MCN Blogs
Mike Wilmington

By Mike Wilmington

Wilmington on DVDs. Pick of the Week: New. Hugo

Hugo (Also Two Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo, or Three Disc 3D) (Four Stars)

U.S.: Martin Scorsese, 2011 (Paramount)

Martin Scorsese’s Hugo — a movie masterpiece if there ever was one — is a film for film lovers to dream on.
It’s an incredibility entertaining show. But how could it not be? Scorsese has made it at the peak of his craft and art, and so have his collaborators. Besides appealing to children, the movie should — a cliché I know but it applies here — appeal to the child in most of us too.
In telling his fabulous story of a little boy named Hugo Cabret, who secretly runs the clocks in a huge early ‘30s Parisian train station (the Gare Montparnasse) and his initial nemesis but eventual friend, filmmaker Georges Melies (the pioneering film genius who invented fantasy movies and narrative movies, now fallen on harder times), Scorsese takes much of the fantastic apparatus and the magical tools and tricks of cinema — touching on everything from the hand-tinted black and white silent movies of the turn of the century (Melies’ métier) to the spectacular 3D wide screen color and CGI effects of today — and uses it all to lavish breathtaking skill and a prodigal affection on each scene.
The maker of Mean Streets, Raging Bull, Goodfellas and The Departed, showing his gentler side, turns Hugo into a feast of delights.
Hugo is a tribute to the silent era and above all to Melies, a cinematic genius and a man of marvels who made over 500 films, lost them all when he burned them in despair after his career collapsed, and then saw other copies of those films unearthed, rediscovered and re-celebrated. But it‘s also a tribute to the movies of today in the age of The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, the cinema of extreme technical virtuosity and computer trickery and even 3D (used wonderfully well, for once), packed with CGI wonders that come up at the push of a button. Scorsese’s collaborators here are all among the best in the business, some among the best that ever were. Cinematographer Robert Richardson lit the glowing images, Dante Ferretti designed the brilliantly complex sets, Howard Shore wrote the lyrical music and Thelma Schoonmaker, once again, cut it all together, beautifully.
In the movie, the heroes, 12-year-old Hugo (Asa Butterfield) and 70-year-old Melies (Ben Kingsley), are a couple of glorious gadgeteers, inventors and artists who’ve both lost their worlds and have to reclaim them together. Even though we hardly ever leave the station, except briefly when, in one of Hugo‘s dreams, one of the trains crashes through an outside wall, Hugo becomes a kind of quest film, a journey film. Scorsese’s movie keeps whisking us from wonder to wonder, from the giant clock looking out at the Eiffel Tower (the perspective near the clock, especially when Hugo dangles off of it, suggests a mix of Quasimodo’s and Harold Lloyd’s views in  and  Safety Last, a movie that Scorsese shows us) to the grand flamboyance of the station interior, to Melies’ (Ben Kingsley) toy shop with its skittering little play-creatures and shelf-rows of mechanical dolls, through the vast clockwork gears and wheels and winding stairs and pullies behind the walls where the Gare Montparnasse time machinery is controlled.

All of this is seen, with Citizen Kane clarity and depth, through the eyes of 12-year-old Hugo, a Dickensian orphan leading a hard knocks life in the station. while secretly running the works in the walls — the boy who finds Melies, among his toys. (The real-life Melies, of course, after he lost his movie studio, really did have a toyshop in the train station.)

The union of the two is inevitable. Hugo was robbed of his childhood when his horologist father (Jude Law) died, leaving him the weird but bewitching legacy of an automaton that writes. Hugo’s drunken uncle Claude (Ray Winstone), then the station’s timekeeper, took him into Montparnasse, and taught him all about time. Then he died too, leaving Hugo, all alone, to run the clocks (unbeknownst, it seems to the stationmasters). And Melies, an extraordinarily gifted man, who was writer, designer, director and even star actor in most of those 500 films, was robbed of his artistic career, and even forced, to dismantle his movie studio (the world‘s first), and destroy his own films because of changing public tastes and the machinations of the clever businessmen who robbed him and others blind.

It was one of the early tragedies of world cinema. Given the early piratical and later tyrannical practices of the business types who took over the movies, and who made obsessive artists like Melies subordinate to their main goals (money and more money), how could it not be?

Scorsese’s movie, the purest expression ever of the director’s passionate love of the cinema, shows us — SPOILER ALERT be damned — how both the fleet urchin inventor Hugo and the bearded, bespectacled magician/movie-man Melies regain what they lost.

There are others in the story of course, other denizens and habitués of the Gare. There is Melies’ plucky god-daughter Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz), who becomes Hugo’s station angel and movie going buddy, and Melies’ wife, beaming Mama Jeanne (Helen McCrory), the studious looking Lisette (film noir lover/actress Emily Mortimer), a fictional Emily (Frances de la Tour), who has a little dachshund, and Emily‘s rotund boyfriend M. Frick (Richard Griffiths, who looks like he was born for a silent movie, and a pie in his face) and, most dangerously the tyrannical station inspector (played with an edge by Sacha Baron Cohen), a WWI veteran with a prosthetic leg, a stickler who chases Hugo and other orphans all around the station.

