Scorsese's Tribute to Film-Makers

Rating: 9/10 (5 March 2012)

Martin Charles Scorsese, now at 70, definitely felt the urge to delve deep into the history of cinema and bring out a story (which also happens to be partly true) that so wonderfully conveys both the power of imagination and the joy of film making. Marie-Georges-Jean Méliès is not a very popular name these days, but his contribution to cinema in the early days of its inception is worth a movie. And Brian Selznick penned a novel, The Invention of Hugo Cabret, which elevates this tribute to an altogether higher orbit of fantasy and adventure.
The story revolves around an orphaned boy, Hugo, who lives in the ducts and vents of a train station in 1930s Paris and employs himself by fixing and maintaining the station clocks. As an heirloom of his deceased father, Hugo tries to mend a broken automaton that is supposed to write a message on a paper. A chance encounter with a toy store owner, Georges Méliès, and his eccentric daughter unravels a way to make the automaton work. And this takes him on a journey down the past life of Méliès and he re-discovers the genius of the man who had suffered a long and silent agony of neglect and deprivation. Glory gets restored to Méliès in the most strangest of ways.
In spite of the stellar star cast, this is not an actor oriented movie. Chloë Grace Moretz and Asa Butterfield deserves applaud since they manage to convey the nuances of their characters with a maturity which is beyond their age. Ben Kingsley is great, but who expects anything less than that from him! Sacha Baron Cohen's portrayal of the station inspector was noteworthy. Wonderfully restrained! But, I must say again, Hugo will not be remembered for these acting performances. It will be remembered for what transcends the actors.
The cinematography, special effects, editing, art direction etc. are all clearly visible entities that must appeal to all viewers. The Oscars were well deserved, mostly. (Ok I agree, the 'Transformers bots' were wicked cool and Harry Potter's final installation was not bad either, but come on! These movies were not 'oscar material'). Hugo is a winner when it comes to 'look & feel'. Scorsese rules. He proves his mettle, once again, by bridging the special effects with the screenplay, the actors with their costumes, the light with the clock work and what not.
When analyzing works of Scorsese, Hugo might not reign over classics like Taxi Driver or Raging Bull but I believe this film is going to age nicely. It has all the ingredients of a classic and in the right proportion. (The only downside is a slight overdose of sentimentality in the last 30 minutes of the movie.) If you haven't seen it already, go dream with Hugo.