What could you find...
Have you ever had a movie completely catch you off guard... in a good way? A film you weren't expecting anything from at all, only to have it so surprise you with its sincerity and uniqueness that you're still talking about it the next day and recommending it to everyone you can think of?
For me, that film is Hugo.
Katie and I saw Martin Scorsese's latest masterpiece in theaters last night. It wasn't a movie I particularly wanted to see. It struck me as a cheesy sort of kids film. Katie wanted to see it more than I did. I figured if she wanted to see it, then I would go along if only to see how Scorsese (whom I studied in a grad school English/film course) would approach the making of a kids movie.
Here's all I really knew about it. A boy (Hugo Cabret) is basically homeless living in a train station. He's being chased by a security guard. He meets a girl his age. A train crashes through the station. There's some weird scene with an androidish man flying through the air. It's set in something like the 1920s or 1930s in Paris. Oh, and at some point or another, at least according to the poster, the boy is hanging from the minute hand on a clock tower.
Not much to go on, but as I didn't care, I didn't seek any clarification on the web.
Oh it is soooo much more.
Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield of The Boy in the Striped Pajamas) is indeed an orphaned child living in the walls of a train station in Paris. He spends his days maintaining the clocks in the station so they don't lose time. He does this secretly as he cannot allow station staff to know both that he is living there and that he is doing the job of his uncle (Ray Winstone) who is constantly missing due to being a drunkard. On occasion, Hugo pilfers toys from a man named Georges (Sir Ben Kingsley of everything) who runs a toy shop in the station. The reason for the pilfering is so Hugo, who has been trained in the art of clockmaking and maintenance by his dad (Jude Law), can use parts from the toys to finish restoring an automaton (a humanoid figure made of metal) that his father rescued from a museum. This task is a labor of love for Hugo as it was the final project that he and his father worked on together. Things happen which further entangle the lives of Hugo and Georges in unexpected and incredible ways and you just kinda have to sit back and let it all unfold.
I really don't want to get into it much more than this as I think the full story here is something you should uncover in the same manner I did... as a complete surprise, assuming you don't already know what it's about.
The rest of this perfectly cast movie is rounded out by Chloë Grace Moretz as Georges' goddaughter Isabelle, Sacha Baron Cohen as the station inspector, Emily Mortimer as the florist Lisette, Christopher Lee as the bookstore owner Monsier Labisse, Helen McCrory as Georges' wife Jeanne, and Michael Stuhlbarg as film historian Rene Tabard.
Hugo (Asa Butterfield) and Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz) watching the automaton in action.
Hugo is a truly beautiful and engaging film. One that deserves many viewings. I found the cinematography to be stunning, the storytelling top notch, the acting second to nothing I've seen this year, and Scorsese's directing to be inspired.
Oh, and while it's not expressly a kids movie as I initially anticipated, it is most certainly family friendly. But I would warn parents that to see it by themselves first to judge whether the action and themes are appropriate given the age of their children.
Please, if you see no other film this year, see Hugo.
For fun, see if you can keep track of how many Harry Potter alumni are in this film. Katie and I counted three. There could be more.
For the record, I am not being paid or in any other way compensated for this review. Katie and I saw Hugo of our own accord and truly loved it as much as my shameless gushing above would infer.
I've wanted to see it just based on the commercials. Good to know it's awesome!
Posted by: Sybil Law | Sunday, 04 December 2011 at 10:31 AM
Waaaaaaaay awesome.
Posted by: kapgar | Sunday, 04 December 2011 at 11:26 AM
A couple of people here in my office watched this over the weekend and they too said it was well worth going to see
Posted by: Kevin Spencer | Monday, 05 December 2011 at 02:42 PM
Definitely. Let me know what you think.
Posted by: kapgar | Monday, 05 December 2011 at 03:09 PM
You are the second person (whose opinion I listen to ) who has told me this is a good movie. I will definitely see it!
Posted by: sizzle | Monday, 05 December 2011 at 04:24 PM
Let me know what you think.
Posted by: kapgar | Monday, 05 December 2011 at 04:42 PM
I loved Hugo. Saw it on Thanksgiving night. Only in 2D, though. But the praise for it in 3D means that I need to go back and watch in 3D.
This movie spoke to me on so many levels, but mostly the film making parts. Also, Sasha Baron Cohen as the train station policeman was a nice surprise.
Posted by: Marty Mankins | Tuesday, 06 December 2011 at 12:56 PM
Cohen surprised me too. And I only saw it in 2D. Don't feel the need for 3D but will reconsider if you see it and convince me of its greatness. It's on your shoulders. ;-)
Posted by: kapgar | Tuesday, 06 December 2011 at 01:21 PM
Great review and I've got to see this with the kids, was on my To-Do list anyway, now on the MUST DO list - in 3D for sure - Daily Herald Dan Gire (who I generally agree with) said the 3d itself was as good or better than Avatar - and those effects really blew me away!
Posted by: Michael Longo | Wednesday, 07 December 2011 at 06:27 PM
You'll have to tell me how it is. As a rule, 3D doesn't do much for me. I though it was well done on the final Harry Potter film. But otherwise, meh. And I never saw Avatar.
Posted by: kapgar | Wednesday, 07 December 2011 at 08:49 PM