Hugo Review

Hugo Review

This review will contain spoilers, including a film changing plot twist. You have been warned


Hugo, formerly The Invention of Hugo Cabret, is Martin Scorsese’s latest film and probably his most unique. A film that couldn’t be perched further away on the spectrum from his previous efforts such as Goodfellas and The Departed, it tells the story of an orphan boy named Hugo (Asa Butterfield) who lives inside the clock framework of a train station.

 There he meets Georges Melies (Ben Kingsley), who runs a small shop specialising in clockwork and his daughter Isabelle, (Chloe Moretz) all while fending off the closest thing the film has to antagonist, the station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen).The first half of the film follows Hugo as he attempts to fix an “automaton”, it and his notebook being the only things of his late father's that he still possesses.

The film does a great job of developing the character of Hugo. It’s done at just the right pace, and doesn’t create a forced, but genuine feeling of sympathy for him. Eventually Hugo does manage to fix the automaton, but, blinded by naïve hope of a posthumous message from his father, falls into despair when the automaton stops it’s drawing, having only created a few unremarkable marks on the page. Asa Butterfield does a fine job as Hugo, for the most part, and this is one of his better scenes, making us feel every ounce of his despair, at his thoughts of a companion, his thoughts that maybe he might hear his father’s guidance once more, are shattered by the coldness of reality.

The automaton springs back into life however, and continues it’s scribbling, creating a picture with the name Georges Melies. Who Georges Melies is at this point is unknown. Hugo and Isabelle come across a picture in a book, describing the early history of film, of Isabelle’s adopted father, who is referred to in the book as Melies himself, and is said to have died during the first world war.

When confronted by the books author Rene Tabard, they inform him that Melies really is alive and well. Tabard is an aficionado of Melies, and possesses what is believed to be the only surviving copy of one of his films. Upon showing the film to him, Melies tells his story. A heartbreaking story at that, as he describes the euphoric heights of reaching one’s dream, before it is torn asunder by nothing more than the ever changing landscape of human taste.

Fortunately, we are treated to a happy ending, as Melies regains his fame and recognition, Hugo is taken in by Melies and his family, and all ends on a high note, uplifting, satisfying, and above all else, genuine.

Hugo is an excellent film, it’s visually beautiful to look at, the characters are well acted and engaging, and the film accomplishes comedy, tragedy and intensity with Panache. The film’s central theme of human purpose is well executed, thought provoking, emotionally engaging, and ties in well with the film's story.

All that said however, the dialogue does have one or two shaky moments, and Asa struggles with his emoting once or twice, but what really stops Hugo from being a great film is it’s second story. The first story arc of Hugo attempting to fix his fathers automaton is a simple story, well told. The second story arc is good as well, it has some of the films best moments, the theme of the human need for purpose is engaging on every level, and is expounded upon with an innocence that really makes it shine.

The trouble comes from the fact that it’s hard to stay invested in Hugo when the film really stops being about him. It becomes more of a story about Melies, told from Hugo’s perspective, and the film shifts from being an innocent mystery story to a celebration, for the love of cinema and for one of it’s founding fathers. It’s not that either story arc is inherently bad, it’s just that they really don’t belong in the same film.

Much more could have been done with both had they each had their own stage to shine on. Maybe a full on biopic of Melies wouldn’t really have worked, and maybe the innocent mystery of Hugo’s automaton wouldn’t have been quite strong enough to hold up by its self, but I feel that telling both stories in the same film, while executed about as well as it could have been, simply doesn’t work, which is a shame, because it really is the films only major flaw.

The films strongest scenes centre around Hugo’s emotions. For the most part, Hugo is softly spoken, and inward about his feelings, but occasionally, he breaks down, as all his anguish for the death of his father, his oppressive loneliness, and his desperate need for purpose in life, can be pent up no longer, and smash through the barriers holding it all back, in some truly heartfelt and emotionally gripping moments.

Hugo is a very good film, just falling short of greatness, but what it does well, it does extremely well. I can honestly say that it’s one of the best films I’ve seen this year, and I can't recommend it highly enough.