Read User Reviews and Submit your own for Hugo - Page 2

8

wishmasterApr 3, 2012

Spectacular film, with enviable art direction! sound, special effects, perfectly constructed, Scorsese did a tremendous job in making this film a reality. performances a bit loose but by the children, but Kingsley tremendous!

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

JonnyFendiMar 5, 2012

When I first heard about Martin Scorsese was doing a family adventure film, I said to myself I have to check thiz out! As we knew, Scorsese is a Director who is widely known for most of his gangster and violent films like: CASINO (1995), THEWhen I first heard about Martin Scorsese was doing a family adventure film, I said to myself I have to check thiz out! As we knew, Scorsese is a Director who is widely known for most of his gangster and violent films like: CASINO (1995), THE DEPARTED (2006) and SHUTTER ISLAND (2010). Since the opening sequence, we are spoiled with such fantastic panoramic scenery. Dynamic camera movements effectively draw you into the story in a split second, where we follow the daily life of an orphan named Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) in 1930s France. Hugo lives inside the tower clock of a crowded train station. By his curiosity, Hugo has been trying to fix an automaton in human form which his father (played by Jude Law) left him. Not long after, it takes him to Papa Georges (Ben Kingsley) with his toy booth. The premise is about the mystery behind it. Asa Butterfield, the boy who played in THE BOY IN STRIPED PAJAMAS in 2008, seems to be a proper choice for Hugo. His blue sad eyes tell everything. Ben Kingsley also delivers a firm and attractive performance. Only after about an hour, the things become more clearly. Apparently, thiz movie tells about the magical world of movie making. I have to underline thiz: the whole package is visually stunning! I was amazed by its remarkable setting, the exquisite cinematography and the exotic lighting schemes. Everything at its best, everyone can tell. The story is filled with various unique characters played by well-known Actors: there was the adventuress Isabelle (ChloÃ« Grace Moretz) who is Papa Georges goddaughter, the grumpy station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen), the flower girl Lisette (Emily Mortimer), the kind-hearted librarian Monsieur Labisse (Christopher Lee) and still many more to mention. But if you want to be objective, most of these characters can be pushed away easily without too much ruining the main plot. I mean everyone! They are only here to become unimportant extras. Except for the station inspector, he is the only antagonist, we still need him! The character played comically well by Sacha Baron Cohen. Without him, there will be no chasing scene and nail-biting suspense. Clearly, the main frame of the story is not that complicated at all. It was kind of flat and anticlimax. To tell you the truth, I did not have The Wow Factor for the ending. Well, I have never read the book (THE INVENTION OF HUGO CABRET by Brian Selznick) before. So I cannot tell whether disadvantage of the story derived from basic material. However, thiz is an award winning book, it won Caldecott Medal in 2008. In that case, if is true that is the whole story. What we can sayâ… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

BrucenelsonDec 26, 2011

This movie starts out so fine -- what a world Scorcese creates, ripe for an adventure which the girl yearns for. And that appears to be what's in store, mysteries are afoot but alas what we ultimately get is a history lesson on the cinema.This movie starts out so fine -- what a world Scorcese creates, ripe for an adventure which the girl yearns for. And that appears to be what's in store, mysteries are afoot but alas what we ultimately get is a history lesson on the cinema. And ironically the artist he celebrates would never have been so unimaginative in his movies. Yet Scorcese's world might be strong enough to overcome the lackluster ending and still garner him his elusive award.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

8

simpletasteFeb 21, 2012

I can understand the viewpoints of the people that did not enjoy this movie. I can also see how the trailers of this movie can be misleading to the final film presented as the movie itself is more methodically paced than the action adventureI can understand the viewpoints of the people that did not enjoy this movie. I can also see how the trailers of this movie can be misleading to the final film presented as the movie itself is more methodically paced than the action adventure portrayal. I, on the other hand, did not watch this film immediately in the theaters so I came to the movie with more of an open mind. Others criticized that they did not get any story out of the people in the train station and their rhyme and reason were convoluted, however, I thought it was well done. Especially if you try to look at them from Hugos perspective. Like him, looking upon them somewhat from a distance, you come to realize that that's how we look upon each other most of the time. Others commented that they wanted those relationships more spelled out, but In the end, I didn't think that was necessary. This is more about Discovery, and within that discovery, lies the adventure. Whether it be in ourselves or each other. This movie reminds me why I love movies in the first place.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

BhawkNov 24, 2011

Most impressive use of 3D since Avatar and beautiful cinematography, costumes, and sets throughout. However the story is aimed too squarely at film history buffs (like me) who will appreciate Scorsese's cinematic love song to the developmentMost impressive use of 3D since Avatar and beautiful cinematography, costumes, and sets throughout. However the story is aimed too squarely at film history buffs (like me) who will appreciate Scorsese's cinematic love song to the development of motion pictures, and therefore this one will have very limited audience appeal. Much more geared towards those over 40 than for the kiddies (and their 20/30-something parents) who will only enjoy the 3D effects but will find the overall film to be painfully slow and too specific to the early silent film era. Grade = B… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

Knicksfan7Dec 13, 2011

This was a very good movie. It isn't like your everyday film, but it was very good. Very well made, Sacha Baren Cohen (if thats how you spell his name) did a surprisingly good job in a more serious role. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. HugoThis was a very good movie. It isn't like your everyday film, but it was very good. Very well made, Sacha Baren Cohen (if thats how you spell his name) did a surprisingly good job in a more serious role. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Hugo is a very beautiful story, a must see film, if you enjoy a detailed plot, with an inspiring message. 8/10… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

heloheJan 9, 2012

Well, the move actually consists of two different, separate themes which are somehow intermixed. One is the story of a boy who lives in the clockworks of the parisian metro, 90 % of the film. And the other 10 % are about the history ofWell, the move actually consists of two different, separate themes which are somehow intermixed. One is the story of a boy who lives in the clockworks of the parisian metro, 90 % of the film. And the other 10 % are about the history of cinema. The part of history of the cinema is very wonderful and a very nice tribute of scorsese to cinema 10/10 for that. The story of the boy is really bad and boring, predictable, with bad acting and simple dialogue I would give it a 3/10. But then again, the visuals are really fantastic, and the clockwork part scenes are great. So overall I give it 8/10, which includes some bonus for good intentions. But it is certainly not one of scorceses masterworks.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

8

AlluminnDec 19, 2011

I don't understand all these bad reviews. Granted, it wasn't the greatest movie I've ever seen, but it's certainly not as bad as some of these reviews make it out to be. Sure, it was a bit slow-paced and it took a while to get to the point,I don't understand all these bad reviews. Granted, it wasn't the greatest movie I've ever seen, but it's certainly not as bad as some of these reviews make it out to be. Sure, it was a bit slow-paced and it took a while to get to the point, but it was very realistic, in that sense. Life doesn't always get straight to the point, and the roundabout way this film went told a unique story in a unique way.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

j30Jan 11, 2012

The lush colors, direction, and cinematography have always been some of Marty's strong suites. When i first saw the trailers to this movie, I cursed the movie gods and doubted Scorsese's ability to make a kid's movie. I was sadly mistaken.The lush colors, direction, and cinematography have always been some of Marty's strong suites. When i first saw the trailers to this movie, I cursed the movie gods and doubted Scorsese's ability to make a kid's movie. I was sadly mistaken. The movie is eye candy and an ultimate tribute to movies and suitable for all ages. Now that this movie is out of the way hopefully he'll move onto more adult themed movies, but this was a nice detour.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

Potter17Feb 3, 2012

Conducted steadily by Scorsese and enriched by a glorious cinematography, "Hugo" is a true love letter to the magic of the cinema and well-deserved of its eleven academy-award nominations.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

grandpajoe6191Feb 13, 2012

"Hugo" is tedious to start off with, which is Martin Scorsese's biggest problem when making his movies. But I give credit for his imaginative visuals and rich designs. A good movie to enjoy in the end.

11 of 16 users found this helpful115

All this user's reviews

8

JohnRoviNov 24, 2011

I am very torn about this film, as I think it contains some really bad directing by a great director. Ouch. On the other hand, once the film finds its pace and leads to its lovely conclusion I found myself deeply moved. It is not just a pieceI am very torn about this film, as I think it contains some really bad directing by a great director. Ouch. On the other hand, once the film finds its pace and leads to its lovely conclusion I found myself deeply moved. It is not just a piece of fluffy entertainment, and yet it is very entertaining. Admittedly, I had read a lot of negative reviews before I went, and this lowered my expectations sufficiently to wade through the bad acting (which, as I said, is not the fault of the actors) which expires after a while. So, go see it, even in 3D, which I don't like. It was definitely worth the time and effort.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

8

TerrellMillerDec 24, 2011

I doubt Hugo will ever be called a masterpiece, but it is an extremely enjoyable movie. This isn't a "comedy" and it's not an action-adventure. There are no gangsters or drug dealers. There are no evil wizards to save the world from. TheI doubt Hugo will ever be called a masterpiece, but it is an extremely enjoyable movie. This isn't a "comedy" and it's not an action-adventure. There are no gangsters or drug dealers. There are no evil wizards to save the world from. The troubled youngsters in this film are intelligent, well-read, mostly well-spoken kids who just need a chance to lead normal lives. They're not teen prostitutes or drug mules or reincarnated princesses. Huge is just not that kind of movie. What it is, is a calm, mature, lovingly crafted indulgence in the passion and magic of filmmaking. Everything in this film is there to show you what going to the movies used to be about. There's also a subtheme about people learning to accept their limitations and transcend them that will either be inspiring, or, to judge from several of the reviews here, infuriating and humiliating. Oh well.

