I reviewed THE INVENTION OF HUGO CABRET for a now-defunct (but trust me it was awesome) geek-culture magazine, more or less on reputation alone. I wasn't sure if Brian Selznick's young-adult Caldecott winner would even appeal to an adult audience, but so rarely does the Caldecott (as an award for artistry in children's books) go to a YA book I thought it was worth looking into. I was taken in by how Selznick's illustrations of Hugo, an orphan in the 1930s who works the clocks in a Paris train station, used cinematic angles and tropes to illuminate the story, and as I got deeper into the plot I understood why: Not only has Hugo been instilled with a love of the movies, he develops a relationship with an old man who works at the station with his own history in film. Maybe I was one of the only people who wasn't surprised that director Martin Scorsese would take on an adaptation like this.
"Hugo" lags a little in its first half, but by the end of the movie, to employ the cliché, I had completely fallen under its spell. The double mysteries of what Hugo has been up to in his room above the train station, and what happened to the embittered old man who takes him on as some kind of apprentice, were completely enthralling, highlighted by a few amazing setpieces. Asa Butterfield as Hugo provided just the right amount of pathos without mugging, and leave it to Scorsese to wring out of Ben Kingsley (as the embittered old man) his best performance since 2000's "Sexy Beast," in a role that could not be more different in terms of overall volume.
When the movie comes to show us some of the old movies Hugo loved, a hush fell over the theatre; imagine how magical these things could be, when they didn't have the tricks to make them look seamless like they do now. The simple delights of camera foolery like making an actor "disappear" by stopping the film, are still delightful now. And speaking of foolery, I'm not sure what the 3-D adds to the element of the film, although in a few instances this really stands out. This is Scorsese's shiniest movie (at least among the ones I've seen) and to be honest I had expected him to insert a little more grit into the story of Hugo. (Though, Scorsese fans, try to spot the Steadicam-Copacabana equivalent sequence early in this film.) I think it's an output of the combination of 3-D CGI that characters often seem to have a glowy aura around them; sometimes I found it fitting, sometimes distracting. As was pointed out by another critic, Scorsese is dabbling in new technology to honor a film innovator who did the same; I'm just not convinced he needed those tricks to bring his marvelous illusion across.
Watching "Hugo" made me think a lot about the other major award contender this season honoring the history of cinema, "The Artist," about the silent-film era and the move to "talkies." For me there's no question that "Hugo" is a better movie, because it doesn't just recreate the art it's trying to honor, it transcends it using the budget and powers that we have. It doesn't just say, "Remember that bygone era? That was awesome." Additionally, I liked "The Artist" but I never bought its characters as truly in danger; they were just figures of whimsy enacting an homage, whereas for all the comedic moments Hugo's nemesis the stationmaster (played by Sasha Baron Cohen, with many echoes of the Childcatcher in "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang") gives to the movie, he is a real threat. (Also, really happy for you, gonna let you finish, but "Singin' In The Rain" is the best movie about the end of silent film of all time. Of all time!) If critics aren't taking "Hugo" seriously because it's ostensibly a children's movie, and it didn't screen at Cannes, that's a real shame.
Filmbook verdict: See the movie even if you haven't read the book, but if you have the chance to read the book, also do that.
Forthcoming in this space: Reviews of "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close," "We Need To Talk About Kevin" and the 2011 "Jane Eyre."
