Hugo's Glorious Finale

email this story
read comments (31)
post a comment

Martin Scorsese's Hugo (Paramount. 11.23) screened this afternoon for press at the big Regal plex in downtown LA. It's a fanciful, heavily CG-ed, 3D storybook film that plays like a "family entertainment" flick during the first two thirds to 75%, which is to say with much familiarity. But the final act, roughly the last 25 minutes, is another story.

For Hugo concludes with a great excursion into filmmaking history and the first dreammakers (particularly George Meiles, director of the 1902 A Trip To The Moon and dozens of other shorts) and film preservation and all that good movie-Catholic stuff.

This finale, aimed squarely at film dweebs and sure to sail right over the heads of most tykes and tweeners, is by far the best portion of the film, and easily worth the price of admission in itself.

Lamentably, the story of poor little Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield), an orphan living a hidden secret life in the guts of a Paris train station (apparently le Gare Montparnasse) in the late 1920s, occupies the bulk of the running time, and too much of this section feels rote and boilerplate. Or it did to me, at least.

I have an AFIFest event to go to in a few minutes, but here are slightly expanded versions of this afternoon's tweets from the Regal.

Tweet #1: Too much of Hugo is done the cute way, the twee storybook way, the endearing childhood emotion way. To me the first 60% to 65% felt needlessly prolonged. Hugo runs 127 minutes, but it could and should have run 75 or 80 minutes. Okay, 90 minutes but no longer.

Tweet #2: The extended running time is due to a needlessly drawn-out relationship between an annoyingly secretive and quite inarticulate Hugo Cabret and the annoyingly secretive and inexplicably nihilistic Melies (Ben Kingsley). Melies is furious that his career has fizzled and therefore discourages any mention of his past glories -- an absolutely nonsensical attitude if you know anything about what all filmmakers, failed or successful, are like.

Moderator Paul Thomas Anderson (far left) and the Hugo team (l. to r.) -- director Martin Scorsese, dp Robert Richardson, composer Howard Shore, production designer Dante Ferretti, edtitor Thelma Schoonmaker, and visual effects supervisor Robert Legato.

Tweet #3: The other running-time extender is the tediously predatory pursuit of Hugo by Sasha Baron Cohen as a half doofusy, half-villainous train station cop.

Tweet #4: But once the film focuses on the legendary history of Melies and once the dawn of moviemaking in Paris in the early 1900s is recalled and recreated, Hugo is pure spirit-lifting pleasure. Finally the "cute big-eyed kid trying to survive in a Paris train station" story is more or less abandoned and the film lifts off the ground.

Tweet #5: What formerly successful filmmaker wants to hide his illustrious past? What wife of a formerly celebrated filmmaker (a woman who was the star of most of his films) wants her husband's past success kept under wraps? After pride in craft and the respect of peers, all filmmakers live for recognition and adulation. I can't imagine any filmmaker trying to suppress awareness of his/her past achievements, or being okay with being forgotten.

Tweet #6: I think I could have done without Sacha Baron Cohen and that Doberman altogether. And 20 or 25 fewer closeups of Butterfield's big watery eyes and his looks of fear and hurt and bewilderment.

The post-screening discussion, moderated by Paul Thomas Anderson (The Master, There Will Be Blood), featured Scorsese, dp Robert Richardson, production designer Dante Ferretti, longtime Scorsese editor Thelma Schoonmaker, visual effects supervisor Robert Legato and composer Howard Shore.

Here's an assessment by Hitflix/In Contention's Kris Tapley.

Gosling Malick<< previous | next >>Haywire Tonight

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on November 5, 2011 at 5:47 PM

comment #1

Colin says ...

Is there any child performance that you've enjoyed?

Posted by Colin at November 5, 2011 6:50 PM

comment #2

scooterzz says ...

it was hardly 'elite' press...the entire bfca was invited....

Posted by scooterzz at November 5, 2011 6:53 PM

comment #3

Rashad says ...

Did anyone get to ask PTA about The Master?

Posted by Rashad at November 5, 2011 6:57 PM

comment #4

dayXexists says ...

I'm interested in this. The girl, Chloe Moretz, has impressed me in everything I've seen her do so far...

Posted by dayXexists at November 5, 2011 7:35 PM

comment #5

Jeffrey Wells says ...

"The girl" Chloe Moretz? What are you, a spammer?

Posted by Jeffrey Wells at November 5, 2011 7:43 PM

comment #6

hiviper says ...

I 'd rather see PTA's next film in 2D
The last one was just fine as that, thanks

Posted by hiviper at November 5, 2011 8:06 PM

comment #7

dino velvet says ...