The acting isn't supposed to be profound or larger-than-life. Again, that's not what this movie is about. This is about extraordinary people inhabiting ordinary lives.

Other reviewers have mentioned all the coincidences and plot gimmicks in Hugo. True, but so what? Again, the film was constructed to show how people in a certain place at a certain time recapture some magic in their lives. It doesn't really matter just how they got to that place. Hugo is not a grimy slice-of-reality flick that wallows in all the sordid details of the characters' dysfunctional lives. Here Scorsese isn't interested in showing how and why his characters self-destruct, he's interested in showing how people OVERCOME their past to become something better. Hugo's an orphan...but that doesn't mean he has to hide from the world, and it doesn't mean he serves no useful purpose. Cohen's character is a middle-aged bully with a gimpy leg...but that doesn't mean he can't learn to be nice. Papa George is a bitter old toymaker...but that doesn't mean he can't be proud of what he's accomplished.

That's the uplifting message of Hugo, and it's a message wrapped in the most gorgeous 3D cinematography I've ever seen. The only thing I didn't really like about it was the British accents (which, contrary to a previous reviewer's claim, were natural to the mostly English cast), but that's a minor gripe and apart from Cohen's dock-worker honk, the accents really don't detract from the story at all.

Highly recommended for those who can concentrate on the screen for longer than thirty seconds without something blowing up or zooming around.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

jordanatkinsonDec 29, 2011

hugo was a good film but for all that said it was 10/10 and 5 star were wrong it was pretty overated. not a film i would usually enjoy but a good one.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

8

SophiesDec 27, 2011

While at first glance Hugo appears to be rather different from most of Scorsese's work, by the end of the film, the 'Scorsesian' touch in Hugo is undeniable. As in all of Scorsese's work, Hugo is fast-paced and artistically brilliant. I amWhile at first glance Hugo appears to be rather different from most of Scorsese's work, by the end of the film, the 'Scorsesian' touch in Hugo is undeniable. As in all of Scorsese's work, Hugo is fast-paced and artistically brilliant. I am typically not a fan of 3-D, but Scorsese's use of 3-D is to put it simply, magical. In typical Scorsese fashion, the camera acts as another actor of sorts rather than just a spectator, providing the audience with a subjective view of Scorsese's fantasy world. While the writing left something to be desired, the visual excellence of the film compensates for the parts where the script is lacking. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed Hugo, and while it is not a movie that I plan on seeing over and over, it is definitely one that should be noted for its artistic genius.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

JudgeHoldenFeb 26, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Hugo's magic and mystery are very slow to kick in and fade away in a nick of time. The movie itself, albeit with a very slow plot, has all the elements of Scorsese's masterpiece: good acting, convincing photography, very good makeup and setting, interesting action. However, it seems to me that at some point the story got stuck at a crossroad, unable to decide whether keep its clockwork Paris magic or develop the story of the French cinema pioneer. In my opinion, both elements could have been worked better! It's a good movie, though!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

hobokenkenJan 1, 2012

Surprisingly adult and interesting story if a bit Dickensian--- also read as "you need to suspend some disbelief". No drawn out sentimentality, just an honest story and well done. Kids over 10 might appreciate it but not younger.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

amateurJan 12, 2012

After reading some reviews I was hesitant to take my nine year old to this movie. It was a fantastic movie visually, and my child was engaged with the movie all the way through. Really glad I saw it.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

bcoolFeb 21, 2012

This movie is a little messy. It's like two movies in one. The first one - about the boy looking for a key - is a little boring and doesn't really go anywhere. But the second one - about Georges Melies - is wonderful.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

geo86Mar 17, 2012

Excellent movie. From the begging til the end keeps a pace. There isnt a single moment that you are bored of the movie. Great story, great actors everything is perfect, there is no exaggeration, you can feel Hugo loneliness and his bound toExcellent movie. From the begging til the end keeps a pace. There isnt a single moment that you are bored of the movie. Great story, great actors everything is perfect, there is no exaggeration, you can feel Hugo loneliness and his bound to the robot. To the end you can understand the connection between Hugo robot Papa Georges even the feelings of the station inspector. I love this movie very much. Another great work of Scorsese.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

SpangleMay 19, 2014

Right from the onset of the film, it is entirely clear why it got so many Oscar nominations for its visuals. The visual effects, sets, and cinematography, are all absolutely gorgeous and this film absolutely qualifies as eye candy. On top ofRight from the onset of the film, it is entirely clear why it got so many Oscar nominations for its visuals. The visual effects, sets, and cinematography, are all absolutely gorgeous and this film absolutely qualifies as eye candy. On top of that, it is a fantastic look at film history. I did not expect that going in and while I knew some of what was discussed, it was still very cool to see it come to life in a film. In terms of the story itself, the film was very cute and charming as we follow the events that transpire for this kid living in the train station. The acting was also pretty good. There were moments when I had to pause and take in how bad they were, but for the most part, they did a solid job for being child actors. Ben Kingsley also turned in a reliably good performance.

On the negative side, there is not much, but the aforementioned times when the acting was...less than sub-par. In those moments, it took me out of the film a bit. In addition, in the beginning, it is a tad hard to get into. However, once you are in, you are in for good. Overall, Hugo is a very enjoyable film that really demonstrates the magic of film and is a very different work from Martin Scorsese, but certainly right up there with the rest of his amazing filmography.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

Compi24Nov 28, 2012

Technically immaculate and successful at reaching deep into any cinephile's heart and plucking at his heart strings, "Hugo" is a clear treat.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

BrianMcCriticJun 19, 2013

A visually stunning experience that any film fan will love to see. Not only does the film have characters that you connect with, but it will have you totally invested in the journey back to the an earlier time in movie history.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

8

JpJuarioJan 30, 2014

''A Masterpiece.'' ''Spectacular!'' The Best use of 3D. Martin Scorsese shows his love of Film-making. One of the Best Films of 2000's. A New Masterpiece of the millennium. One of the most important film you're ever going to see. You won't''A Masterpiece.'' ''Spectacular!'' The Best use of 3D. Martin Scorsese shows his love of Film-making. One of the Best Films of 2000's. A New Masterpiece of the millennium. One of the most important film you're ever going to see. You won't see anything like Hugo.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

Viper8787Apr 27, 2014

I didn't think I was going to like this movie, but it was really well done and I ended up enjoying it more than I thought. It was surprising to me when I saw that Martin Scorsese directed this movie because it is not one of his typicalI didn't think I was going to like this movie, but it was really well done and I ended up enjoying it more than I thought. It was surprising to me when I saw that Martin Scorsese directed this movie because it is not one of his typical movies. But he's a great director and this is another good movie done by him.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

8

maggie1Nov 7, 2014

When first seeing this movie I was in awe of the beauty it not only captures your attention but also your mind. I love that this film blends the past with the present showing the viewer how far special effects have come. this unlike manyWhen first seeing this movie I was in awe of the beauty it not only captures your attention but also your mind. I love that this film blends the past with the present showing the viewer how far special effects have come. this unlike many others can be enjoyed by the whole family and I mean that. Its not a cookie cutter family movie where the parents sit waiting for something interesting to happen with the suspense and adventure everyone can enjoy and go on a journey with the characters. I also love that Martin Scorsese directed a film that was unique from all his other films that are for a much more mature audience.
This film uses sound to its advantage every chance it gets. I believe sound is one of the most important aspects of a film and in Hugo sound allows another aspect to draw you in, to suspense the next scene, to know when to look even more intently. The sound in this film was edited so beautifully it as if it is a part of the words blended into one solid piece of art. One does not go without the other. They work hand in hand and as one becomes silent the other is ready to take its place. Martin Scorsese did a wonderful job of incorporating sound throughout this film just like he does in many others like Cape Fear and Goodfellas.
I love that the cast in this film is far from well known and all-star actors; I believe if this film had better known actors it would have detracted from the beauty of the story and we would lose the realistic aspect that Hugo is a boy living in a train station and that Isabelle is a curious young girl looking for an adventure. The cast really took their parts seriously and I believe that helped make this film what it is. The small characters were also quiet a big part of this film without all the side characters a lot of the story would be lost. If we didn't have an inspector we would lose a fair amount of the suspense and never have the threat of Hugo being taken away to the orphanage.
The special effects in this film are my favorite part. They capture you with the past and the present showing how far we have come and the amazing changes that have been made. Including George Melies is the best thing Martin Scorses could have done because this not only give an amazing plot but also bridges the gap between old and new. By including some of Melies original work we see how special effects have transformed from the magicians hat to 3-D pictures. Last when Hugo turns into a robot you not only believe it but you start to think it could happen in real life and that is when a movie truly becomes a masterpiece.
Overall I believe anyone can enjoy this film and recommend it to not just families but everyone. If you're looking for something a little less ordinary then watch Hugo I promise it won't disappoint. I must say if you can please watch it in 3-D but even if you can't it's still worth watching.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

