Hugo is an orphan boy living in the walls of a train station in 1930s Paris. He learned to fix clocks and other gadgets from his father and uncle which he puts to use keeping the train station clocks running. The only thing that he has left that connects him to his dead father is an automaton (mechanical man) that doesn't work without a special key which Hugo needs to find to unlock the secret he believes it contains. On his adventures, he meets with a shopkeeper, George Melies, who works in the train station and his adventure-seeking god-daughter. Hugo finds that they have a surprising connection to his father and the automaton, and he discovers it unlocks some memories the old man has buried inside regarding his past.
Log in to post a review.
This movie is the perfect example of what you get when you put $100 million and the best crew in the world together and make a film: you get a technically excellent film, which any dolt can make with that combination (Scorsese, hello).
You don't get a story though, and from the try-hard actors slogging through their lines to the typical Hollywood tear-jerk cliches, this movie just has nothing interesting in it at all. Except the visuals, which are nice. Two stars for the pretty, and for Georges Melies. At about an hour, this would have been watchable, although stilted. Who thought that Sacha Baron Cohen could be off? All of the little jokes of this movie are flat, odd, and don't hit.
I agree with the person who said they would buy it on CD: That's the perfect place for it, a place where you can't see it at all.
If you get it for a buck at redbox, go ahead, as long as it's your sick day and you want to take a nap during something playing on the DVD player.
Three words. Oh my god. When i first heard that they were making this movie, I screamed and ran around for about 20 minutes. I have read the book 5 times and never get sick of the story and love the gorgeous illustarations. Yes, according to some people, this movie was really fucking boring and they had to wake their friends/family up at the end, (my dad would probably agree with this in a HUMBLE matter but, I personally think that this movie was beautifully made and was bawling from the beauty and the gorgeous acting. I'll probably wait in line in front of the store to get this on DVD.
One of the best movies I've seen combining a great story with fantastic character development (for minor and supporting characters as well as the leads. This is combined with super staging and photography. Took my wife and 9 yr old granddaughter to it and everyone loved it. How long has it been since you have been to a movie that relieved applause from the audience? This one did!
We will buy it on CD when it comes out. This is one worth watching way more than once!
I read the reviews and people say that it was such a great movie. Well I strongly disagree with that. The only thing good about it was the clock tower looked pretty good and the lighting was good also. Besides that it was pretty much a snooze fest and I have to agree with the woman who said that you should just nap instead of going to see it.
Based on Brian Selznick's captivating and imaginative New York Times bestseller "The Invention of Hugo Cabret." Hugo Cabret, Scorsese's first film shot in 3D, tells the tale of an orphan boy living a secret life in the walls of a Paris train station. When Hugo encounters a broken machine, an eccentric girl, and the cold, reserved man who runs the toy shop, he is caught up in a magical, mysterious adventure that could put all of his secrets in jeopardy.
Hugo, a boy who lives alone in a clock tower, tries to solve the mystery of George melies.
You might think that it was strange for Scorsese to do a kids movie, but after watching Hugo, it made perfect sense to me. This movie was right up Scorsese’s ally. The movie is fantastic, and has several things going for it with its great cinematography, characters and philosophical ideas.
The movie is beautiful. Every shot shows off the time period wonderfully and the special effects are used to the movies advantage, as a tool instead of a gimmick.
The characters are very interesting, each one played well and with subtlety.
This movie is also really deep, and speaks to me on a personal level. It deals with the meaning of life with care and comes to a satisfying conclusion (and it isn’t 42.)
I really can’t find much wrong with this movie. I guess Sasha Baron Cohen’s character was kind of annoying, but that’s really it, Except that automaton thing, it was creepy as hell, but that’s not really a flaw as much as it is something that haunts my nightmares.
Needless to say this was a great movie and it will be a shame if it does not win something at the Oscars in February. So go see it. . . right now.
I believe that this movie lived up to expectations. I read the book before I watched the movie and there was only about THREE differences that I found. The book its self was extraordinarily good. If you have read the book or are thinking about watching the movie, don't hesitate buying the tickets. The movie is very much worth it.