Review of Hugo (2012) by Cheyne L — 24 May 2013

Hugo was a good film, but not a great film. Sure, it's dazzling to watch, the cinematography is really outstanding, but doesn't add anything to the story! But there is no glossing over the abundance of cliche at the center of this film.

All films are basically a variation of the same three act structure that has come to dominate commercial filmmaking today, so a few clever variations doesn't make Hugo anything truly remarkable. The pacing is too slow considering the payoff, which can be seen from miles away.

It's really not important enough to justify all the mystery and build up. Cohen's comic relief funny at times, some of his lines do crack a smile with their often sexual subtext, but I'm sure these moments are lost on children and often bring the story to a halt.

Overall, his place in the film is formulaic and not funny enough to make up for the plodding pacing of the kids struggle. Also, the boy playing Hugo, could hardly explore any of his character's small idiosyncrasies because he lacked the range necessary to really create a fully rounded character.

The actor's delivery, by this I mean Hugo's vocal pacing, seemed off to me, and other's have noticed this as well, i'm not sure if this is the actor's fault, or an editing issue. Scorsese does a great job directing this film, obviously out of his norm, but that doesn't make this a great picture just because a great director handles it.

But I do think there may be children to young to appreciate the moments when this film detours into the history of film. This film delves into the magic of filmmaking and alludes to many classic techniques that have created the movies as we come to know them today.

The script is smart in that sense, but great pieces don't always add up to a great whole.