MDXtremeNov 26, 2018

- Great Story
- Great Acting
- Ending felt a bit rushed
overall its 8/10 for me

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

EpicLadySpongeApr 25, 2016

Gee, with Hugo, I think I feel like my eyes are very weak and my brain needs to rest by now. Movies never make me like that but Hugo just did and that's how Hugo should be the next time I see this again.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

MonkiReviewsMay 29, 2017

I loved this movie. The acting was good and the story was magical. The acting was realistic, better than I expected. The look of the movie felt old fashioned and magical, and made it work. It was better than I expected.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

carlossolracMay 16, 2019

Great visuals. Story a bit blocky and oportunistisc from a narrative point. Like, man, a lot of things fell into place pretty neatly. Would have been better served with a discussion on fatalism vs free will....then again this was sorta a kidsGreat visuals. Story a bit blocky and oportunistisc from a narrative point. Like, man, a lot of things fell into place pretty neatly. Would have been better served with a discussion on fatalism vs free will....then again this was sorta a kids movie. Marty got to geek out a bit while directing....def had fun with the old movies. A bit of a throw off too with all the British accents in Paris. Why pick only Brit actors? Why just not make in London with same plot?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

NickTheCritickNov 4, 2021

As I said before when Scorsese goes out from his comfort zone turns out to give his best as a director (his best movies are in fact Alice doesn't live here anymore and After Hours). I would place this movie right behind the two I mentionedAs I said before when Scorsese goes out from his comfort zone turns out to give his best as a director (his best movies are in fact Alice doesn't live here anymore and After Hours). I would place this movie right behind the two I mentioned before. What a beautifully full-of-soul shot movie! What a great acting, editing and what a great cinematography! I Didn't like many of Scorsese's XXI century movies but this is a great one!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

txrangersfan72Feb 5, 2012

Scorsese steps outside of his typically gritty box and achieves pure magic filming a gorgeous rendition of the popular children's book, "The Invention of Hugo Cabret." While pieces of the story change for the purposes of film, my personalScorsese steps outside of his typically gritty box and achieves pure magic filming a gorgeous rendition of the popular children's book, "The Invention of Hugo Cabret." While pieces of the story change for the purposes of film, my personal opinion is that (and I'm going to offend hardcore readers here) it tried too hard to be a film version of a book. As a result, the first hour was very hard to sit through. It was long, it was slow, but so beautifully shot that I couldn't fall entirely asleep. However, the second hour more than made up for it. The movie, which takes a while to get to its point, eventually uncovers a sweet, precious film with a wonderful message. That is, our dreams make us who we are. If our dreams die, so do we. To "fix" ourselves, to truly live life, we must chase our dreams, even when we perceive ourselves to fail. Only then can we truly become what we were meant to become.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

asthobaskoroApr 1, 2012

Hugo is not a magic, extravagant or elegant fantasy. Let's say it's Martin Scorsese, dazzling 3D and love letter to cinema. But Hugo is mediocre and even boring.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

cabritaNov 27, 2011

The cinematography is a WOW. The 3D is a WOW. The acting is above average, but the movies real downfall is in its story. The comedy wasnt funny and the story takes a 180 turn halfway through with no reason. This turn in focus is not a twist neither.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

Spielberg00Jun 7, 2012

HUGO was clearly a hard movie to make. The book on which it is based was only half of what we usually find in books, with the other half made up of art. Though this source medium is about 500 pages in length, 60% of that consists of picturesHUGO was clearly a hard movie to make. The book on which it is based was only half of what we usually find in books, with the other half made up of art. Though this source medium is about 500 pages in length, 60% of that consists of pictures to tell the story. Having read the book only over this weekend, I was able to point out a good amount of discrepancies between the two works, but someone who read the book a while ago would not be able to point put one. As this was directed by Martin Scorsese, who had probably never directed anything that would pass with a modern PG rating before this, I expected a few scenes here that would give the average child nightmares, none of which appeared at all in the book. Not only do I realize that Scorsese actually DOES understand what a family movie is, Iâ… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

wallofjericho42Dec 6, 2011

The first thing that came across my mind while watching this movie was "This is boring." While I was impressed with the camera work and art direction, the first hour or so dragged. I guess you could say it was getting us familiar with theThe first thing that came across my mind while watching this movie was "This is boring." While I was impressed with the camera work and art direction, the first hour or so dragged. I guess you could say it was getting us familiar with the characters and setting, but it still felt a bit uneventful. The rest of the movie, on the other hand, was superb. The story picks up, and I felt like there was a goal (or a purpose) that made watching the movie a great joy to watch. This film had some great scenes, great artistic vision (it made good use of the 3D effect as well), I just wish the first half of the movie was as enjoyable as the last half.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

7

ClariseSamuelsMar 9, 2012

The most enchanting aspect of this film is the magical backdrops--bold colors, intricate clockworks and machines that would make an enthralling playland for any child, and archetypal characters that have a Jungian appeal. The film enthrallsThe most enchanting aspect of this film is the magical backdrops--bold colors, intricate clockworks and machines that would make an enthralling playland for any child, and archetypal characters that have a Jungian appeal. The film enthralls with the fairy-tale set design. It's no wonder that Hugo won so many technical awards at the Oscars--cinematography, art direction, sound editing, sound mixing, and visual effects, all of which were richly deserved. However, the story itself gets off track, literally, since most of it takes place at a Paris train station. There are two stories--one is the story of a lost little boy, orphaned when his loving father dies in an accident and then later abandoned by a drunken uncle who brings the boy to his living quarters under the train station. The boy is hunted by the station master, who is the head of security at the train station, played austerely by Sasha Cohen. The grown-up characters tend to be stiff and wooden cliches, but not because they are bad actors, merely because they are being presented as Jungian archetypes who know their place in this magical universe. The characters are like marionettes waiting for their strings to be pulled, but the puppeteer is the controlling forces outside this luminous world that is really a theater in a box.

Ben Kingsley seems to understand this the best of anyone in the cast. He sits at the counter of his toy shop unblinkingly, almost frozen in time, until someone or something appears to stimulate him to at least nod his head. The centerpiece of the movie is a contraption called an automaton, a robot-like machine capable of limited action, which is symbolic of all the characters in this universe. But suddenly the story changes, and we realize this is a biography of the French film director George Melies, who participated in the earliest period of cinema and filmed the first fantasy and science-fiction movies. The movie turns into a giant vehicle to pay homage to this director and at one point starts to sound like a documentary. The link between the boy, the director, and the automaton becomes more tenuous and less coherent, as the story breaks down under Scorsese's desire to document this period in film history. In fiction, whether written or visual, it is tempting but problematic to stop and spend long periods giving educational lectures--the challenge is to work the information more subtly into the story.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

MattCarterWADec 13, 2011

Hugo was alright. It was an on-rails, whimsical adventure movie that should not have been given its 127 minute run-time. I came into this movie expecting Scorsese's "touch of death," and so was curious how that would extend to a "children's"Hugo was alright. It was an on-rails, whimsical adventure movie that should not have been given its 127 minute run-time. I came into this movie expecting Scorsese's "touch of death," and so was curious how that would extend to a "children's" movie. I felt that Hugo had an overly gloomy tone, as many of the characters had experienced death or crippling disappointment. I couldn't quite gauge this movie's target audience.

However, one could get lost in the wonderful set design, costumes, and attention to detail. As many other reviews state, Scorsese's trip down the movie industry's "memory lane" was a welcome treat. The no audio shorts were entertaining, and the creative process behind them was intriguing.

The score could have been handled better. I found myself mouthing "and que montage music", "que etc" multiple times throughout the movie. In part due to its length, and also the "on-rails" comment I made earlier.

The last thing is the child acting. It always leaves something to be desired, or it's great. I don't believe it's worth faulting the movie as a whole. For kids, it was acceptable. For the movie goer who: likes to watch things that look decent, have a multiple hidden messages, a decent plot and a happy ending, this movie is great.