And there’s another character from outside the station group: the film lover, academic and Melies admirer Rene Tabard, played by Michael Stuhlbarg, who played the Job figure in the Coen Brothers’ A Serious Man.

Scorsese is a master director of actors, but usually in rougher, tougher, fouler-talking urban milieus. Here he and his actors go for the larger-than-life fairytale quality that Spielberg or Jean-Pierre Jeunet or Robert Zemeckis have mastered — and in fact, Hugo often suggests what Jeunet’s Amelie may have been like, if Spielberg had directed it, and if Amelie had been played not by Audrey Tautou, but by Zazie dans le Metro (the little gamin who, come to think of it, sounded and swore something like a Scorsese mean streets character).

It’s not Scorsese’s milieu, and in a way, not even his style, but you can tell how much the material means to him, how much the cinema means to him. Because of all that, Hugo is easily one of the most personal movies he’s ever made. Mean Streets and Goodfellas show us his real world, and the world around that world. Hugo shows us the world of his dreams, the world of the movies.

Hugo was based on the children’s book by Brian Selznick (yes, it’s that Selznick family)  “The Invention of Hugo Cabret” (a better film title, by the way, than Hugo) and the screenwriter was John Logan, of The Aviator, Gladiator and Rango. With its child’s perspective on a child’s fantasy world, it’s the first movie of its kind that Scorsese has ever done — unless you want to count the boy’s-eye view he used in his classic mother-son road movie, Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore. But Alice was , at bottom, a realistic movie, while Hugo is a great rich fever dream a movie that suggests the kind of wild spree Spielberg would have made out of Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s lush French farce Amelie, if the screen character Amelie were 12 years old, and more like Louis Malle’s Zazie dans le Metro than Audrey Tautou.

Yet its also pure Scorsese, and quite clearly one of the most personal movies he‘s ever made.

Movie-loving, it seems to me, especially the intense kind that Scorsese demonstrates in this film and in his many film preservation ventures, is one of the most prodigal and rich of all artistic obsessions — since the movies are the art that can embrace not only all the world, but all the arts and entertainments and people in the world. To make a movie like Hugo, to pay such extravagant, but well-deserved, tribute to the great Georges Melies (Ben Kingsley lets the character swallow him up) is to show, in many ways, a universal artistic love for that world and all its (best) works.

Melies, who began his show business career as one of Paris’ best stage magicians, was a man who made both magic and the movies, triumphed in both, lost both, and regained both. He would have probably been touched that today you can buy a set with over 170 of his films (from Criterion) and play it in your homes on anoher magical invention. He would have been touched too by Hugo, I‘m sure, as I was. It’s my favorite film this year. How could it not be?

Leave a Reply

MCN Blogs

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how many recappers, while clearly over their heads, are baseline sympathetic to finding themselves routinely unmoored, even if that means repeating over and over that this is closer to “avant-garde art” than  normal TV to meet the word count. My feed was busy connecting the dots to Peter Tscherkassky (gas station), Tony Conrad (the giant staring at feedback of what we’ve just seen), Pat O’Neill (bombs away) et al., and this is all apposite — visual and conceptual thinking along possibly inadvertent parallel lines. If recappers can’t find those exact reference points to latch onto, that speaks less to willful ignorance than to how unfortunately severed experimental film is from nearly all mainstream discussions of film because it’s generally hard to see outside of privileged contexts (fests, academia, the secret knowledge of a self-preserving circle working with a very finite set of resources and publicity access to the larger world); resources/capital/access/etc. So I won’t assign demerits for willful incuriosity, even if some recappers are reduced, in some unpleasantly condescending/bluffing cases, to dismissing this as a “student film” — because presumably experimentation is something the seasoned artist gets out of their system in maturity, following the George Lucas Model of graduating from Bruce Conner visuals to Lawrence Kasdan’s screenwriting.”
~ Vadim Rizov Goes For It, A Bit

“On the first ‘Twin Peaks,’ doing TV was like going from a mansion to a hut. But the arthouses are gone now, so cable television is a godsend — they’re the new art houses. You’ve got tons of freedom to do the work you want to do on TV, but there is a restriction in terms of picture and sound. The range of television is restricted. It’s hard for the power and the glory to come through. In other words, you can have things in a theater much louder and also much quieter. With TV, the quieter things have to be louder and the louder things have to be quieter, so you have less dynamics. The picture quality — it’s fine if you have a giant television with a good speaker system, but a lot of people will watch this on their laptops or whatever, so the picture and the sound are going to suffer big time. Optimally, people should be watching TV in a dark room with no disturbances and with as big and good a picture as possible and with as great sound as possible.”
~ David Lynch