Come for the family entertainment, stay for the lecture on the history of early cinema! What do ya mean can we see The Muppets instead?

Posted by dino velvet at November 5, 2011 8:16 PM

comment #8

Gaydos says ...

A season of seasoned American filmmakers making cinematic summations: Woody Allen's "Midnight in Paris," Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life," Monte Hellman's "Road to Nowhere," Martin Scorsese's "Hugo," Clint Eastwood's "J. Edgar," Glenn Close's, "Albert Nobbs."

All of these films, in very different ways and to differing degrees, focus on illusion, all focusing on different aspects of the lure and power of illusion, all reaching personal conclusions/making personal observations about media, reality, the artifice of culture and identity. And God.

None of them wil achieve the boxoffice success of "The Smurfs."

It's time for OCCUPY THE MULTIPLEXES.

Posted by Gaydos at November 5, 2011 9:15 PM

comment #9

reverent and free says ...

Don't forget The Beard's War Horse Gaydos.

Posted by reverent and free at November 6, 2011 12:26 AM

comment #10

Bob Violence says ...

"This girl" Chloe Morettz? What are you, a spammer?

uh it pretty clearly says "the girl," as in, you know, the girl in the movie Hugo

Posted by Bob Violence at November 6, 2011 1:13 AM

comment #11

Joe Leydon says ...

Actually, Mary Pickford at one point wanted to include instructions in her will to have all of her silent films destroyed after her death. Seriously: She figured contemporary audiences would view silent films as silly or worse. Had she not been talked out of that notion...

Posted by Joe Leydon at November 6, 2011 5:20 AM

comment #12

Sams says ...

"easily worth the price of admission in itself."

Worth seeing in theaters and worth paying extra for 3D. That's what most folks want to know. Hope it does well at the box office. After Rum Diary, GK needs it.

Posted by Sams at November 6, 2011 5:34 AM

comment #13

The Pope says ...

Sams,

The Rum Diary had been looking for a home for more than a decade before GK took it on. They did so on condition that Depp do The Tourist first. Same reason why GK is releasing Land of Milk and Honey, directed by one Angelina Jolie.

Posted by The Pope at November 6, 2011 6:31 AM

comment #14

Ray says ...

"What formerly successful filmmaker wants to hide his illustrious past? ... After pride in craft and the respect of peers, all filmmakers live for recognition and adulation. I can't imagine any filmmaker trying to suppress awareness of his/her past achievements, or being okay with being forgotten."

Kubrick and Malick sure seemed as if they were peachy keen without the recognition and adulation, and they're only, like, TWO OF THE BEST DIRECTORS WHO'VE EVER LIVED.

And while not director, Brando, Day-Lewis, Julie Christie and Paul Scofeld all seemed pretty happy off the grid of CRITICAL ACCLAIM AND FELLATING PRESS.

Posted by Ray at November 6, 2011 7:48 AM

comment #15

Jeffrey Wells says ...

In their heart of hearts, filmmakers do not want to be ignored or, God forbid, forgotten. Not wanting to be "public" is a different matter.

Posted by Jeffrey Wells at November 6, 2011 8:48 AM

comment #16

Rashad says ...

Well Kubrick did try to destroy every copy of Fear and Desire, did he not?

Posted by Rashad at November 6, 2011 8:55 AM

comment #17

Jeffrey Wells says ...

Yeah, because he didn't like the film, his first feature, and was kind of embarassed by it. Which has nothing to do with anything.

Posted by Jeffrey Wells at November 6, 2011 9:28 AM

comment #18

The Pope says ...

I think Jeff Kubrick's wish to wipe Fear and Desire from his resume says a lot more than "nothing to do with anything." I think it reverberates in a way similar to what you said.

"Filmmakers do not want to be ignored or, God forbid, forgotten."

They want to be remembered, certainly, and they want to be remembered for good work. Not Fear and Desire.

Posted by The Pope at November 6, 2011 10:05 AM

comment #19

Jason S. says ...

I'd watch Fear and Desire in a second over anything in the theaters right now.

Posted by Jason S. at November 6, 2011 11:40 AM

comment #20

Sams says ...

The Pope,

The Rum Diary started filming in March 2009 while The Tourist started in Feb 2010 so it couldn't have been a quid pro quo. Jolie's film also came after The Tourist. Although I read King wanted her for the remake of the British miniseries Unforgiven.

http://movies.ign.com/articles/969/969133p1.html
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00030902.html

Posted by Sams at November 6, 2011 12:09 PM

comment #21

The Pope says ...

