lee in a small role. But, all in all, I foundthis pointless and boring. It's only being praised to the high heavensbecause Scorsese did it. A 1 all the way.
Humphrey Fish 29 April 2013
I have just come home from the theater totally and completelyastonished. Martin Scorsese has done something that is absolutelyincredible, he has directed his first movie that is aimed for youngeraudiences. Hugo (based on The Invention Of Hugo Cabert) is amasterpiece, it is on the same level as Goodfellas. Of course, there isa difference between the two movies. Goodfellas is for older audiences,and Hugo is for younger audiences. So let me put it this way, Hugo isScorsese's family equivalent to Goodfellas! This movie is also MartinScorsese's first movie in 3D, and the camera-work and photography inthis movie is absolutely beautiful! This marks the first time that Ihave ever seen Scorsese on the big screen, and hopefully, it won't bethe last time! Scorsese's directing is brilliant, but so is everythingelse in this movie! When it comes to directing movies, Martin Scorsesesimply cannot fail, I have loved every single one of his movies that Ihave seen, he is one of the greatest directors who has ever walked theface of the planet!Most of the acting in this movie stunned me, Asa Butterfield wassomething great, because in a time where there aren't many good childactors, he happens to be a an exception. I also was astonished by BenKingsley, he was also something great. I also happened to notice asurprise in this movie...Sacha Baron Cohen. I have seen him in only oneother role, and of course, that's Borat. Here, he plays the stationinspector and gets into a lot of very funny scenes involving him andAsa Butterfield. Scorsese scores another big one with this movie, it isjust as good as my five favorite Scorsese movies. My five favoriteScorsese movies are (in no specific order) Goodfellas, Casino, TheDeparted, Raging Bull, and Taxi Driver. It was nice to see Scorsesecome down from the crime and gangster genre so we can see truly what atalented film director he is, Hugo is truly another masterpiecedirected by a master film director, it is proof of Martin Scorsese'stalent as a director of movies!On a scale from one to ten, one being the worst and ten being the best,this movie gets a perfect rating of ten out of ten from me. I didn'tautomatically like this movie because it's Scorsese, I also liked itfor other reasons, like the ones I mentioned in the paragraphs above.Hugo is Martin Scorsese's Goodfellas for children. What I mean by thatwhile this movie is mostly for younger audiences, it is just asfabulous as Goodfellas. Take your children to see this movie, no betteryet, let them take you to see it, because you will be astounded by themagic, the directing, the scenery, or to make a long story short, bythe entire movie! Since this movie is directed by Martin Scorsese, thenyou can probably expect this movie to be fabulous, and hey, it isfabulous! I'm not kidding you at all, see this movie for yourself, itis fabulous! It is one of the best movies that I have seen in quite along time, and it is the best movie that I have seen at the theater sofar this year.10/10
chrisknealejones 25 April 2013
It's up there with Sex and the City 2 - one of the worst films I haveever seen. Unless you are somehow gifted with an ability to extract andappreciate "cinematography" and skip over the fact that nothingactually happens in this film, you will vigorously hate this film. Ifyou liked "The Tree of Life", you'll probably enjoy it. For themajority who actually appreciate something happening in a film, avoidlike the plague.Chloe Moretz is impressive - dropping the stateside accent for a verywell presented English accent. Sadly - as was the case in "The Boy inStriped PJs" - Asa Buttefield was bland and predictable.
MsMovie 24 April 2013
I made the mistake of believing the trailers for this movie which madeit look like a cross between Harry Potter and the Narnia movies. It'snot at all like that. It is a movie for movie buffs to enjoy, who willget all the movie related homages. It's a movie for teenagersdefinitely, those who have the patience to sit through a "kids" moviethis long. I would definitely not recommend it for the average kidunder 10 years old - it's not violent or anything like some ofScorcese's other movies, it's just not kid friendly. Take the under10's to Arthur Christmas and leave this one to the teens and adults -they will most likely find it visually stunning, breathtaking in fact,if a bit lacking in concrete plot - and there are some pretty big holesin this plot too.Quite frankly, as an adult who LOVES movies, I found it to bebeautifully crafted, beautifully shot, but I won't watch it againbecause it was totally lacking in story.Why do we watch a movie again and again? Because we love to relive thestory over and over again, even overlooking the parts that were notthat great (I'm thinking "It's a Wonderful Life"'s talking angel stars- perhaps good SFX at the time, just annoying now!).Sorry Mr Scorcese - it's beautiful, like a Monet, Picasso etc, but Idon't want to own it or re-watch it again.Honestly, I preferred The Polar Express - similar hype, better story,definitely one to own. This one, not so much!