All the more disappointing because of the talent behind it.

Rating: 4/10 (24 March 2012)

Wow. I don't usually review films that I consider to "mediocre" (I'm lazy so I review films that I love and ones that I hate--in-betweeners I tend to ignore). But "Hugo" was such a disappointment that I have to drop in and post a review. It's a crying shame that so much talent resulted in such a boring movie.
Where to begin? It's a kid's film, certainly, but that doesn't mean it should be stupid and unfortunately that's where we end up. The dialogue in this film reminded me of that line from (the vastly underrated Jamie Kennedy film) "Starstruck"--
"Real people don't talk like that!"
"Of course real people don't talk like that! It's called DIALOGUE!!"
Yeah... IT'S CALLED DIALOGUE.
Not one conversation in this film makes sense. The entire structure of the movie depends upon everyone being secretive when there is no need to be. It's nuts. It's just bad scriptwriting. Want suspense? Keep somebody in the dark! How simple! Especially if it's the audience that's being kept in the dark!
Roger Ebert complains that he hates it when the audience can see something that is obvious but the characters are so dense that they can't see it. Here is a similar situation. All the characters know something that the audience does not, but the director assumes that the audience (children) are so dumb they won't be able to figure it out. It's tedious.
Martin Scorsese, meet George Lucas. You two guys have perfected the art of making bad, expensive films that are supposed to please children but just annoy me.