For the movie goer who: doesn't like to be pandered to, thinks about plot progression, and likes to analyze, it was alright. It's almost worth going to see for the retro films, but other than that, it's a rent.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

7

JollyG87Dec 15, 2011

On a technical scale, "Hugo" is a masterwork. Scorsese majestically helms this adventure delivering superb 3-D cinematography and a steady pace. Out of all of Scorsese's films, this is definitely one of his most personal. While delivering anOn a technical scale, "Hugo" is a masterwork. Scorsese majestically helms this adventure delivering superb 3-D cinematography and a steady pace. Out of all of Scorsese's films, this is definitely one of his most personal. While delivering an engaging story, he uses the movie to celebrate his love of films, in particular, the ones that got the art of film off the ground. It's during these moments when the movie radiates a sense of magic. But these are the only magical moments. When the movie doesn't focus on film, it's only an interesting story, nothing more. The main issue is that few of the characters are satisfyingly developed. Kingsley's Georges Melies is the one exception. His back story is far more intriguing than Hugo's, and with only a limited amount of screen time, Kingsley gives us a complete heartbreaking portrait of a sorrowful genius. But the film focuses on Hugo, and his story and character is nowhere near as fascinating. This prevents the movie from taking off into greatness. Once Scorsese's love of film shines, the movie starts to soar, but this doesn't happen until the last 20 minutes. Still, it's a very good film that should be seen by anyone who's a fan of Scorsese or a fan of cinema in general. I wouldn't recommend it to younger kids however. The movie moves too slow for them, and they'll most likely leave the theater confused and bored.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

outsideinMay 15, 2012

The Other Scorsese

One Martin Scorsese uses cinema to make violent, 'realistic' films like Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Casino and Goodfellas, while the other one makes gentle, thoughtful films like The Age Of Innocence, KundunThe Other Scorsese

One Martin Scorsese uses cinema to make violent, 'realistic' films like Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Casino and Goodfellas, while the other one makes gentle, thoughtful films like The Age Of Innocence, Kundun and Hugo.(He also makes music documentaries like Woodstock, Last Waltz and Shine a Light.)

This lavish 3D production is a labor of love devoted to the making of films, the true subject of Hugo. The story is about an orphan who lives in a Paris train station who carries on the family tradition of fixing clocks. In this tale, he turns his hand to fixing the broken life of Georges Meliere (Ben Kingsley), chased by the evil station master (Sacha Baron Cohen, wonderful) and helped by the young, female ward of the great cinema innovator. Who is it aimed at? It is too old for very young children, too slow for older children, and not adept enough to move many adults because of its almost cartoony style. It is like Frank Capra on acid, but not nearly as witty.

Nevertheless, it is enjoyable, brilliantly made, occasionally surprising and well played by the cast. One quibbling question: why are all the French people, English? Why not cast French people or Americans? Is it because Americans only belong in Type 1 Scorsese films?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

n_gJan 4, 2012

Hugo is a warm and charming film. Yes, the storyline is quite weak and predictable in many ways with several elements of the film not fully explained which makes them seem useless. The cinematography is really nice though and the performancesHugo is a warm and charming film. Yes, the storyline is quite weak and predictable in many ways with several elements of the film not fully explained which makes them seem useless. The cinematography is really nice though and the performances by Butterfield and Moretz were quite good.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

Vanessa_SFeb 25, 2012

Definitely not as good as I thought it would be. I wonder how it can get so many Oscar nominations and the Global Award. The scenes are not beautiful. The robot is ugly. The plot is also boring. And it's really strange all the cast speakingDefinitely not as good as I thought it would be. I wonder how it can get so many Oscar nominations and the Global Award. The scenes are not beautiful. The robot is ugly. The plot is also boring. And it's really strange all the cast speaking English while the story supposed to take place in French. Only the music is satifting and Paris in night is really extraordinary.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

BadMovieLoverFeb 4, 2012

Well, I didnâ

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

7

jgzegerFeb 9, 2012

This flick seems to be aimed at the minds of children who can best appreciate insignificant fantasies such as this movie is. Hugo does have strengths in its visual and technical qualities such as set design, but these are not enough toThis flick seems to be aimed at the minds of children who can best appreciate insignificant fantasies such as this movie is. Hugo does have strengths in its visual and technical qualities such as set design, but these are not enough to catapult it to a higher level.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

KostersKMar 22, 2012

I think most audiences from 12 and under will find Hugo to be one of the best films for their age group. Outside of that age range will likely find the film to be of fantastic quality in every category. The true question for most readers is,I think most audiences from 12 and under will find Hugo to be one of the best films for their age group. Outside of that age range will likely find the film to be of fantastic quality in every category. The true question for most readers is, do you like family films? Can you tolerate them? If so, rent it, buy it, borrow it, or somehow find a way to watch it. I think you will like it, if not absolutely love it. For me personally, I think it really is a beautiful and stunning film to see, and the acting is spot on. I just didn't care for the film after the first say hour and a half or so. Not that the last half hour is bad, in fact I rather liked it at first. It was after re-watching part of it, and thinking about it in depth that I began to realize its flaws. I do think it was rather predictable in ways, which is to be somewhat expected as a family film. I also can't get over the ending feeling like an attempt at becoming a shoe-in at the Oscars. This does bother me to a certain extent how it was done, and how educational it became on the start of the film industry. I hope if anything this ends up inspiring youth to be more creative as I find there to be far too few of these around today. None-the-less, still a well done film and was glad to have seen what it was all about.

For my full review, visit http://visuallyimpairedreviews.blogspot.com/2012/03/hugo.html… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

mrmonsterAug 4, 2012

Although Hugo was not very entertaining, it was a good mystery/drama that was actually very inspiring. It is the best movie that has come out in a long time. I wonder what the world would be like if everyone was like Hugo.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

killian13Jul 7, 2013

Hugo is one of movies of Martin Scorsese I love ,because it tell the story of the first studio of cinema and George Méliése .
the movie respects the story of the book

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

NefakiNov 28, 2013

A nice movie you can watch with your whole family. The main negative parts are: Main character's acting is dull and the movie could be shorter (its 126 min.) When or If you watch it fully, you will understand how come it earned 5 Oscars.

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

7

ULTRA_MARIO_10May 30, 2016

First time I saw this, I thought the movie is just nothing but bland but really the storytelling is great and it's emotional.

Good movie. Recommended to those who like movies with excellent drama and Great storytelling but can still beFirst time I saw this, I thought the movie is just nothing but bland but really the storytelling is great and it's emotional.

Good movie.

Recommended to those who like movies with excellent drama and Great storytelling but can still be boring at times so it's a 7/10.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

JJ2FAS4UDec 30, 2021

----------------------------------7.0/10-----------------------------------

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

JamesLJan 29, 2012

I found it beautiful and thought it was well done in 3D. However, I was bored throughout and went to buy M &M's so I would not keep staring at my watch. The story simply did not interest me in the slightest. "Hugo" summed up what a mediocreI found it beautiful and thought it was well done in 3D. However, I was bored throughout and went to buy M &M's so I would not keep staring at my watch. The story simply did not interest me in the slightest. "Hugo" summed up what a mediocre film year 2011 was. When "The Descendants", "Moneyball", and "The Tree of Life " are Oscar nominees , it is a poor year. I hope 2012 brings me a substantial improvement.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

JM23Mar 28, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Hugo is a film that is technically brilliant but almost every other aspect fell short in my opinion. The cinematography is incredible and is one of the main reasons why the movie pulls you in initially. However, the story eventually let me down. Chloe Moretz is a great up-and-coming actress and she does well in this role, but Asa Butterfield isn't quite ready for a main role and in certain moments he comes off as awkward. The story is just too slow and uneventful for most of the movie. Also, moments that could be powerful are dramatically downplayed, such as Hugo's relationship with his father and uncle. When Hugo learns that his father died, he literally has no reaction and shows very little emotion. The father is a large part of the story, and he doesn't even shed a tear? The movie shifts halfway through to a story about the history of movies, which is probably why the critics praised it so much. The movie has it's moments, but I feel like it is predictable. I can't imagine kids really getting into this and enjoying it, though the blame is more on the marketing (who tried to sell it as a kids movie). Martin Scorsese is an all-time great director, and it's great to see him experiment so late in his career. However, Hugo was a big disappointment for me. I still recommend seeing it as it does have it's moments, but I definitely feel like this could have been so much more.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

BikerjamesNov 30, 2011

I wonder how Roger Ebert feels about this movie? He has trashed the 3D format for years and now his favorite director, Martin Scorsese, has made one! Unlike Ebert, Scorsese has totally embraced 3D technology, as the 3D is the star of thisI wonder how Roger Ebert feels about this movie? He has trashed the 3D format for years and now his favorite director, Martin Scorsese, has made one! Unlike Ebert, Scorsese has totally embraced 3D technology, as the 3D is the star of this film. For me, the movie would have been a failure without it. It is the best non-animated 3D I have seen in the theater, and nearly all scenes were filmed with the format in mind. The opening shot of the camera moving through a crowded train station is fabulous. It's a great looking movie. Unfortunately, the movie's plot and story did not match the visual delights for me. This is a slow, plodding movie, lacking humor, saved only by the visuals. Unfortunately, I just didn't care about any of these people, and the dialogue seemed stilted and unnatural in parts. I can't imagine a kid keeping his attention to this film. The little boy just seemed devoid of personality. Not sure I ever saw him smile until the end of the movie. I rate this film a 6 in the theaters, but only a 3 or 4 at home unless you have a 3D television.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

lahaineDec 19, 2011

This is was an interesting one, though something was highly questionable about it. Hugo was a very meaningful movie that gets into the heart of the characters and the meaning of cinema itself. Any movie buff should see this, as its aThis is was an interesting one, though something was highly questionable about it. Hugo was a very meaningful movie that gets into the heart of the characters and the meaning of cinema itself. Any movie buff should see this, as its a testimonial to the history film making and film preservation, which is evidently very important to Mr. Scorsese. This is one of Scorsese's most technically lush films, boasting exceptional art direction (which needs an Oscar), nice cinematography and some decent costume designs. And finally Asa Butterfield did well and the supporting players were all good, particularly Chloe Moretz (as usual) and Ben Kingsley. With all that said, something that I genuinely questioned was the true quality of the movie's screenplay. It was very unbalanced, and the first half was a quite drab (despite having an interesting premise). The movie could have definitely used a a serious rewrite, but overall it was a good, and well made film.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

TyranianFeb 11, 2020

A class above most kid films but still a fairly meagre effort from Scorsese.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

tenmusesNov 26, 2011

Beautiful to look at and the acting was above average (although not stellar). I thought the story was bland and the vintage cinema theme in the second half of the movie just didn't do it for me. Ultimately, my reaction to the movie was oneBeautiful to look at and the acting was above average (although not stellar). I thought the story was bland and the vintage cinema theme in the second half of the movie just didn't do it for me. Ultimately, my reaction to the movie was one of disappointment.

