Sunday, November 27, 2011

Now Playing: Hugo (2011)

Today I was fortunate enough to catch a movie with a film reviewer and writer I greatly admire. You may remember him as the guest writer we had here in the summer, @2DReviews! I left the choice up to him about what we should see, and after all the great critical buzz surrounding it, he couldn't help but want to see Martin Scorsese's new film Hugo. I was of course more than happy to go along because, as I said, this film has been getting some great marks all over the place and I'd heard it had possibly the best use of 3D yet in a movie! That's a pretty bold claim, but I loved it in Avatar and so I was curious to see how Hugo did it. So was this the fun family adventure film that we were hoping to see? You might be surprised.


From the trailers it seems like Hugo is going to be a fun, fanciful, family adventure starring Asa Butterfield as Hugo, and Chloe Moretz as his friend Isabelle. We see a curious little metal man and a mysterious heart shaped key and we wonder what enchanted tale it will all tell. Well, I'm here to tell you that the movie isn't really about that at all. What it's really about is a young boy and girl discovering the history of silent films because the boy likes movies and the girl has never seen any before. The little metal man, or the automaton as they call it, is simply a side plot point that really isn't very fantastical at all. Actually, it's far more creepy and weird than anything else. I know a lot of this may seem like spoilers, but if the movie was advertised as what it really is, this is what you'd get. And what they're selling in the trailers really isn't what you're going to get when you pay for those tickets.


Turns out the movie is barely about this little automaton at all
I really don't know where to start with this movie. It has quite a bit going for it on the positive side, but quite a lot of negatives too. On the positive side, the 3D really was very good. I'm not sure if I'd say it was better than Avatar, but it is damn close if it isn't. It was crisp and clear and added lots of depth while still having the few things, like some snowflakes, come out of the screen as well. The special effects, the city, and the cinematography were all very good too, resulting in a beautiful looking movie.

Before I get too far into this review, though, I have to bring up that automaton. That has to be one of the creepiest freaking things I've seen in a while. There is one scene in particular where, inexplicably, it is staring at Hugo while he sleeps. I repeat, it STARES at him while he's sleeping! Now while it is shown to be able to move (it is a wind-up figure after all), we are never given any indication that it is "alive" or anything of the sort. This only means that Hugo must have moved and positioned this thing closer to his bed, and also positioned the head so its cold, dead, black eyes will be aimed, glaring unblinking at him as he slumbers. WHO WOULD DO THAT?! Then Hugo proceeds to have nightmares about the mechanized doll, waking up in a cold sweat with a jump. That automaton thing is evil I say! Just look at the smug, callous glare it is always giving. You can just tell it hates the world and everything in it. Also, all I could think of during those dreams was about that 80s TV ad about child safety. "I am Astar, a robot. I can put my arm back on. You can't. So play safe!"

The wacky inspector is always on the look out for pesky children
On the plus side, the acting is quite good, if a little odd sometimes. Ben Kingsley is quite good, as are the two main kids. Unfortunately, while they did act well, their characters just weren't interesting at all. In fact I couldn't have cared less about Hugo, and strangely found myself frequently hoping he would tragically die. I didn't feel such animosity towards Isabelle, but she was kind of naive and annoying. Sacha Baron Cohen was fine as the strange train station inspector, but to be honest he always seemed out of place in this world. He was goofy and wacky, while the rest of the world was often quite serious. He even stuck out with how he looked. While nearly everybody else is in browns, he wears a bright blue uniform with large shiny golden buttons. Christopher Lee also has a role here as a bookstore owner at the station. For the life of me, I really can't figure out what the point of this character was in the movie. There are just so many pointless characters that we spend far too much time with.

A recreated scene from an old black and white silent film
The most glaring oddity of the film is that it ends up being about something entirely different than what it's being sold as in the trailers. The fun family adventure soon vanishes as the children, and I kid you not, start researching the history of film making. They even go to the library and we watch them read a book about it. Then they meet the writer of the book and get to see his collection of movie memorabilia. Really, the film just becomes a festival of "self pleasuring" for movie historians under the thin disguise of an adventure movie. Apparently the first film ever made was about a train coming into a station... how convenient that this movie takes place in a train station then!

Ben Kingsley becomes a surprisingly important character of the film. More important than Hugo in fact
In the end, I was frustrated, annoyed, and ultimately bored by this well acted, and beautiful, but overly long film. The weirdest thing to me is that, while I very much enjoy watching old classic movies and seeing them play out before my eyes, I found this film's obsession with old films to be incredibly dull. How can that be? I should be the exact target audience for this movie! Instead, it just seemed to be a masturbatory history lesson on film. While this is sold as a family film, I can't imagine a single child who would end up liking this movie. The premise of the little metal man, that literally has a key to its heart, is quickly abandoned as nothing more than a plot device to get to other things, and it just becomes something that I didn't want. I can't recommend this film, in the end. It was just boring, while at the same time its own internal themes continuously clashed with each other, making the film feel like a mess.

And I know I wasn't alone. Next time, I get to choose the film 2D!

3 comments:

  1. Shame to hear that this movie is being marketed this way. Especially since it'll likely turn people off the movie rather than encourage them to see it.

    We almost went to see this movie instead of The Muppets. I'm so glad that didn't happen now. I'm sure my wife would have been bored and I probably wouldnt have found this nearly as enjoyable.

    I know I was interested in seeing a movie about the automaton and his story. Hearing what the actually story is about, I couldn't care less. Not even sure if I'd do a $1 RedBox rental. (oh yea, they aren't $1 any more)

    ReplyDelete
  2. After seeing that Astar commercial so many times as a kid I thought, "man, it would be cool to cut off my arm and re-attach it." I don't think it was the right message to interpret.

    But yes. You pick the movie next time. Lordy. I AM SORRY.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A lot of the praise this film is getting really seems that it's simply because, obviously, people who review films LOVE films. Of course something that enshrines the oldest beginnings of film, while using the most advanced 3D film technology yet seen is going to make them all drool. While I get it, and I will admit it was well made, it just wasn't very fun for me. Educational, certainly, but that's not what I paid for that day.

    ReplyDelete

Please leave a comment for us!