Scorsese's next - Hugo

Sad Professor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry7VuPHM6a0

Quicktime version here.

This is a children's adventure film based on the novel The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick and is being released in 3D. It's out here in early December.

Phony Scott

In my eyes, looks like an awesome kids movie, just unadulterated escapism. This could either be a master stroke by Scorsese or another career nadir. I'm backing on the former.

Mickeroo

Really good cast, should be good surely, not expecting a career high for Scorcese or anything but I'm sure he'll do a good job of it.

Am I the only one who's weirded out that Ali G is in a Martin Scorcese movie?

wandatowell

I feel I could happily lose myself in this movie for a few hours and enjoy every second.

Some movies are magical and timeless and this perhaps might just be one of the good 'uns

Phony Scott

Mickeroo wrote: »

Really good cast, should be good surely, not expecting a career high for Scorcese or anything but I'm sure he'll do a good job of it.

Well if someone does mention 'Taxi Driver' with regards to a kids film, they need to grow up themselves. I've watched this trailer a few times now and am just as excited by it as with the first time
I saw it. Though there is a bit of an emo thing to it.

Mickeroo wrote: »

Am I the only one who's weirded out that Ali G is in a Martin Scorcese movie?

Possibly, but I think he is the most gifted comedian since Peter Sellers (who he seems similar to). I could easily see Sacha Baron Cohen doing a ‘Being There’ later in his career.

JP Liz V1

Wow Marty does a kiddie film and no sign of Leo or Bobby De Niro

pickarooney

Is that the kid that plays Mordred in Merlin(BBC)?

py2006

Very different for Scorcese! Looks interesting though!

mystic86

getting excited for this movie now, less than 3 weeks till release. Just saw first tv ad for it.

Dunno if everyone heard, but Hugo is getting great early feedback, and apparently the 3D is the best 3D implementation to date, topping Avatar (according to Cameron himself), here are some links for early feedback:

• http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Scorsese-Hugo-Even-Unfinished-May-Best-Live-Action-3D-Film-Ever-27245.htmlD-Film-Ever-27245.html
• http://www.hollywood.com/news/NYFF_Our_Reactions_to_the_Very_First_Screening_of_Scorseses_Hugo/7848038
• http://www.movies.com/movie-news/martin-scorsese39s-39hugo39-will-literally-remind-you-why-you-love-going-to-movies-so-much-first-place/4884
• http://entertainment.salon.com/2011/10/11/will_scorseses_hugo_redeem_the_3_d_fiasco/singleton/
• http://thefilmstage.com/features/martin-scorseses-hugo-is-an-enthralling-dose-of-film-history-from-cinemas-greatest-admirer/

bnt

Ebert's reviewed it, and has special praise for the 3D. It does contain a few potential spoilers, though I'm not quite sure whether they are spoilers. I'll just say that knowing a bit about the history of film might increase your appreciation of this film-less "film".

That_Guy

Really looking forward to seeing this though I reckon I'll be seeing it in 2D. Looks visually stunning. Interesting idea from Scorcese and I for one will be seeing it on opening day.

Nolanger

Another overrated movie from the world's most overrated director.

mystic86

Nolanger wrote: »

Another overrated movie from the world's most overrated director.

oh you have seen this movie?

one of the world's best directors.

johnny_ultimate

mystic86 wrote: »

oh you have seen this movie?

one of the world's best directors.

It is extremely unlikely that he has seen the film (apologies if he has), and its is wearily known around these parts that Mr. Langer passionately hates every film made after 1957, with the exception of Lars von Trier movies.

Do not feed him. It will only encourage him, as he is often unwilling to engage in any discourse other than broad statements and generalisations.

Eirebear

I do quite fancy this, but 3D actually puts me off - can't be bothered with it.

Will it be shown in 2D too? And of course, given the reviews of the 3D...will i be missing out?

mystic86

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It is extremely unlikely that he has seen the film (apologies if he has), and its is wearily known around these parts that Mr. Langer passionately hates every film made after 1957, with the exception of Lars von Trier movies.

Do not feed him. It will only encourage him, as he is often unwilling to engage in any discourse other than broad statements and generalisations.

I had a feeling he was being ridiculous, there are a lot of these extreme opinions people out there.

3D seems to be a must for this one.

D'Agger

Was looking at this thinking Scorsese? 3D? Ali G?

All seems a bit crazy but I trust Scorsese so I'll give it a go

That_Guy

Eirebear wrote: »

I do quite fancy this, but 3D actually puts me off - can't be bothered with it.