To be honest, I think the main appeal of the movie lies in a somewhat taboo area of discussion - nostalgia for a lost time and lost homogeneity of society. That "all in it together" feel was used effectively to add complexity and empathy for a particular character. There is a loneliness in today's society and a longing for that sensation of shared goals and tribulations. The vintage cinema element is a related theme but misses the mark. People are mourning a lost society, not lost movies.

This movie is ultimately chocolate box art. People are hungering for this though and we are going to see more movies like it. I hope the stories get better.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

ScovernDec 2, 2011

I went in to see Hugo after seeing it advertised as a film about adventure, mystery, and possibly sci-fi. I ended up scrutinizing these overemotional actors and short-lived story lines that eventually came to mean nothing once I realized theI went in to see Hugo after seeing it advertised as a film about adventure, mystery, and possibly sci-fi. I ended up scrutinizing these overemotional actors and short-lived story lines that eventually came to mean nothing once I realized the whole thing was a setup to explore the history of early film making.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AdvocateDec 26, 2011

The movie was overall sappy and slow. I took a young girl about the same age as the one in the movie, and there was no connection felt by her to that character. I can tell that the content of the movie meant a lot personally to Scorsese; heThe movie was overall sappy and slow. I took a young girl about the same age as the one in the movie, and there was no connection felt by her to that character. I can tell that the content of the movie meant a lot personally to Scorsese; he did an excellent job of transmitting his personal zest for the old films shown in the movie. You could see him romanticize some personal childhood experiences quite well.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

skyminsterMay 26, 2012

Hugo is alright, it's nothing special, I can't say anything bad about it, but I can say a few good things about it; its got a good and fairly interesting plot, exciting and tense chase sequences, good acting, great character building (youHugo is alright, it's nothing special, I can't say anything bad about it, but I can say a few good things about it; its got a good and fairly interesting plot, exciting and tense chase sequences, good acting, great character building (you really get to know what the characters are like) and strange music that's kinda catchy. I don't recommend watching it if your into action and sci-fi films, but I do recommend watching it if you like touching dramas or mystery movies.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

beingryanjudeAug 31, 2014

I certainly commend Marty's attempt at making a film for all ages; however, Hugo doesn't quite pack the punch any of his other films do. It's an epic story--one that is lost along the way.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

axelkochSep 3, 2012

A great experience in sound and vision. 'Hugo' deserved all 5 Academy Awards it won, but not more. Asa Butterfield was very disappointing, for my opinion he should only play in horror movies in young age. Also the dialogues are sometimesA great experience in sound and vision. 'Hugo' deserved all 5 Academy Awards it won, but not more. Asa Butterfield was very disappointing, for my opinion he should only play in horror movies in young age. Also the dialogues are sometimes faint and the whole story is extremely predictable. It mixes the love to inventions with the love to the cinema. The plot is slightly boring and only the hunting scenes with Sacha Baron Cohen are really exciting. All in all a well-made homage to the initation of films, which disappointed me here and there and will definitely be boring for kids!… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

oblique15Mar 16, 2013

It`s an interesting film, It was kind of slow at times but has a good message. I like the music and time of this movie, it adds a nice feel to it. I kind of wanted more from the movie but it`s worth watching.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

ExKingJan 23, 2014

Martin Scorsese is one of my all time favorite directors and this movie was good,
i liked the visuals and the plot, and i like the details about movie making and all that stuff,
however i didn't like the way this movie addresses it'sMartin Scorsese is one of my all time favorite directors and this movie was good,
i liked the visuals and the plot, and i like the details about movie making and all that stuff,
however i didn't like the way this movie addresses it's audience,
it seems as the story was for kids not for adults, come on if you seen it, you'll know what I'm talking about
that's my only problem with this movie.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

cbeers2513Dec 4, 2013

I was expecting to be dazzled by Hugo, as critics across the board praised the movie and it won several Oscars for its achievements in cinematography and art design. However, Hugo let me down. The massive praise clearly stems from itsI was expecting to be dazzled by Hugo, as critics across the board praised the movie and it won several Oscars for its achievements in cinematography and art design. However, Hugo let me down. The massive praise clearly stems from its purpose, a mushy love letter to the art of cinema. The acting is perpetually bland, the effects were underwhelming, and the story isn't as endearing as several other 2011 releases. Hugo is not a bad film, and I do enjoy some moments. But when people cite Hugo as a year-defining film and an instant classic, I can't help but disagree. Hugo is a decent family movie, but does nothing new or inspiring other than glorify Hollywood. In the end, it's a sweet and simple appetizer for all the delicious cinematic entrees 2011 had to serve.

6/10

Follow me on twitter. @cbeers2513… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AlanoSilvaPBFeb 25, 2023

A parte técnica desse filme é um show a parte, e a história é simplesmente cativante. Diante disso, afirmo sem dúvidas que A Invenção de Hugo Cabret é uma aventura belíssima.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

BKMDec 17, 2011

Hugo has a potentially interesting and moving story to tell, but it gets lost in what turns out to be a history lesson on early cinema with an endorsement for film preservation thrown in for good measure. It is taylor made for awards seasonHugo has a potentially interesting and moving story to tell, but it gets lost in what turns out to be a history lesson on early cinema with an endorsement for film preservation thrown in for good measure. It is taylor made for awards season and you can feel that in every frame of film.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

5

VidsRuleMar 11, 2012

WOW. I did not in a million years expect to be this bored during a movie that is held in such high regard. The technical and artist acheivements and acting were top notch, but dramatically this film does not exist. Why not do more wierdWOW. I did not in a million years expect to be this bored during a movie that is held in such high regard. The technical and artist acheivements and acting were top notch, but dramatically this film does not exist. Why not do more wierd things with the robot? Why not have some chase scenes that are more than a kid running up steps while a man with a dog follows? The train station/clocks look amazing, why not use this to more avail? The came close to being the first movie that i paid for in years that I simply walked away from 2/3rds of the way. But I wanted to review it fairly on Metacritic so I sat through the whole thing. It was tough. The incredible look and feel of the film gives it a 50%, the lack of drama adds a big zero.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

hevatinNov 23, 2011

I went in looking forward to seeing this movie and hoping it would be another Scorsese classic. I'm a big fan of Scorsese's past greats, such as Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, and Good Fellas - and the idea of him doing a children's movie wasI went in looking forward to seeing this movie and hoping it would be another Scorsese classic. I'm a big fan of Scorsese's past greats, such as Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, and Good Fellas - and the idea of him doing a children's movie was intriguing to me.

I left the theater with a nagging reminder that, as great as Scorsese is, he's only human and even he can fall into the same trap that so many directors fall into when making big budget visual films; so much energy is put into the visuals that the story and characters get left behind.

This movie is no exception to that sad Hollywood norm. The characters are lifeless and wooden, the dialogue is far too on the nose, and the plot is so slow moving that it trips over itself.

The music is annoying and far too omnipresent. Instead of being used to heighten a mood or intensify a feeling, it's just constantly in your face. It's so superfluous that it loses it's meaning and impact.

There were no humorous moments. I didn't laugh once. Sacha Baron Cohen is a lifeless, boring Station inspector and doesn't compare to other great children movie bad guys, such as the child catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang or Gene Wilder in Willy Wanka. From a visual standpoint it is a stunning movie. The best 3D movie I have seen. It makes Avatar look wimpy. Clearly Scorsese put a tremendous amount of thought into the visuals created each scene for 3D. But I think that is actually where he went wrong. He focused so much on that aspect that the story and character went dead. There should have been two directors on this movie - one for the visuals and one for the story. That might have created what I was so hoping to experience when I came out tonight.