Sams,

I stand corrected. Thanks.

Posted by The Pope at November 6, 2011 12:11 PM

comment #22

Sasha Stone says ...

Gaydos' comment FTW. Here's hoping for a much longer essay on that topic.

Posted by Sasha Stone at November 6, 2011 12:24 PM

comment #23

Mike Ock says ...

Now that you've seen the movie Jeff, what exactly does the last 25 minutes have to with the rest of the movie? Didn't it feel like you were watching 2 completely different movies?

It's like Scorsese and Co. tacked it on to say, "Yeah the movie's a mess, the story is poorly written, and isn't really about much, but.......HAHAHA!!! You see, that's not really what the movie was about?! It's about FILM PRESERVATION!!!! Yes I know what you're thinking, why didn't we just make it all about film preservation, and not make audiences sit through a tedious story, and my answer for that is..........

BECAUSE IT'S ABOUT FILM REALLY ABOUT FILM PRESERVATION!!!"

Posted by Mike Ock at November 6, 2011 12:49 PM

comment #24

MechanicalShark says ...

Really, Gaydos? The usual carping about people passing over great filmmakers for The Smurfs, little recognizing that to the vast majority of people, film is not so much an art as a thing to occupy their children's time while they run errands. Most people don't even know what the word subtext means. This has always been the way of things. Only, things are better now than they were because the number of stupid people is down from 95% to maybe 80%! And it will continue going down! People are stupid, but I think getting gradually less stupid. And man, some people are too busy having lives to be concerned with the deep thematic implications of Terrence Malick's work, that's also a thing. Lighten up, man.

Posted by MechanicalShark at November 6, 2011 12:54 PM

comment #25

Mike Ock says ...

I don't know what the hell is going on, but lately, my tastes are mostly right in tune with Jeff's. We both loved Drive, Bridesmaids, and Moneyball.

And neither of us loved Hugo. I personally hated it, and going by what Jeff wrote above, he probably thought it was fair.

I gotta disagree about the last 25 minutes being "Worth the price of admission." I'd say it's worth waiting for Netflix.

Now if I could only get these obese, Hispanic elephants, and their annoying kids who live upstairs to shut the fuck up....

Posted by Mike Ock at November 6, 2011 1:11 PM

comment #26

Sasha Stone says ...

Hate is way too strong a word to describe how Jeff feels about Hugo.

Posted by Sasha Stone at November 6, 2011 4:34 PM

comment #27

Mike Ock says ...

I said I hated it, not Jeff.

Posted by Mike Ock at November 6, 2011 5:52 PM

comment #28

Colin says ...

When you say that your tastes are in tune with Jeff's you imply that he hated it as well.

Posted by Colin at November 6, 2011 7:20 PM

comment #29

Mike Ock says ...

@ Colin - Really? Here's what I wrote:

"And neither of us loved Hugo. I personally hated it, and going by what Jeff wrote above, he probably thought it was fair."

I thought it was pretty clear that I hated it, and going by what he wrote, he probably thought it was fair. Neither of us loved it, was the point I was trying to make. I disliked it more than him.

Posted by Mike Ock at November 7, 2011 2:30 AM

comment #30

Christian Louboutin Heels says ...

More new brand mbt shoes and mbt sandals offered online,all kind of MBT are very fashion and comfortable .Now there are so more kind of cheap and 2010 newest mbt shoes clearance in mbtstore.org,and there are more new moncle jackets supply in the internet,such as moncle down jacket ,the moncler 2010 producted more new type for you choose,the moncler is the best jackets for you .If you have you baby now,you should choose the "your baby can read" which revolutionary early-reading program encourages infants and toddlers to NATURALLY learn the written word AT THE SAME TIME as they learn the spoken word. click you mouse and order now.

Alexander Wang Shoes Christian Louboutin Sale Discount Christian Louboutin Shoes Womens UGG Boots
Christian Louboutin Boots
UGG Boots Sale
Manolo Blahnik Shoes Jimmy Choo Boots

----------------------

-------------------------

Alexander Wang Bag | Alexander Wang Shoes | Alexander Wang Rocco Alexander Wang Frankie Creeper

Posted by Christian Louboutin Heels at November 9, 2011 11:25 PM

comment #31

Hypnosis101 says ...

I saw the trailer of Hugo way back and it didn't really excite me. I don't really think that the movie sucks, it's just not my cup of tea.
conversational hypnosis

Posted by Hypnosis101 at November 23, 2011 7:56 AM