Will it be shown in 2D too? And of course, given the reviews of the 3D...will i be missing out?

Cineworld definitely have it in 2D anyway.

abouttobebanned

Wtf is this Ali g stuff? Do people say Leonardo di caprio? Critters 3?!

Sacha has proved himself to be a superb actor since Ali g so I think it's time we moved on.

D'Agger

abouttobebanned wrote: »

Wtf is this Ali g stuff? Do people say Leonardo di caprio? Critters 3?!

Sacha has proved himself to be a superb actor since Ali g so I think it's time we moved on.

Honestly - I knew I'd fúck up spelling his name so Ali G was easier than doing a search

whatislife

whens it out?

Mitch Connor

whatislife wrote: »

whens it out?

Decemeber 2nd

Cianos

This was a real struggle of a film to get through. Visually it was very impressive, but that was it. The dialogue sounded like it was either written by a 12 year old, or passed on first draft. The pace of the movie was very testing - very little happens in over 2 hours, repetitive scenes, long drawn out build ups that try and reinforce emotional motivation but just make the acting look clumsy and forced.

Very little humour though it was often attempted.

Serious ham-boning from the main character, I actually almost lol'd in the cinema during his last emotional outburst.

Some impressive visual elements and the scenes towards the end using the Georges Méliès material were nice, but Scorcese can hardly claim credit for those!

Finally, it's supposed to be a kids movie but I can't really imagine it holding a child's attention for too long at all.

Nolanger

Just because Sorcese is the director does not make it a great film. Same thing happened when Coppola made Jack.

WatchWolf

I didn't really like it. Incredibly boring.

mystic86

film was disappointing.

it's good, not great.

Renn

Nolanger wrote: »

Just because Sorcese is the director does not make it a great film. Same thing happened when Coppola made Jack.

What did you make of the film yourself?

Warper

Saw a trailer for this and thought it looked pretty poor but after reading all the rave media reviews i thought ya its Scorsese, cant be too bad. After reading here, looks like my original feelings were right. Cheers

johnny_ultimate

Warper wrote: »

Saw a trailer for this and thought it looked pretty poor but after reading all the rave media reviews i thought ya its Scorsese, cant be too bad. After reading here, looks like my original feelings were right. Cheers

Would you not go and formulate your own opinion?

I haven't got around to see it yet, but intend on this week at some point.

Renn

Haha, the notion of somebody taking on board a couple of sentences here and forming an opinion of the film

Thought it was pretty fantastic myself - 3D is something that bugs me so I was a little skeptical going in on that front, but it's probably the best use of it I've seen as of yet. The colours actually came through properly unlike everything else I've seen (usually it's far too dark and falls to black in places etc). Opening scene will be a hard one to top this year. It's just a really fun film!

Duggy747

Going checking this out on Friday, it's do or die for 3D on this one for me. The format has been bland for me so I'll see what ol' Scorsese can muster up, if it doesn't work I'm done with 3D.

Renn

I felt kind of the same going in Duggy. Too many films were 'ruined' on me by poor 3D and a lack of vibrant colours but this one didn't suffer from any of those issues.

hidinginthebush

I saw this last night and thought it was excellent. I must warn you though, the the trailer gives off the completely wrong impression, it is not a child-llike fancy adventure, it's more of a tribute to the birth of cinema. Being completely honest, I wouldn't bring a child to see this, I don't think they would enjoy it, but I absolutely LOVED it! it's tragically funny and quite sad in parts, but overall excellent!

Also, the 3-d is the best I've seen (beating Avatar, even).

Hrududu

Saw this today. The film looked stunning, really gorgeous cinematography. The effects and 3D were also really well used, to enhance rather than to showboat.

But that's about all the positive things I can say about it. It had pacing and plot problems. It just didn't hold my attention and I found myself getting bored several times throughout.

The big problem with this film is that it seems like a number of other films shoe-horned into one. The first half and the second half didn't seem to fit together very well. You also had bits of scenes thrown in that could have come from Amelie, particularly the romance plots between the characters in the train station. All the Cohen scenes seemed completely out of place. As soon as he'd appear you knew there would be some bit of physical comedy business going on, it was always telegraphed a mile away and none of it was funny. The only good scene he had was when he touched on why he wore his leg brace.

All in all I'm glad I saw it in the cinema as it did look incredible. But I wouldn't recommend it to any one I know.