I really wanted this to be great. But it was just average.… Expand

9 of 17 users found this helpful98

All this user's reviews

5

CanisrahJan 12, 2012

Any film directed by Scorsese is automatically awarded a place on my 'must see' list. I was somewhat dubious about Hugo, but went along anyway. My views on the film are mixed - I'd say it had high aspirations, and occasional flashes ofAny film directed by Scorsese is automatically awarded a place on my 'must see' list. I was somewhat dubious about Hugo, but went along anyway. My views on the film are mixed - I'd say it had high aspirations, and occasional flashes of brilliance, but ultimately it fell short for me. The story was functional, and it had some moments which bordered on the profound, but the plot was somewhat mechanical (like the subject matter) and ties between various elements were wafer thin such that the conclusion was not as satisfying as it could have been. The environments and the cinematography were beautiful throughout, but the pacing was a bit off - leading to several patches were I was bored (and feeling guilty for being so), in spite of the beautiful visuals and breathtaking recreation of a bygone era.

Sir Ben Kingsley was magnificent - as was the cast generally; although the young lad playing the lead was sometimes annoying for me. But the most disappointing aspect of the film for me was where it crossed the line between plot progression and telling a story into the realm of self-serving indulgence. Film critics will lap it up given it spends a great deal of time lecturing the audience on events of historical significance if you are a film buff. The film tries to weave this into the story by tying it to the characters but it comes off forced and grating. Would I see it again? No. Would I recommended it... probably not.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

5

pegasusDec 27, 2011

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie is beautiful to look at, has a good cast among the adults, and has some nice moments with the train station setting. But the plotting and pacing kills it. For one thing, the two plots seem to be forced together in a non-credible way. That may be the fault of the source material, but a good director ought not to reproduce strained plotting out of some sense of faithfulness to the text. It was just too abrupt for me the way Hugo is all about the automaton and then suddenly he's all about movies. Too much coincidence, not well integrated. Then, there are two places where the movie basically stops for a lecture about film history. Nothing against the topic, but voice-over to explain it is a poor dramatic technique in a non-documentary film. Finally, the secret behind Papa Georges' reaction to Hugo's notebook and to seeing his old drawings didn't have sufficient dramatic heft. "He went bankrupt because tastes changed" is sad, OK, but hardly the tragedy presaged by all the preceding build-up. He didn't change with the times so his studio failed. This happens all over in every industry. I was left with a big feeling of "Is that all there is?" He seemed pitiful (and self-pitying) rather than tragic. I realize we are meant to view the melting of his films as an awful warning about preserving the classic films we know and love, but the point was laid on with too heavy a hand. Besides all this, the screenplay was uneven, sometimes awkward, there were too many extraneous bits such as the bookseller and the wicked uncle, and the pace was very slow. All these factors kept me from becoming fully involved. I can't imagine a child having the patience to try to follow this. In short, for a movie about the magic of movies, there just wasn't enough magic.… Expand

5 of 7 users found this helpful52

All this user's reviews

5

andres200jMar 7, 2012

I do not like this film is well done technically and artistically, but it is a film that has given me rage that has won many Oscars, because if you stop to think, has won many awards just because it is American and the director is MartinI do not like this film is well done technically and artistically, but it is a film that has given me rage that has won many Oscars, because if you stop to think, has won many awards just because it is American and the director is Martin Scorsese, if it had been a British film, directed by a director not well known, had won an oscar or no, so like what happened to Harry Potter this year, a film score of 87 on Metacritic, and great reviews in every newspaper and review websites in the world and only had 3 nominations and did not win any prizes.
I still say: There were many injustices in the Academy Awards this year… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

MikeRGDec 13, 2011

Prepare to be underwhelmed, due to its overlong running time. If it had been 30 minutes shorter (and it could have been), I would give this an 8 or 9. Sasha Baron Cohen is dreadful, and the lead kid is not very good either. The little girlPrepare to be underwhelmed, due to its overlong running time. If it had been 30 minutes shorter (and it could have been), I would give this an 8 or 9. Sasha Baron Cohen is dreadful, and the lead kid is not very good either. The little girl is excellent. Kingsley is one-note, but Christopher Lee is good. The recreations of Georges Melies studio are the best part of the movie, but there are endless chases through the train station that wear one's patience down.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

BehdabraFeb 28, 2012

First of all, I'm a big fan of Great Scorsese, but this film is absolutely one of the most overrated movies of all time. well of course the visual effects are awesome, also with fantastic 3D effects, but the story is extraordinary boring.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

lblJan 20, 2012

Too long. Do film makers today believe that every movie they make has to be more than two hours to qualify as a good film? Hugo needed at least twenty to thirty minutes cut out of it. I was so bored in the middle I didn't think I was going toToo long. Do film makers today believe that every movie they make has to be more than two hours to qualify as a good film? Hugo needed at least twenty to thirty minutes cut out of it. I was so bored in the middle I didn't think I was going to make it to the end of the film. It got good in the end, but it took SO long to get there.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

5

nandopJan 28, 2012

Extremely visually wonderful (the opening scene is such a masterpiece take), in a beautiful 30's Paris, but a bit long, a bit too much of a homage (although deserved) and, for me, with a story and main character uncomfortably showingExtremely visually wonderful (the opening scene is such a masterpiece take), in a beautiful 30's Paris, but a bit long, a bit too much of a homage (although deserved) and, for me, with a story and main character uncomfortably showing harrypotter-wannabeism.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

csw12Mar 30, 2012

Hugo is an okay not great. Except for the flashy visuals the kids and everyone around were over- acting. The movie was too long by 15 mintues. The magic for the movie wasn' there entirely and that is were the movie goes off course the most.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

G_Thomas_BostonApr 25, 2013

Hugo is directed by either Spielberg or Scorsese. I think it's Scorsese, but it felt like Spielberg. The film even had some John Williams-style big music, composed by Howard Shore (yeah, that's right! the saxophone player from the bandHugo is directed by either Spielberg or Scorsese. I think it's Scorsese, but it felt like Spielberg. The film even had some John Williams-style big music, composed by Howard Shore (yeah, that's right! the saxophone player from the band Lighthouse!)

This fantasy is about a boy who lives in the walls of a Paris train station. Not since The Legend of 1900 have I heard of anything this screwy. Inside these walls are the guts of the station's clocks. The guts consist of cogs, gears, counterweights, pinions, springs, and inexplicably steam.

During the course of the film, we learn that Hugo is the dude that built C3PO (or some C3PO prototype). C3PO reveals to Hugo that the local old grump (played by Ben Kingsley) is in fact a forerunner to movie wizards like Spielsese or Scorberg.

Anyway, I saw this movie in regular old boring 2D. I didn't realize it was a 3D film until the scene where some pages with drawings go flying from the kids' hands and drift all over the screen. At first I was thinking, "What the hell is this all about? Am I supposed to be mesmerized by fluttering stationery?" Then I realized that this was intended to be seen in super-duper 3D. "Ahh," I thought, "Now I see. Ooooh, that would have been so cool to see all that paper flying around in 3D." We haven't witnessed anything like this in cinematic history since the famous bolo-bat scene in the 1953 film House of Wax.

Hugo does a lot of hiding and running, primarily from a train station cop played by Sacha Baron Cohen. Cohen's character is an amalgam of Inspectors Javert and Clouseau. He and his trusty Doberman Pinscher cannot seem to track down the elusive boy who knows the station and its walls like the inner workings of an automaton. During one climactic scene, Hugo gives the Inspector the slip by doing a Harold Lloyd impression from a clock tower.

Once the Inspector catches up with Hugo, they have a talk. During the conversation, the little urchin makes the Inspector laugh. The Inspector tells him that he's funny. Hugo then says, "I'm funny how? I mean funny like I'm a clown? I amuse you? I make you laugh, I'm here to f____n' amuse you? What do you mean funny? Funny how? How am I funny? What the f__k is so funny about me? Tell me, tell me what's funny!"

Wait a minute. I might me confused. That dialog might be from a different movie a real Scorcese film.

All in all, Hugo isn't such a bad movie. But in retrospect, I think I would have preferred watching the Harold Lloyd film, Safety Last.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

McLaughlinViewsAug 19, 2013

Hugo tells the story of young Hugo Cabret and his journey to try and find a message from his late father. Scorsese uses great imagery with vibrant colors to throughout the film giving the entire film a bright and hopeful view on life. HoweverHugo tells the story of young Hugo Cabret and his journey to try and find a message from his late father. Scorsese uses great imagery with vibrant colors to throughout the film giving the entire film a bright and hopeful view on life. However in spite of this view of a brighter and ore hopeful life the colors sometimes distract, finding yourself looking more at the old and attractive architecture in comparison to what is occurring on the screen.

The story of Hugo is a roller-coaster of ride where at one point the story is just but Hugo trying to find a message from his father after his tragic loss. Then the story quickly adapts to a journey of discovery and to rekindling people's dreams.

Sacha Baron Cohen is hilarious in this film, from his in chase scenes to his failures at attempting to secure a lover. Cohen plays the simpler minded police officer whose confusion in conversation is leads to bags of laughter. Moretz delivers an incredible performs as the twelve year old, Isabelle who lives to read the great novels of the day and who is already up for an adventure.

