“”Hugo” is unlike any other film Martin Scorsese has ever made, and yet possibly the closest to his heart: a big-budget, family epic in 3-D, and in some ways, a mirror of his own life.”- Roger Ebert
I have to disagree this film is not his most personal, I thought it was his semi-autobiographical masterpiece Mean Streets. However being the cinephile that Scorsese is I can see why this might be put up to debate. This film caught me off guard but in the best way possible. I guess you can equate it to a Tarantino musical. I don’t think it would happen but i sure as hell pray.
This animation reminded me of the work in the newest Great Gatsby. I love watching all movies but I am not particularly fond of digital animation granted the digital animation did enhance the fantasy of the film but it also took away a great sense of depth. This film was 170,000,000 dollars to make. The Great Gatsby was 105,000,000 to make. Digital is expensive.
I think the money is what made the film great not the story. The story premise felt average to me. The movie didn’t make me think like Spirited Away did. I just sat there mesmerized like a blob mainly because everything felt given to me. I guess the audience is based for children should be not dumbed down, but more easily understood.
I think Hugo was a tribute to early cinema but i feel that one shot I would have loved would be the face of the girl mesmerized by her first movie. I didn’t really grasp her reaction or maybe i was busy tweeting.
All in all Hugo felt simple to me. But simple is hard to do. Just as a clock hand moves the devil is in its details.