Mickeroo

Saw this tonight. THought it was brilliant. Knew very little about it going in to be honest, had seen the trailer when it first came out ages ago. I don't think it would really hold a kids attention but its a great film for gown ups to forget their worries for two hours. I really enjoyed how it was actually a film about films, scorcese put a lot of love into this one and it really shows on the screen. It looked stunning too and the 3D wasn't bad either although I'm not sure if it really enhanced it. Enjoyed all the well known actors popping up in minor roles too!

d@rk l0rd

Amazing 3D but was bored silly by this film. Thought it was a pile of poop! Lots of people leaving during it when I was there, especially families with kids. Definitely not a kids movie!

Duke Leonal Felmet

Scorsese and 3D: enough already

DONALD CLARKE

Fri, Dec 02, 2011

Oh no. Elsewhere in these pages we grudgingly acknowledge that Hugo , the fine new film from Martin Scorsese, profits from being shot in 3D

But we didn’t want Scorsese to go crazy for the process. Asked whether he would like to continue shooting in 3D, he replied: “Quite honestly, I would. I don’t think there’s a subject matter that can’t absorb 3D.”

We take it all back. Hugo is awful
© 2011 The Irish Times

I LOLed.

Smartguy

Definitely not a kids movie.
Visually stunning but the story was average at best.

johnny_ultimate

Very much enjoyed it. I do think the first act felt a bit awkward as it tried to establish a tone and setting. But once the 'adventure' began it kicked into gear and was a rather moving examination of the joy of cinema. Clever setpieces homaging classic silent cinema

(although shouldn't the train have been stopping even before they saw Hugo?)

were a delight. Performances were all impressive - Chloe Grace Moretz once again owning a role that seems well beyond her years - although Sasha Baron Cohen's character felt uneven with some strangely delivered scenes and lines. I like where they finally went with his character, but wasn't always fond of the delivery.

I can see how some people would think this is sort of proselytising about the glory of cinema as an artform, and it does lack subtlety on that front sometimes (the scene on the bridge after the first cinema visit, for example). But there's so much enthusiasm and love for the medium in here its almost impossible to begrudge. The recreations of the Melies studio was a particularly fantastic touch, and the cinematography was full of colour and energy. But this is a film aimed at children that doesn't feature fart jokes or ADD editing (although there was a shoddy cut or two, like a very awkward one in the book shop). Its a lesson in the birth of cinema, and a celebration of intelligently and passionately engaging with art. I know that might be a moral more appreciated by film fans rather than the kids themselves, but it's sure as hell a good lesson for them to be learning.

As for the 3D? I dunno. The first scene admittedly had a wonderful sense of depth, even if it had the unavoidable side effect of making everyone look like they were in a pop-up book. After that, I would have preferred to be watching in traditional format despite a clever scene or two utilising the third dimension. And even though the colours and brightness were very well optimised for 3D, the few times I took off my glasses for comparison's sake, the palette seemed even warmer and more vibrant. Oh well.

Warper

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Would you not go and formulate your own opinion?

I haven't got around to see it yet, but intend on this week at some point.

Saw a trailer for Conan the Barbarian too and decided to give that a miss. When i go to the cinema i go to films that i like the look of or heard good things of. Hugo looks bad to me so i was looking for opinions on it rather than wasting 2 hours in the cinema watching crap.

The Sparrow

I thought it was excellent. Solid 8 out of 10. Didn't really care about the 3D but the film looked gorgeous. Great turns from all of the cast and especially the younger leads. Although, I'm not sure that Sacha Baron Cohen really fit in with the rest of the performances. A really engaging story that I found really interesting once it got going. It's not really a huge adventure though. But I viewed that as a plus. It is refreshing to have a more subtle story for once that is not about saving the world but rather a lovely journey back to the birth of cinema.

It was perhaps a tad longer than it needed to be as it felt a tiny bit drawn out towards the end. Still though, I don't really understand how any cinema fan could not love it. I really loved all of the clockwork and the machinery. No idea if kids will like it but I suspect most would. I certainly did.

The Sparrow

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

(although shouldn't the train have been stopping even before they saw Hugo?)

That did occur to me too!

BTW, how come your review was posted 34 mins after the post below yours? Have I found a glitch in The Matrix?

johnny_ultimate

Posted on two different days

Also anyone notice the

Scorcese cameo as a cameraman?

Nice little touch

Warper wrote:

Saw a trailer for Conan the Barbarian too and decided to give that a miss. When i go to the cinema i go to films that i like the look of or heard good things of. Hugo looks bad to me so i was looking for opinions on it rather than wasting 2 hours in the cinema watching crap.

That's fair enough, but as you can see there seems to be an even split between positive and negative opinions here. I'd recommend it personally, although there does seem to be quite a few who find it 'boring'. I thought it was worth it for the recreations alone!

hidinginthebush

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Also anyone notice the

Scorcese cameo as a cameraman?

Nice little touch

I spent the entire movie looking for that, and thought

he didn't cameo in it, was raging when I saw it on IMDB!

Mickeroo

Nolanger wrote: »

Just because Sorcese is the director does not make it a great film. Same thing happened when Coppola made Jack.

Nah it really didn't. Jack was torn apart by critics and most people who saw it.

Warper wrote: »

Saw a trailer for Conan the Barbarian too and decided to give that a miss. When i go to the cinema i go to films that i like the look of or heard good things of. Hugo looks bad to me so i was looking for opinions on it rather than wasting 2 hours in the cinema watching crap.

It's got 94% on RT and 8.5 on imdb. Considering this thread is only 3 pages long and considering(by my count, not inculding posts by people who says it looks crap and didn't watch it) 6 people liked it and 5 didn't you're making a decision based on the opinions of a very very small cross section of the world wide cinema going public. The maths don't add up brah :pac:

johnny_ultimate

Excellent in-depth analysis of the film here. Spoilers, as they say, ahoy.

Duggy747

Just back from it. For once, I walked out of a 3D film feeling like it had an actual purpose and added to the film. The whole design and and visual flow of the film was great.

Story wise it starts sluggish and takes quite a while to actually get going. At one point I was wondering where the movie was actually going with all this as the pacing began to almost grind to a halt.

But, once the film kicked into gear it had my attention for the rest of the movie as it went through the birth of cinema. Definitely a case of a film with a better 2nd half.

Only weak point was Baron Cohen's character, he didn't feel fleshed out enough despite having quite an amount of screen time. Great performances from everyone though and was a treat to see

Christopher Lee

since I didn't know he would be making an appearance. His presence definitely adds weight to the entire movie's love letter to cinema given the actor's status.

Overall, I really enjoyed it once it eventually kicked in and Scorsese treated the 3D format nicely with some neat tricks that didn't feel gimmicky for the sake of it. Some great nods and touches to the old movies, too. I agree with Johnny about the

train trying to stop before hitting Hugo. The bloody thing should've been already going at a snails pace coming into the station

:pac:

I wouldn't really class it as a kid's film, though, despite it feeling like one that came from the 70's and wasn't riddled in cliches we're so familiar to nowadays.

BlitzKrieg

scorsese trolls 3D cinema?

Thats how it felt to me. Melies was a filmmaker who was left behind in the film industry because like a lot of early european filmmakers at the time failed to develop the tools of cinematic narrative and world war one destroying most of the industry physically really just put the nail in the coffin.

And he is the subject of Scorsese's first 3D film? Come on! A new technology that has been criticized as being a purely spectacle addition with no narrative merit telling the story of the filmmaker who couldnt keep up with the narrative development of cinema.

Its trolling that only filmmakers and film enthusiasts would get.


Anyway average enough yarn from Scorsese, felt the pacing was very poor with the first half drawn out to the point I was fidgeting at characters to act, the 2nd half picks up nicely enough but I never genuinely get a sense of adventure from the plot and there was some pretty awful exposition dump scenes towards the end, particulary involving the stationmaster.

I'd be curious to hear what people who have read the book feel about it as to me it feels like it was a sloppy adaptation that wanted to focus on Melies more then the story itself.

Cartman78

Had planned to go and see this last week but couldn't make it for a variety of reasons.

This weekend my local cinemas are only showing this in 2D --- is it still worth going to see??

Mickeroo

Cartman78 wrote: »

Had planned to go and see this last week but couldn't make it for a variety of reasons.

This weekend my local cinemas are only showing this in 2D --- is it still worth going to see??

Definitely.

Doctor_Socks

Seen this 2 weeks ago and seen it again yesterday, that's how much I absolutely adored this film! Some of the most beautiful scenes I have ever seen in a film, I seen it both times in 2D as I deplore 3D in films, something that I hope will be removed from cinema in years to come! I had tears rolling down my face throughout some of the scenes because I was so moved by them!

My friends complained that it was slow to start with but don't be thrown off by that, it is truly an excellent, excellent film and what I hope will win the oscar for best picture! For anyone that loves their films and hasn't seen it yet, get your arse to the cinema and see it!