However despite the strong performances from the entire cast the film Hugo fails to keep the attention of the audience, apart from the funny Cohen or strong lines of dialogue delivered by an incredible cast can’t bring the film back from the rather dull narrative that is the plot of Hugo.

Unfortunately a film that had so much going for it, an incredible cast, director and writer. The film fails to entertain past the usual slapstick humor of a children’s film. Despite this the visuals of the film is stunning which I suppose is an upside if you aren’t easily distracted by grand architecture then this will be a major upside to your cinematic experience.

In hindsight I will remember Hugo but not for it’s narrative I will remember it for it’s stunning visuals and superb acting, but I do not think that this is a film which I will remember with fond memories or frankly even remember at all. In hindsight this is not a film I would likely watch again.

I would like to reiterate that my score is nothing against the acting. Moretz and Bohen were great. My score is more against the story and the general feel of the film.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

akshatmahajanSep 1, 2020

I was excited for this movie but it was disappointing for me. Directed by Martin who is famous for gangster type movies, this movie was not for him.
It was hard to see who this film is aimed at. The storyline was too childish. The action isI was excited for this movie but it was disappointing for me. Directed by Martin who is famous for gangster type movies, this movie was not for him.
It was hard to see who this film is aimed at. The storyline was too childish. The action is slow and dreary for most of the film and the acting by most of the cast is okay. Only cinematography is good. Overall, it is a big disappointment.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

NemethLFeb 16, 2022

A mediocre imitation of Wes Anderson. Big names, but the movie is too long and unnecessarily aloe.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

shaunmedMar 6, 2012

visually pleasing and a not all together unpleasing 2 hour distraction, but FAR from a masterpiece. characters are two dimensional and their interactions are unbelievable. ben kingsley's portrayal is unconvincing and sasha baron cohen isvisually pleasing and a not all together unpleasing 2 hour distraction, but FAR from a masterpiece. characters are two dimensional and their interactions are unbelievable. ben kingsley's portrayal is unconvincing and sasha baron cohen is plain terrible. if it wasn't for the high production value, this movie would be merit-less.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

4

real1gNov 29, 2011

Not enough words can be said in terms of how much I love Scorcese's work, but Hugo is a near-total flop. The idea that Scorcese would take on the daunting, film-crippling fad that is 3D, came as a surprise to me. But it was Scorcese, so INot enough words can be said in terms of how much I love Scorcese's work, but Hugo is a near-total flop. The idea that Scorcese would take on the daunting, film-crippling fad that is 3D, came as a surprise to me. But it was Scorcese, so I gave him the benefit of the doubt, and went into the theatre with high hopes. Boy, was I disappointed. The storyline, writing, and acting by the main character who plays Hugo are put together producing a flat product. The movie is boring. The only true part of the movie I liked was Scorcese going through the history of film periodically, which had nothing to do with the main story-line at all. Wait for it on DVD, don't see it in 3D. Disappointed!… Expand

9 of 17 users found this helpful98

All this user's reviews

4

marsiliaNov 27, 2011

I fell asleep for a moment watching this movie. Much too slowly paced. Lots left undeveloped. Surprising to see other reviewers comments about the performances. Except for the child, all the other characters were quite undeveloped. SomeI fell asleep for a moment watching this movie. Much too slowly paced. Lots left undeveloped. Surprising to see other reviewers comments about the performances. Except for the child, all the other characters were quite undeveloped. Some quite good actors had very little to work with here. Humor is lame, groin injuries and dog bites. Characters that you thought might have some interest were left dangling and unfinished. And even the child's most dramatic moment in the movie is poorly integrated into the story. He shifts on a dime, or rather the director does. This is not a story Scorcese should have directed. And I certainly would not take children, unless they need a good nap! Contra shibumi, there isnt much to get. And whatever there is takes so long in the getting. Visually it is stunning, and the paean to the beginnings of cinema are appreciated, but it was too much of a good thing.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

4

RobinsNestMay 10, 2012

Yet another 2011 film receiving rave reviews that I don't get. While it is interesting to see Mr Scorsese defend his not selling out to SFX, that's exactly what he did. Watching at home, without 3D, the movie falls flat. A movie should haveYet another 2011 film receiving rave reviews that I don't get. While it is interesting to see Mr Scorsese defend his not selling out to SFX, that's exactly what he did. Watching at home, without 3D, the movie falls flat. A movie should have been made about Mr Melies but this is not about him, but about things that fly off the screen. And what's the story with the dust or snowflakes that drift around the entire film? Is everyone in a snow globe? Is this Dr Suess? Disappointing on so many levels. The director needed long explanations about the characters, their families, the evil cop, etc. instead of "showing" us some background-this is a visual medium. The best part of the film is the flashbacks on how movie making got it's start. Now that would make a good film. Mr S should get back to developing strong characters, fierce relationships, and de-emphasize the SFX. Poor outing from a usually brilliant director.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

AquophisDec 28, 2011

I don't think I can even remember the last time I've ever been subject to such a stagnant, passive viewing experience. Such a slow, sluggish plot that I found myself silently urging along. The film felt like all twinkling lights andI don't think I can even remember the last time I've ever been subject to such a stagnant, passive viewing experience. Such a slow, sluggish plot that I found myself silently urging along. The film felt like all twinkling lights and tenderness, almost never jumping out at me. Watching it could be compared to trying to swim through a lake of honey - there's warmth and sweetness, sure, but it's very slow going. The main boy actor hardly shows any emotion on his face - to me, he looked either creepily indifferent or morose and sullen.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

Annoymous1Jul 10, 2013

Nice, cute, Hugo is a nice film and a bit tedious and um, hilarious in itself. Its too long though and it was extended. Though its good it won a few Oscars, though its kind of odd

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

TheHygienistDec 29, 2012

A pretty film in blue-ray, and one of few movies a parent can take a kid to without the inevitable F-bomb. Entertaining but slow to the point and a bit overacted.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

4

KivaJun 11, 2013

I didn't really like this film. It was too long and boring, lame. I didn't get the message of that movie and i didn't even bother to look for it through the internet or watch the movie again. A waste of my time.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

3

kris2furMar 18, 2012

This movie is not captivating, not magical and not exiting. a movie about a washed up old man and a kid is pathetic Tin Tin was a better movie choice. I really did not like this.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

lancekozMar 6, 2012

I am a fan of some European films, and can find interest in old movies, but this was barely engaging at all. The train station and artistic detail is lovely for the first 20 minutes, but after that, we are led mostly nowhere by tragicI am a fan of some European films, and can find interest in old movies, but this was barely engaging at all. The train station and artistic detail is lovely for the first 20 minutes, but after that, we are led mostly nowhere by tragic characters who speak very little. The intense focus on mechanical things and all these supposed French characters acting bitter and speaking with British accents made it seem like a post WWII British engineering education film. Not deep or well-scripted enough for adults, too dreary and slow for children, it mainly was an equal-opportunity aggravation. Why the critics are swooning about this, I can't imagine.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

3

spacecaptainMar 13, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very disappointing given the hype. The darndest thing is that it just isn't very interesting --though it should be given its, pardon, mechanisms and reality behind the magic. Whether fantasy or magical realism, this movie evoked no emotions in me --oops. The only reason to see it is Sacha Baron Cohen as the inspector, who endearingly steals what little is left of the show.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

ravenscarDec 3, 2011

I was almost shocked by the stream of 100 reviews by critics, which the more I think about the less I like. I'll try to be fair and line up the points in its favour first then more onto the more disappointing. In its favour, Hugo carries aI was almost shocked by the stream of 100 reviews by critics, which the more I think about the less I like. I'll try to be fair and line up the points in its favour first then more onto the more disappointing. In its favour, Hugo carries a strong cast with (albeit brief) roles by Jude Law, Christopher Lee, the pleasantly surprising Sacha Baron Cohen as well as the superb Ben Kingsley and Annoymous Child Actor with Sparkling Blue Eyes. Y'see, I've already slipped into the negative because there's so many of them. Director Scorsese doesn't seem to be able to focus on Child Actor with Sparkling Blue Eyes (hereby referred to as CASBE) without an overly long and rather blunt focus on his sapphire blue eyes. Thus starts a long stream of the film throwing what it wants you to think in your face in a blunt and unconvincing manner. He's an innocent child, it screams, can't you see that, in his blue-blue eyes! Ahem, back to the good. The setting of the film is spectacular, beautiful even. We are pleasured optically with panoramas of early 1930's Paris bedecked in a powdering of snow, lit in the evenings by twinkling lights and a few obvious landmarks like l'Arc de Triomphe, the Eiffel Tower and Notre Dame, just to make sure you're absolutely sure it's Paris because amazingly NO-ONE, except Christopher Lee's line "Mousieur Cabret," sound even remotely French. Okay, we can forgive that, back to the good things. A lot of money has clearly been put into backdrops and extras; the train station in which most of the film is set is bustling with hundreds of Parisian folk about their business, crushingly busy at points (like during chases) but fortunately empty at others (like when extended dialogue takes place). Maybe Parisian's were more polite in the 1930's than they are now. There's a few moments that may make you laugh, mostly with comedy relief Cohen, but they were few and far between for me. Right, is that the good stuff done? Recap, imagery, some actors, a few laughs. So much for Hugo as a good film, now for it as a monster....

The film's so God-awfully slow as to be painful. In a world of high octane films that demand attention through sheer eye popping explosiony goodness, it's nice to slow the pace, it really is, but not this far. I was bored by mid-way, checking my watch for the first time in a film in years. Each scene is staggered out with long dramatic pauses that drag on and on. My hopes were high in the extended introductory scene where a chase with Cohen, the unlikable and awkward station inspector, pursues CASBE through a throng of Parisians. Just as I'm thinking "ooo, this is fun" WHAM, it slows down again to a snails pace and becomes brooding and dark, which gives me another impression; this films doesn't know what it wants and so has a pot shot at everything. Rather than stick with a theme, it veers chaotically from tragic, comedic, philosophical, romantic, like it's on a runaway locomotive ploughing into a Parisian station.... The thing that annoyed the most, beyond the agonisingly slow pace and the butterfly plot, the thing that really got to me more than anything was how demanding this film is. Now I don't mean demanding in terms of complexity, God no. I mean demanding in what it asks of you in a manner almost as petulant as CASBE when he follows child acting school rule 17, "Act Shocked When Accused" and snarls that he's not a thief when anyone even vaguely implies a five finger discount being taken. This films DEMANDS how you feel about characters while providing so little background to them that to call them two dimensional in within serious risk of being overstating them. He's an orphan, roars the film, you HAVE to feel sorry for him! He's a sad old man, can't you see that? Aren't we making it clear enough how you should feel!? Every character that we are meant to empathise with has so little back story, or such a limited back story, that it makes it almost impossible to feel anything for them. The backstory that pads out Kingsley's character is given in one large chunk right at the end of the movie and I actually found this quite engaging as it allowed me to appreciate the character I wasn't allowed to feel anything for. Every time another character tries to peek into the bubble each character has around themselves they're rebused with almost the same petulance as CASBE along the lines of "I don't want to talk about it". The only character that gave any inkling into their motives was surprisingly the unlikeable Inspector, Cohen offering the touching line almost as an apology of his disability to the girl of his desires. In that brief conversation more was giving about one character than most of the others in the entire film. In short, appalling pacing, almsot non-existent character development and a waste of good actors do not make up for pretty settings and facing graphics. Let's not even talk about the 3D.… Expand

4 of 8 users found this helpful44

All this user's reviews

3

awhubschNov 27, 2011

Over-acting, plodding pace, too long. You can understand why this movie is well-received by critics. The plot involves the early making of movies. But that's really a distraction. The director fawns over that aspect of the plot. And whyOver-acting, plodding pace, too long. You can understand why this movie is well-received by critics. The plot involves the early making of movies. But that's really a distraction. The director fawns over that aspect of the plot. And why do American actors playing French people have such strong and unauthentic English accents?… Expand

15 of 33 users found this helpful1518

All this user's reviews

3

petitorenjiDec 6, 2011

A visually-stimulating eye-candy that got lost in a cornfield in terms of storytelling. I wanted to see more of Hugo's growth and his relationship with his female friend after the death of his father. I also wish there was more to theA visually-stimulating eye-candy that got lost in a cornfield in terms of storytelling. I wanted to see more of Hugo's growth and his relationship with his female friend after the death of his father. I also wish there was more to the Automaton (sp?) than just showing that Ben Kingsley's MÃ©liÃ¨s is still alive and well. MÃ©liÃ¨s's creative approach to film-making was a side-plot that somehow overruled the whole story after thirty minutes in, and I feel that the protagonist position shifted to him rather than Hugo as well. I agree w/ awhubsch that the critics may have loved this because it shows some film history, but the movie itself has too much airy, half-hearted acting (anyone could immediately tell that Asa Butterfield didn't know a thing about fixing things by the way he touched and handled the parts of a contraption) and badly developed characters - as well as many redundant ones. What exactly was Isabelle's purpose after her key was known to fit into Hugo's father's machine? It's like she became a smiley prop object or something. I feel that Hugo was just a mouse running on its wheel continuously and that somehow got lucky.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

3

NosehairDec 7, 2011

Very disappointing and hard to believe Scorsese had a hand in it. Brilliant cinematography but the rest of the movie and acting was very bad. Other reviews are very interesting, very high or very low but my wife and I both came out of thisVery disappointing and hard to believe Scorsese had a hand in it. Brilliant cinematography but the rest of the movie and acting was very bad. Other reviews are very interesting, very high or very low but my wife and I both came out of this movie almost bewildered with a "What was that?" We saw it in an extreme 3D theater and those effects were also very good but the lead character boy, in some scenes, was absolutely terrible.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

3

EludiumQ36Apr 19, 2012

Make no mistake, "Hugo" is a film for kids. It's wrapped in fine 3D cinematography set in 1940's Paris but it's leveled at your pre-teen. Even the film's theme is revealed via dialogue so there's no mystery to ponder or interpretation toMake no mistake, "Hugo" is a film for kids. It's wrapped in fine 3D cinematography set in 1940's Paris but it's leveled at your pre-teen. Even the film's theme is revealed via dialogue so there's no mystery to ponder or interpretation to debate. The 3D version certainly added an interesting visual dimension to it but it's still a kid's film and was largely a waste of time for me but again, your pre-teen may find some adventure and enchantment there.… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

3

movie_raterFeb 26, 2012

First of all I want to mention that I am a big fan of Scorsese and I love almost every movie which was directed by him!
My favourite is Taxi Driver, followed by Good Fellas, Departed and even Shutter Island wasn't that bad, like some peopleFirst of all I want to mention that I am a big fan of Scorsese and I love almost every movie which was directed by him!
My favourite is Taxi Driver, followed by Good Fellas, Departed and even Shutter Island wasn't that bad, like some people say!

So I just thought, I have to watch 'Hugo', because it's a 'Scorsese', although I don't really like fairy tales and stuff like that.

Now, after I saw 'Hugo', I have to say that the movie is not so bad, but really not great!
I also don't understand, why this movie is nominated for 11 oscars!

Is it because Scorsese was the director?!

Well, about the movie itself: the effects were great (not too much or less, but just right), the story was half interessting, half boring, the actors were partly good (Ben Kingsley), partly bad (Asa Butterfield, the innocent looking acting-noob) and the runtime was way too long!

It really needs more than dirty hands and baby-blue eyes to play an orphan quite authentic!
Asa was much too whiny...

Also there were way too much 'coincidences', like the girl carrying the key as a necklace (of course...)!

All in all I would say take another child actor, wrap up the story a little bit, shorten it and show it again.
Otherwise, it's not worth an oscar!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

LovegoodcinemaFeb 27, 2012

It is unbelievable how a film like this one can get so many Oscar nominations. A mix of artificial technical effects, boring script, a copy of some French films style (Delicatessen, Amelie,...) but without any humour, ridiculous characters...It is unbelievable how a film like this one can get so many Oscar nominations. A mix of artificial technical effects, boring script, a copy of some French films style (Delicatessen, Amelie,...) but without any humour, ridiculous characters... Once again, Scorsese over-rated, unable to tell a real story, full of banalities. Nogo recommendation… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

3

Greenball10Jul 26, 2012

This movie was quite falsely advertised. All these commercials saying "This movie is the greatest movie of ALL TIME...Magical...enthralling..." It wasn't that good whatsoever. This is nothing close to enthralling. The most exhilarating partThis movie was quite falsely advertised. All these commercials saying "This movie is the greatest movie of ALL TIME...Magical...enthralling..." It wasn't that good whatsoever. This is nothing close to enthralling. The most exhilarating part was when the main character was running from a security guard. Hugo is repetitive, slow, and didn't appeal to me WHATSOEVER. It was visually entertaining, as the setting was interesting and the gears were a nice touch, but I still didn't like the movie. Not recommended.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

3

FilmmakerJan 11, 2013

Well there goes two hours of my life I'm not getting back. Many others have nailed what's wrong here; it's too long, there's almost no plot, the acting is weak, there are glacier size holes in the story, trite characterizations, exposition isWell there goes two hours of my life I'm not getting back. Many others have nailed what's wrong here; it's too long, there's almost no plot, the acting is weak, there are glacier size holes in the story, trite characterizations, exposition is the main source of dialogue, I could go on. Yes, it's beautifully shot, but we go to movies to see ourselves through the characters portrayed. If we only wanted beauty, we could go to the beach, or a park. The filmmaker (George Milies) in the film became a has-been because once the novelty of moving pictures wore off (a train! Special effects!) the audience craved rich, complex characters overcoming seemingly impossible odds to acheive their goals. The Director of Hugo forgot that.

It's much much easier to criticize than it is to create a movie start to finish. And yet, we as Scorcese's audience deserve to see him use his awesome power and budgets in the service of great characters in a great story, and not in talking down to us. The ten-year old in me is disappointed.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews