User Score
7.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 585 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 51 out of 585

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 23, 2014
    10
    Hugo es una película que triunfa mostrando varios acontecimientos con respecto a la historia del cine, logra dar un buen espectáculo y su trama es muy convencional.
  2. Nov 7, 2014
    8
    When first seeing this movie I was in awe of the beauty it not only captures your attention but also your mind. I love that this film blends the past with the present showing the viewer how far special effects have come. this unlike many others can be enjoyed by the whole family and I mean that. Its not a cookie cutter family movie where the parents sit waiting for something interesting to happen with the suspense and adventure everyone can enjoy and go on a journey with the characters. I also love that Martin Scorsese directed a film that was unique from all his other films that are for a much more mature audience.
    This film uses sound to its advantage every chance it gets. I believe sound is one of the most important aspects of a film and in Hugo sound allows another aspect to draw you in, to suspense the next scene, to know when to look even more intently. The sound in this film was edited so beautifully it as if it is a part of the words blended into one solid piece of art. One does not go without the other. They work hand in hand and as one becomes silent the other is ready to take its place. Martin Scorsese did a wonderful job of incorporating sound throughout this film just like he does in many others like Cape Fear and Goodfellas.
    I love that the cast in this film is far from well known and all-star actors; I believe if this film had better known actors it would have detracted from the beauty of the story and we would lose the realistic aspect that Hugo is a boy living in a train station and that Isabelle is a curious young girl looking for an adventure. The cast really took their parts seriously and I believe that helped make this film what it is. The small characters were also quiet a big part of this film without all the side characters a lot of the story would be lost. If we didn't have an inspector we would lose a fair amount of the suspense and never have the threat of Hugo being taken away to the orphanage.
    The special effects in this film are my favorite part. They capture you with the past and the present showing how far we have come and the amazing changes that have been made. Including George Melies is the best thing Martin Scorses could have done because this not only give an amazing plot but also bridges the gap between old and new. By including some of Melies original work we see how special effects have transformed from the magicians hat to 3-D pictures. Last when Hugo turns into a robot you not only believe it but you start to think it could happen in real life and that is when a movie truly becomes a masterpiece.
    Overall I believe anyone can enjoy this film and recommend it to not just families but everyone. If you're looking for something a little less ordinary then watch Hugo I promise it won't disappoint. I must say if you can please watch it in 3-D but even if you can't it's still worth watching.
    Expand
  3. Aug 31, 2014
    6
    I certainly commend Marty's attempt at making a film for all ages; however, Hugo doesn't quite pack the punch any of his other films do. It's an epic story--one that is lost along the way.
  4. Jun 22, 2014
    10
    Someone compared this movie to a Hans Christian Andersen tale and I think this is about as good a comparison as it gets. Some people find it boring and painful, others are mesmerized and inspired by the story it tells and the way it does so. In short, if you prefer Disney's version of the little mermaid story, you will likely be disappointed by Hugo.

    On the other hand, if you like the
    attention to detail and the not entirely happy endings of Andersen's classic short stories, you will probably find that Hugo is a captivating film that is hard to describe in a few words. It really lives in a lot more than three dimensions.

    If you also happen to be a cinema fan, you will love it even more. What is a cinema fan? It's person that appreciates films for more than just their entertainment value. The way movies are made, the different layers of audio, visuals, emotions, symbols, the photography, the standout supporting casts, the way you can predict the cliché moves sometimes, but love it anyway. We love the good movies, like the bad ones, and films like Hugo make our hearts sing.

    One last note on the use of 3D. I usually avoid 3D versions of movies because that feature has not yet proved itself to be more than just a gimmick. In Hugo's case, it is still partially true. I watched it in 3D and the opening sequence in the train station as well as a couple other select shots were exceptionally staged for 3D. Aside from that though, you get used to the effect and thankfully, it's the story that stays in the center of attention, followed by beautiful cinematography, characters, and 3D is trailing humbly behind. If you have the opportunity, watch the 3D version, but you will not really love it in 2D any less.
    Expand
  5. May 19, 2014
    8
    Right from the onset of the film, it is entirely clear why it got so many Oscar nominations for its visuals. The visual effects, sets, and cinematography, are all absolutely gorgeous and this film absolutely qualifies as eye candy. On top of that, it is a fantastic look at film history. I did not expect that going in and while I knew some of what was discussed, it was still very cool to see it come to life in a film. In terms of the story itself, the film was very cute and charming as we follow the events that transpire for this kid living in the train station. The acting was also pretty good. There were moments when I had to pause and take in how bad they were, but for the most part, they did a solid job for being child actors. Ben Kingsley also turned in a reliably good performance.

    On the negative side, there is not much, but the aforementioned times when the acting was...less than sub-par. In those moments, it took me out of the film a bit. In addition, in the beginning, it is a tad hard to get into. However, once you are in, you are in for good. Overall, Hugo is a very enjoyable film that really demonstrates the magic of film and is a very different work from Martin Scorsese, but certainly right up there with the rest of his amazing filmography.
    Expand
  6. May 8, 2014
    10
    hugo is an amazing movie i really like that porno i really like that he came all over her boobs its really HOT i get so turned on i also like his nipples when i see it makes me wanna hump the **** out my dog and my sister fridge
  7. Apr 27, 2014
    8
    I didn't think I was going to like this movie, but it was really well done and I ended up enjoying it more than I thought. It was surprising to me when I saw that Martin Scorsese directed this movie because it is not one of his typical movies. But he's a great director and this is another good movie done by him.
  8. Mar 2, 2014
    2
    when i saw this it was boring and something that isnt enjoyable . Wow martin scoresse why would you make a film like this . it is boring , it is Sh***t
  9. Jan 30, 2014
    8
    ''A Masterpiece.'' ''Spectacular!'' The Best use of 3D. Martin Scorsese shows his love of Film-making. One of the Best Films of 2000's. A New Masterpiece of the millennium. One of the most important film you're ever going to see. You won't see anything like Hugo.
  10. Jan 23, 2014
    6
    Martin Scorsese is one of my all time favorite directors and this movie was good,
    i liked the visuals and the plot, and i like the details about movie making and all that stuff,
    however i didn't like the way this movie addresses it's audience,
    it seems as the story was for kids not for adults, come on if you seen it, you'll know what I'm talking about
    that's my only problem with this movie.
  11. Jan 7, 2014
    10
    Uma homenagem ao cinema de uma grandeza fenomenal.
  12. Dec 4, 2013
    6
    I was expecting to be dazzled by Hugo, as critics across the board praised the movie and it won several Oscars for its achievements in cinematography and art design. However, Hugo let me down. The massive praise clearly stems from its purpose, a mushy love letter to the art of cinema. The acting is perpetually bland, the effects were underwhelming, and the story isn't as endearing as several other 2011 releases. Hugo is not a bad film, and I do enjoy some moments. But when people cite Hugo as a year-defining film and an instant classic, I can't help but disagree. Hugo is a decent family movie, but does nothing new or inspiring other than glorify Hollywood. In the end, it's a sweet and simple appetizer for all the delicious cinematic entrees 2011 had to serve.

    6/10

    Follow me on twitter. @cbeers2513
    Expand
  13. Nov 28, 2013
    7
    A nice movie you can watch with your whole family. The main negative parts are: Main character's acting is dull and the movie could be shorter (its 126 min.) When or If you watch it fully, you will understand how come it earned 5 Oscars.
  14. Oct 22, 2013
    10
    Hugo is one of Scorcese's best films in the 21st century, and delivers a combination of magic, expert moviemaking, and a great, talented cast. Sacha Baren Cohen strays from his usual "crazy foreigner" performance for a quiet, shy one. Asa Butterfield is amazing, and has a pretty good amount of potential for the future. Chloe Grace Moretz is amazing, as always, and Ben Kingsley gives an Oscar-worthy performance that is enjoyable as well as sturdy. You have to see this movie for yourself to soak up every little magical thing about it. Just the way it progresses, and the dialogue spoken is a feat almost irreplaceable. Expand
  15. Aug 19, 2013
    5
    Hugo tells the story of young Hugo Cabret and his journey to try and find a message from his late father. Scorsese uses great imagery with vibrant colors to throughout the film giving the entire film a bright and hopeful view on life. However in spite of this view of a brighter and ore hopeful life the colors sometimes distract, finding yourself looking more at the old and attractive architecture in comparison to what is occurring on the screen.

    The story of Hugo is a roller-coaster of ride where at one point the story is just but Hugo trying to find a message from his father after his tragic loss. Then the story quickly adapts to a journey of discovery and to rekindling people's dreams.

    Sacha Baron Cohen is hilarious in this film, from his in chase scenes to his failures at attempting to secure a lover. Cohen plays the simpler minded police officer whose confusion in conversation is leads to bags of laughter. Moretz delivers an incredible performs as the twelve year old, Isabelle who lives to read the great novels of the day and who is already up for an adventure.

    However despite the strong performances from the entire cast the film Hugo fails to keep the attention of the audience, apart from the funny Cohen or strong lines of dialogue delivered by an incredible cast can’t bring the film back from the rather dull narrative that is the plot of Hugo.

    Unfortunately a film that had so much going for it, an incredible cast, director and writer. The film fails to entertain past the usual slapstick humor of a children’s film. Despite this the visuals of the film is stunning which I suppose is an upside if you aren’t easily distracted by grand architecture then this will be a major upside to your cinematic experience.

    In hindsight I will remember Hugo but not for it’s narrative I will remember it for it’s stunning visuals and superb acting, but I do not think that this is a film which I will remember with fond memories or frankly even remember at all. In hindsight this is not a film I would likely watch again.

    I would like to reiterate that my score is nothing against the acting. Moretz and Bohen were great. My score is more against the story and the general feel of the film.
    Expand
  16. Jul 10, 2013
    4
    Nice, cute, Hugo is a nice film and a bit tedious and um, hilarious in itself. Its too long though and it was extended. Though its good it won a few Oscars, though its kind of odd
  17. Jul 8, 2013
    10
    A film made ​​for all that we relive so exciting and moving love for cinema. In addition to having an interesting plot is also technically perfect. A photograph crazy, bright and dark in the station instead of in the streets of Paris and a setting that is able to represent in a realistic manner as the Paris of the '30s and special effects really sensational. One thing that surprised me was the absolute 3D. The best I've ever seen so far. A movie film that manages to make you dream and makes us understand the love for cinema. Expand
  18. Jul 7, 2013
    7
    Hugo is one of movies of Martin Scorsese I love ,because it tell the story of the first studio of cinema and George Méliése .
    the movie respects the story of the book
  19. Jun 20, 2013
    9
    Martin Scorsese's love letter to film is near flawless, visually fantastic, and characters that connected very well to each other and the audience. The special effects were perfectly utilized and were tributary to Georges Méliès and his revolutionary special effects. This was Scorsese's first children's movie and possibly the work closest to his heart. It is a children's movie in that it made me feel like a child again, restoring wonder and marvel to the world of film and the real world at once. The movie also connects parallels between mechanics, literature, and film-making. Expand
  20. Jun 19, 2013
    8
    A visually stunning experience that any film fan will love to see. Not only does the film have characters that you connect with, but it will have you totally invested in the journey back to the an earlier time in movie history.
  21. Jun 11, 2013
    4
    I didn't really like this film. It was too long and boring, lame. I didn't get the message of that movie and i didn't even bother to look for it through the internet or watch the movie again. A waste of my time.
  22. May 15, 2013
    0
    This movie suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkksssssssssssssssssssssssss. I am a professional movie critic.
  23. May 15, 2013
    2
    I didn't read the book so I don't know if its properly ported, but the movie is... omg.
    It's been years since I have to stop watching a movie and this had even Oscars behind it.
    The girl is extremely painful and the main character is even worse.
    I'm not trying to be troll. I'm just saying that, for me, it's an incredible bored movie.
  24. Apr 25, 2013
    5
    Hugo is directed by either Spielberg or Scorsese. I think it's Scorsese, but it felt like Spielberg. The film even had some John Williams-style big music, composed by Howard Shore (yeah, that's right! the saxophone player from the band Lighthouse!)

    This fantasy is about a boy who lives in the walls of a Paris train station. Not since The Legend of 1900 have I heard of anything this
    screwy. Inside these walls are the guts of the station's clocks. The guts consist of cogs, gears, counterweights, pinions, springs, and inexplicably steam.

    During the course of the film, we learn that Hugo is the dude that built C3PO (or some C3PO prototype). C3PO reveals to Hugo that the local old grump (played by Ben Kingsley) is in fact a forerunner to movie wizards like Spielsese or Scorberg.

    Anyway, I saw this movie in regular old boring 2D. I didn't realize it was a 3D film until the scene where some pages with drawings go flying from the kids' hands and drift all over the screen. At first I was thinking, "What the hell is this all about? Am I supposed to be mesmerized by fluttering stationery?" Then I realized that this was intended to be seen in super-duper 3D. "Ahh," I thought, "Now I see. Ooooh, that would have been so cool to see all that paper flying around in 3D." We haven't witnessed anything like this in cinematic history since the famous bolo-bat scene in the 1953 film House of Wax.

    Hugo does a lot of hiding and running, primarily from a train station cop played by Sacha Baron Cohen. Cohen's character is an amalgam of Inspectors Javert and Clouseau. He and his trusty Doberman Pinscher cannot seem to track down the elusive boy who knows the station and its walls like the inner workings of an automaton. During one climactic scene, Hugo gives the Inspector the slip by doing a Harold Lloyd impression from a clock tower.

    Once the Inspector catches up with Hugo, they have a talk. During the conversation, the little urchin makes the Inspector laugh. The Inspector tells him that he's funny. Hugo then says, "I'm funny how? I mean funny like I'm a clown? I amuse you? I make you laugh, I'm here to f____n' amuse you? What do you mean funny? Funny how? How am I funny? What the f__k is so funny about me? Tell me, tell me what's funny!"

    Wait a minute. I might me confused. That dialog might be from a different movie a real Scorcese film.

    All in all, Hugo isn't such a bad movie. But in retrospect, I think I would have preferred watching the Harold Lloyd film, Safety Last.
    Expand
  25. Apr 6, 2013
    9
    Hugo is a well made movie from one of the best directors of all time: Martin Scorsese. I read the book too and the movie and the book where very good. The actors are good and the plot is good too. Hugo is a beautiful family film who everyone needs to see.
  26. Mar 16, 2013
    6
    It`s an interesting film, It was kind of slow at times but has a good message. I like the music and time of this movie, it adds a nice feel to it. I kind of wanted more from the movie but it`s worth watching.
  27. Jan 11, 2013
    3
    Well there goes two hours of my life I'm not getting back. Many others have nailed what's wrong here; it's too long, there's almost no plot, the acting is weak, there are glacier size holes in the story, trite characterizations, exposition is the main source of dialogue, I could go on. Yes, it's beautifully shot, but we go to movies to see ourselves through the characters portrayed. If we only wanted beauty, we could go to the beach, or a park. The filmmaker (George Milies) in the film became a has-been because once the novelty of moving pictures wore off (a train! Special effects!) the audience craved rich, complex characters overcoming seemingly impossible odds to acheive their goals. The Director of Hugo forgot that.

    It's much much easier to criticize than it is to create a movie start to finish. And yet, we as Scorcese's audience deserve to see him use his awesome power and budgets in the service of great characters in a great story, and not in talking down to us. The ten-year old in me is disappointed.
    Expand
  28. Jan 6, 2013
    9
    This movie is a wonderful imagination land that combines innocent childhood and a love letter to cinema.
    It is fun, pretty and enthrall you till the end. But most of all it is accurate related to Papa Gorge's life
  29. Jan 4, 2013
    10
    Not often does a film truly find its feet when its basis and plot is, well, film.
    Hugo centres on the extraordinarily rollercoaster life of the title character, adapted from the book "The Tale of Hugo Cabret", we see this small boy (Asa Butterfield) living within the walls of the Gare Montparnasse train station in Paris in an early 1930s France. Hugo keeps the clocks running within the
    station, unbeknownst to everyone else. We soon meet the brilliantly diverse Sir Ben Kingsley, who really catapults himself into the role of toy stall owner 'Papa' Georges, named so by his goddaughter Isabelle, played by the coming-of-age Chloë Moretz. With a rather humorous supporting role from Sacha Baron Cohen as the station inspector, and brief appearances from Jude Law, Richard Griffths, Ray Winstone, Christopher Lee, Helen McCrory and Emily Mortimer, this has an ensemble cast which are used to their fulll potential.
    The cinematography at work here is truly beautiful, from the fluid motion of the train station walls to small pieces within Paris, the visual effects truly are spectacular, from the set pieces of the train station to the hand of the large clock.
    Perhaps the most enjoyable part of this film is the emotional rollercoaster that Martin Scorcese takes us on. This could very well be his most heart-wrenchingly beautiful film to date, he appears to have poured moments from his own life into the 120+ minute ride. With the history of film and moving pictures at play here, it truly is a trip down memory lane for some, but a valuable and entertaining history lesson for most. My pick for the stand alone performance has to be Sir Ben Kingsley, he soars to a different height in his diverse role as a down on his luck old man, I could really watch this man all day, everyday. The nostalgic setting and era used as the backdrop for the film is spot on, providing glimpses of the fast paced motion of technology in the early 20th Century, in particular the automaton, a glorious addition to this tale, one which sets in motion the basis for the film.
    Hugo is quite simply a must-watch film, superb acting, wonderful effects, a riveting and thoroughly entertaining story that really is suitable for all ages, see it to believe it!
    Expand
  30. Dec 29, 2012
    4
    A pretty film in blue-ray, and one of few movies a parent can take a kid to without the inevitable F-bomb. Entertaining but slow to the point and a bit overacted.
  31. Dec 22, 2012
    9
    Best cinematography of all time not to mention crazy visual effects. I thought this movie would have action but instead it had mind blowing screenplay and adrenaline pumping suspense. The one thing preventing this from being a 10 is that it was just barely to slow for me especially for a PG movie. But just barely.
  32. Dec 6, 2012
    10
    Wonderful. A joyous and magical experience. Nominated for 11 Academy Awards including Best Picture and Best Director. Asa Butterfield and Chloe Moretz are child actors to keep an eye on.
  33. Nov 28, 2012
    8
    Technically immaculate and successful at reaching deep into any cinephile's heart and plucking at his heart strings, "Hugo" is a clear treat.
  34. Sep 3, 2012
    6
    A great experience in sound and vision. 'Hugo' deserved all 5 Academy Awards it won, but not more. Asa Butterfield was very disappointing, for my opinion he should only play in horror movies in young age. Also the dialogues are sometimes faint and the whole story is extremely predictable. It mixes the love to inventions with the love to the cinema. The plot is slightly boring and only the hunting scenes with Sacha Baron Cohen are really exciting. All in all a well-made homage to the initation of films, which disappointed me here and there and will definitely be boring for kids! Expand
  35. Aug 22, 2012
    10
    2011 in film saw two very successful films depicting forgotten ages of cinema. I speak of course, of Hugo and The Artist. The story-lines weaved within this film may be confusing for some, but for the right individual Hugo is a rare film that is both charming and full of illusion. Simply put, Hugo is easily the best film of 2011 and should be considered among the great films of the 3-D era.
  36. Aug 4, 2012
    7
    Although Hugo was not very entertaining, it was a good mystery/drama that was actually very inspiring. It is the best movie that has come out in a long time. I wonder what the world would be like if everyone was like Hugo.
  37. Jul 26, 2012
    3
    This movie was quite falsely advertised. All these commercials saying "This movie is the greatest movie of ALL TIME...Magical...enthralling..." It wasn't that good whatsoever. This is nothing close to enthralling. The most exhilarating part was when the main character was running from a security guard. Hugo is repetitive, slow, and didn't appeal to me WHATSOEVER. It was visually entertaining, as the setting was interesting and the gears were a nice touch, but I still didn't like the movie. Not recommended. Expand
  38. Jun 23, 2012
    10
    You're going to finish the movie with a lot of emotions. I can guarantee you that you will laugh, smile, want to tear up and cry, and stand up and applaud when the credits roll. "Hugo" is a triumph in masterful filmmaking packed with good acting, gorgeous Parisian scenery, a spectacular story, and plenty of emotions that you, no, anybody, will not be able to handle.
    Read the full review
    here:
    http://emptyfilmstock.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/hugo/
    Expand
  39. Jun 11, 2012
    0
    Today I saw Hugo on DVD for the first time believing that it was supposed to be an adventure fantasy story. I was very wrong. This movie looked cool, and i can tell it was meant for 3D in the theater, but other than that it was not very good. The plot is so very slow moving that you think it has to lead up to some big climax of how all the mixed story lines tie together, but it does not. I still do not understand how that was supposed to flow well at all. The Automaton had so much potential to be entertaining, but actually had very little to do with the story. It all was very coincidental and the story of Hugo, his dad and the automaton and the story of the movie director didn't quite flow together, heck the Automaton doesn't flow with the director. How would it draw images of his movies if he took it apart to make his camera before making any of his films? Why did he fake his death or why do people think he is dead? What happened to Hugo's mother? Over all the movie left many questions unanswered and was not a fantasy adventure story that the previews made it out to be at all. Expand
  40. Jun 7, 2012
    7
    HUGO was clearly a hard movie to make. The book on which it is based was only half of what we usually find in books, with the other half made up of art. Though this source medium is about 500 pages in length, 60% of that consists of pictures to tell the story. Having read the book only over this weekend, I was able to point out a good amount of discrepancies between the two works, but someone who read the book a while ago would not be able to point put one. As this was directed by Martin Scorsese, who had probably never directed anything that would pass with a modern PG rating before this, I expected a few scenes here that would give the average child nightmares, none of which appeared at all in the book. Not only do I realize that Scorsese actually DOES understand what a family movie is, Iâ Expand
  41. May 29, 2012
    9
    Good story - very creative. Wonderful child actors. Not too sappy and even some historic background to keep older watchers interested. Well done. S B Cohen did a great job as the police officer.
  42. May 26, 2012
    6
    Hugo is alright, it's nothing special, I can't say anything bad about it, but I can say a few good things about it; its got a good and fairly interesting plot, exciting and tense chase sequences, good acting, great character building (you really get to know what the characters are like) and strange music that's kinda catchy. I don't recommend watching it if your into action and sci-fi films, but I do recommend watching it if you like touching dramas or mystery movies. Expand
  43. May 21, 2012
    9
    A heartwarming movie I've seen lately. Love the steampunk themes, charming cast and top notch story. Too bad the ending wasn't as satisfactory as thought it would be.
  44. May 15, 2012
    7
    The Other Scorsese

    One Martin Scorsese uses cinema to make violent, 'realistic' films like Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Casino and Goodfellas, while the other one makes gentle, thoughtful films like The Age Of Innocence, Kundun and Hugo.(He also makes music documentaries like Woodstock, Last Waltz and Shine a Light.)

    This lavish 3D production is a labor of love devoted to the
    making of films, the true subject of Hugo. The story is about an orphan who lives in a Paris train station who carries on the family tradition of fixing clocks. In this tale, he turns his hand to fixing the broken life of Georges Meliere (Ben Kingsley), chased by the evil station master (Sacha Baron Cohen, wonderful) and helped by the young, female ward of the great cinema innovator. Who is it aimed at? It is too old for very young children, too slow for older children, and not adept enough to move many adults because of its almost cartoony style. It is like Frank Capra on acid, but not nearly as witty.

    Nevertheless, it is enjoyable, brilliantly made, occasionally surprising and well played by the cast. One quibbling question: why are all the French people, English? Why not cast French people or Americans? Is it because Americans only belong in Type 1 Scorsese films?
    Expand
  45. May 14, 2012
    9
    I wish I could tell Martin Scorsese how much his movie impacted my life. His movie is a true masterpiece. Utterly breathtaking. I wish I could watch it for the first time again.
  46. May 10, 2012
    4
    Yet another 2011 film receiving rave reviews that I don't get. While it is interesting to see Mr Scorsese defend his not selling out to SFX, that's exactly what he did. Watching at home, without 3D, the movie falls flat. A movie should have been made about Mr Melies but this is not about him, but about things that fly off the screen. And what's the story with the dust or snowflakes that drift around the entire film? Is everyone in a snow globe? Is this Dr Suess? Disappointing on so many levels. The director needed long explanations about the characters, their families, the evil cop, etc. instead of "showing" us some background-this is a visual medium. The best part of the film is the flashbacks on how movie making got it's start. Now that would make a good film. Mr S should get back to developing strong characters, fierce relationships, and de-emphasize the SFX. Poor outing from a usually brilliant director. Expand
  47. Apr 24, 2012
    10
    A fantastic film. With so much detail and effort put into it. Great acting all around especially from no coming Asa Butterfield. Scorsese takes us on a magical journey that i never wanted to never end.
  48. Apr 19, 2012
    3
    Make no mistake, "Hugo" is a film for kids. It's wrapped in fine 3D cinematography set in 1940's Paris but it's leveled at your pre-teen. Even the film's theme is revealed via dialogue so there's no mystery to ponder or interpretation to debate. The 3D version certainly added an interesting visual dimension to it but it's still a kid's film and was largely a waste of time for me but again, your pre-teen may find some adventure and enchantment there. Expand
  49. Apr 3, 2012
    8
    Spectacular film, with enviable art direction! sound, special effects, perfectly constructed, Scorsese did a tremendous job in making this film a reality. performances a bit loose but by the children, but Kingsley tremendous!
  50. Apr 1, 2012
    7
    Hugo is not a magic, extravagant or elegant fantasy. Let's say it's Martin Scorsese, dazzling 3D and love letter to cinema. But Hugo is mediocre and even boring.
  51. Mar 31, 2012
    10
    First off, this would be a 9.75. Almost perfect. Story is great. It just such a good story, that I don't know how much I can empathize it. Visuals and score are pretty great. acting is also well done by everyone. Scorsese doesn't disappoint. This is great. Overall you should watch. Recommend for everyone.
  52. Mar 30, 2012
    5
    Hugo is an okay not great. Except for the flashy visuals the kids and everyone around were over- acting. The movie was too long by 15 mintues. The magic for the movie wasn' there entirely and that is were the movie goes off course the most.
  53. Mar 29, 2012
    9
    Hugo es emocionalmente cautivadora. Es una pelicula llena de magia...a todos los amantes del cine les parecera un emocionate viaje en la historia del septimo arte. Es visualmente atractiva, cada detalle de Hugo fue cuidado a tan grado que parece ser casi perfecta. Una de las mejores peliculas que he visto ultimamente y un clasico instantaneo.
  54. Mar 28, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Wow, Hugo, this movie is an double edged sword, because much people think: The movie is for a children, but no. What is the reason?. Because the movie have much material of the book (that is excellent), and is awesome, the direction of Scorsese is amazing. But with this material a kid can feeling boring, because I'm watching the movie with my little brother of 9 years, and he tell: We can watch other movie?, this is boring. I think that the movie is excellent, but the mistake of Scorsese or the people that put the subtitles is say: A story for all the family, because is false, I'm feel that the story is for child but the development is for other public. Okay, the rest of the movie is great, the cast is amazing, the performance of the kid is incredible, and the rest wow. The effects are awesome, this scenes on the train station are fantastic, and the robot, is amazing (but I think that Rise of the planet of the Apes, Transformers, or Harry Potter have better effects). The screenplay is excellent. The development [for me] is interesting. Hugo is a masterpiece, is for adults, and teenagers that don't like the cultutre pop, have much amazing things. I put a dry 10, for the problem that I'm tell, but for me the movie is fantastic. Expand
  55. Mar 28, 2012
    2
    One of the more pretentious movies made in the past few year. A love letter to itself and the the self absorbed members of Hollywood that believe all the magic and originality in the world is a result of their own collective efforts. The story is so slow, and unconvincing, you'll likely doze off well before the movie's anti climatic ending. The only redeeming quality is the beautiful set and costume design, as well as some slightly inspired acting . Expand
  56. Mar 28, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Hugo is a film that is technically brilliant but almost every other aspect fell short in my opinion. The cinematography is incredible and is one of the main reasons why the movie pulls you in initially. However, the story eventually let me down. Chloe Moretz is a great up-and-coming actress and she does well in this role, but Asa Butterfield isn't quite ready for a main role and in certain moments he comes off as awkward. The story is just too slow and uneventful for most of the movie. Also, moments that could be powerful are dramatically downplayed, such as Hugo's relationship with his father and uncle. When Hugo learns that his father died, he literally has no reaction and shows very little emotion. The father is a large part of the story, and he doesn't even shed a tear? The movie shifts halfway through to a story about the history of movies, which is probably why the critics praised it so much. The movie has it's moments, but I feel like it is predictable. I can't imagine kids really getting into this and enjoying it, though the blame is more on the marketing (who tried to sell it as a kids movie). Martin Scorsese is an all-time great director, and it's great to see him experiment so late in his career. However, Hugo was a big disappointment for me. I still recommend seeing it as it does have it's moments, but I definitely feel like this could have been so much more. Expand
  57. Mar 24, 2012
    10
    It is Scorsese's passion for movies and stroytelling in general that makes it so warm to feel, so appealing to look at, and so entertaining to watch.
  58. Mar 22, 2012
    7
    I think most audiences from 12 and under will find Hugo to be one of the best films for their age group. Outside of that age range will likely find the film to be of fantastic quality in every category. The true question for most readers is, do you like family films? Can you tolerate them? If so, rent it, buy it, borrow it, or somehow find a way to watch it. I think you will like it, if not absolutely love it. For me personally, I think it really is a beautiful and stunning film to see, and the acting is spot on. I just didn't care for the film after the first say hour and a half or so. Not that the last half hour is bad, in fact I rather liked it at first. It was after re-watching part of it, and thinking about it in depth that I began to realize its flaws. I do think it was rather predictable in ways, which is to be somewhat expected as a family film. I also can't get over the ending feeling like an attempt at becoming a shoe-in at the Oscars. This does bother me to a certain extent how it was done, and how educational it became on the start of the film industry. I hope if anything this ends up inspiring youth to be more creative as I find there to be far too few of these around today. None-the-less, still a well done film and was glad to have seen what it was all about.

    For my full review, visit http://visuallyimpairedreviews.blogspot.com/2012/03/hugo.html
    Expand
  59. Mar 18, 2012
    3
    This movie is not captivating, not magical and not exiting. a movie about a washed up old man and a kid is pathetic Tin Tin was a better movie choice. I really did not like this.
  60. Mar 17, 2012
    8
    Excellent movie. From the begging til the end keeps a pace. There isnt a single moment that you are bored of the movie. Great story, great actors everything is perfect, there is no exaggeration, you can feel Hugo loneliness and his bound to the robot. To the end you can understand the connection between Hugo robot Papa Georges even the feelings of the station inspector. I love this movie very much. Another great work of Scorsese. Expand
  61. Mar 13, 2012
    9
    I went to cinema with minimum expectation. Despite thanks to rippling effect of media accolade, I couldn't help but noticing its hype. I wanted to be surprised and I honestly was, there's a genuine appeal when you go to cinema and discover these delights, the most recent being The Adventure of Tintin. With brilliant director and multitude of talented actors, Hugo gives you the old magic of cinema which you might have taken for granted over the years. It's nostalgic, magical and full of vanilla dream. I'll admit it's not my cup of tea, but you can't help but loving it, it's heart-warming in the most platonic universal way.



    Hugo is an orphan boy who lives on a train station in Paris somewhere after World War I, for the sake of the magic, that's all you need to know. Contrary to its rather depressing era, the station is vibrantly lively and depicted masterfully. Small details of otherwise average station are put in a spectacular colorful fashion as if it's a more optimist portrayal of dull reality. Cameras pan around and follow the young Hugo's steps while still capturing the posters, little souvenirs, shopkeepers and other things our experienced (read old) weary eyes might overlook. It's simply seeing the world with innocent eyes again, and a far cry of Martin Scorsese's recent works like Shutter Island or The Departed.

    It takes its time well, giving time for audience to enjoy it naturally. The station becomes a sort of personified sanctuary for Hugo with people not more than strangers, it's lonely at times yet icy cheerful. Living characters are identically essential as well, Asa Butterfield as Hugo has a likeable charm, he looks physically frail with fragile hardened mask. It's easy to root for an orphan in search for his place. His role is a demanding one, often the movie will focus heavily on him, especially on tear-jerking moments, fortunately he delivers amazingly.

    Chloe Moretz as Isabella, a word-savvy kindhearted girl, is undeniably beautiful, even in boyish attires. She's talented with rough juvenile adorable air, she just glows with maturity beyond her age but still has the innocence of a child. Ben Kingsley takes the role of a shop owner who is stern, slightly mysterious and seemingly cold. In a clever persona, he exudes lost confident and unexpected warmth, even humor sometimes. Sacha Baron Cohen plays the part of Station Inspector, a more comedic villainous role, the almost cliché bumbling chaser. He provides more than laughing material though as he also has reasons and problems, but mostly for laugh.



    It's predominated with dramatic moments in more sophisticated fashion, not in full blown exaggerated kind. Usually the movie will focus on the scene silently as the characters express their feelings, with or without witty dialogues. The great thing about it is how the simplest interactions such as, mildly leaning against each other or holding hands, make such impact and you're drawn to it. Soothing soundtracks, classic distinct sound of last century have theatrical beat to it, much like old time cartoon. They fit the theme magnificently and I appreciate the good timing of the sound editing, it's impeccable.

    With lucid style it might be confused with children movie, and not saying that it's not, but I think it's more appropriate if it's called a movie for our inner-child. It's highly romantic and timeless, far from cheesy, and it serves as homage to the art of cinema without political or social undertone, just pure amazement and honest humble magic that is so rare these days. Very touching, joyful and passionate, it's easy to understand why lots of people are drown in short yet quaint respite that is Hugo. 9/10
    Expand
  62. Mar 13, 2012
    10
    Hugo is one of the rare movies that is able to capture almost every emotion. I left the theater feeling happy and positive, and I think that is one of the best things that a movie can do. A tale of adventure, glory, orphans, movies, magic.. what could be better? Hugo is one of the movies that is a movie about a boy in Paris and about the world and that comes to be the world in a movie. I have no higher praise for a movie, and after all it is a movie about making movies, made quite well. Expand
  63. Mar 13, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very disappointing given the hype. The darndest thing is that it just isn't very interesting --though it should be given its, pardon, mechanisms and reality behind the magic. Whether fantasy or magical realism, this movie evoked no emotions in me --oops. The only reason to see it is Sacha Baron Cohen as the inspector, who endearingly steals what little is left of the show. Expand
  64. Mar 11, 2012
    5
    WOW. I did not in a million years expect to be this bored during a movie that is held in such high regard. The technical and artist acheivements and acting were top notch, but dramatically this film does not exist. Why not do more wierd things with the robot? Why not have some chase scenes that are more than a kid running up steps while a man with a dog follows? The train station/clocks look amazing, why not use this to more avail? The came close to being the first movie that i paid for in years that I simply walked away from 2/3rds of the way. But I wanted to review it fairly on Metacritic so I sat through the whole thing. It was tough. The incredible look and feel of the film gives it a 50%, the lack of drama adds a big zero. Expand
  65. Mar 9, 2012
    7
    The most enchanting aspect of this film is the magical backdrops--bold colors, intricate clockworks and machines that would make an enthralling playland for any child, and archetypal characters that have a Jungian appeal. The film enthralls with the fairy-tale set design. It's no wonder that Hugo won so many technical awards at the Oscars--cinematography, art direction, sound editing, sound mixing, and visual effects, all of which were richly deserved. However, the story itself gets off track, literally, since most of it takes place at a Paris train station. There are two stories--one is the story of a lost little boy, orphaned when his loving father dies in an accident and then later abandoned by a drunken uncle who brings the boy to his living quarters under the train station. The boy is hunted by the station master, who is the head of security at the train station, played austerely by Sasha Cohen. The grown-up characters tend to be stiff and wooden cliches, but not because they are bad actors, merely because they are being presented as Jungian archetypes who know their place in this magical universe. The characters are like marionettes waiting for their strings to be pulled, but the puppeteer is the controlling forces outside this luminous world that is really a theater in a box.

    Ben Kingsley seems to understand this the best of anyone in the cast. He sits at the counter of his toy shop unblinkingly, almost frozen in time, until someone or something appears to stimulate him to at least nod his head. The centerpiece of the movie is a contraption called an automaton, a robot-like machine capable of limited action, which is symbolic of all the characters in this universe. But suddenly the story changes, and we realize this is a biography of the French film director George Melies, who participated in the earliest period of cinema and filmed the first fantasy and science-fiction movies. The movie turns into a giant vehicle to pay homage to this director and at one point starts to sound like a documentary. The link between the boy, the director, and the automaton becomes more tenuous and less coherent, as the story breaks down under Scorsese's desire to document this period in film history. In fiction, whether written or visual, it is tempting but problematic to stop and spend long periods giving educational lectures--the challenge is to work the information more subtly into the story.
    Expand
  66. Mar 7, 2012
    5
    I do not like this film is well done technically and artistically, but it is a film that has given me rage that has won many Oscars, because if you stop to think, has won many awards just because it is American and the director is Martin Scorsese, if it had been a British film, directed by a director not well known, had won an oscar or no, so like what happened to Harry Potter this year, a film score of 87 on Metacritic, and great reviews in every newspaper and review websites in the world and only had 3 nominations and did not win any prizes.
    I still say: There were many injustices in the Academy Awards this year
    Expand
  67. Mar 6, 2012
    4
    visually pleasing and a not all together unpleasing 2 hour distraction, but FAR from a masterpiece. characters are two dimensional and their interactions are unbelievable. ben kingsley's portrayal is unconvincing and sasha baron cohen is plain terrible. if it wasn't for the high production value, this movie would be merit-less.
  68. Mar 6, 2012
    3
    I am a fan of some European films, and can find interest in old movies, but this was barely engaging at all. The train station and artistic detail is lovely for the first 20 minutes, but after that, we are led mostly nowhere by tragic characters who speak very little. The intense focus on mechanical things and all these supposed French characters acting bitter and speaking with British accents made it seem like a post WWII British engineering education film. Not deep or well-scripted enough for adults, too dreary and slow for children, it mainly was an equal-opportunity aggravation. Why the critics are swooning about this, I can't imagine. Expand
  69. Mar 5, 2012
    8
    When I first heard about Martin Scorsese was doing a family adventure film, I said to myself I have to check thiz out! As we knew, Scorsese is a Director who is widely known for most of his gangster and violent films like: CASINO (1995), THE DEPARTED (2006) and SHUTTER ISLAND (2010). Since the opening sequence, we are spoiled with such fantastic panoramic scenery. Dynamic camera movements effectively draw you into the story in a split second, where we follow the daily life of an orphan named Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) in 1930s France. Hugo lives inside the tower clock of a crowded train station. By his curiosity, Hugo has been trying to fix an automaton in human form which his father (played by Jude Law) left him. Not long after, it takes him to Papa Georges (Ben Kingsley) with his toy booth. The premise is about the mystery behind it. Asa Butterfield, the boy who played in THE BOY IN STRIPED PAJAMAS in 2008, seems to be a proper choice for Hugo. His blue sad eyes tell everything. Ben Kingsley also delivers a firm and attractive performance. Only after about an hour, the things become more clearly. Apparently, thiz movie tells about the magical world of movie making. I have to underline thiz: the whole package is visually stunning! I was amazed by its remarkable setting, the exquisite cinematography and the exotic lighting schemes. Everything at its best, everyone can tell. The story is filled with various unique characters played by well-known Actors: there was the adventuress Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz) who is Papa Georges goddaughter, the grumpy station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen), the flower girl Lisette (Emily Mortimer), the kind-hearted librarian Monsieur Labisse (Christopher Lee) and still many more to mention. But if you want to be objective, most of these characters can be pushed away easily without too much ruining the main plot. I mean everyone! They are only here to become unimportant extras. Except for the station inspector, he is the only antagonist, we still need him! The character played comically well by Sacha Baron Cohen. Without him, there will be no chasing scene and nail-biting suspense. Clearly, the main frame of the story is not that complicated at all. It was kind of flat and anticlimax. To tell you the truth, I did not have The Wow Factor for the ending. Well, I have never read the book (THE INVENTION OF HUGO CABRET by Brian Selznick) before. So I cannot tell whether disadvantage of the story derived from basic material. However, thiz is an award winning book, it won Caldecott Medal in 2008. In that case, if is true that is the whole story. What we can sayâ Expand
  70. Mar 4, 2012
    10
    One of the best movies I have seen in recent memory. And even my kids, who don't usually like serious themed movies, had to watch it a second time as soon as it came out on bluray. Even though we saw it twice in the theaters. MUST SEE.
  71. Mar 4, 2012
    0
    What a boring movie! I always finish movies, doesnt matter how bad they are. But with Hugo, I lost intrest 3/4 of the way! The movie was a big dissappoinment for me.
  72. Mar 2, 2012
    10
    Hugo wasn't a movie. It was an experience. I rarely come out of the theater feeling as satisfied and uplifted as I did when leaving Hugo. The sets, cinematography and visual effects were incredible and the directing was great as usual. Best movie of 2011. Grade: A
  73. Feb 28, 2012
    5
    First of all, I'm a big fan of Great Scorsese, but this film is absolutely one of the most overrated movies of all time. well of course the visual effects are awesome, also with fantastic 3D effects, but the story is extraordinary boring.
  74. Feb 27, 2012
    3
    It is unbelievable how a film like this one can get so many Oscar nominations. A mix of artificial technical effects, boring script, a copy of some French films style (Delicatessen, Amelie,...) but without any humour, ridiculous characters... Once again, Scorsese over-rated, unable to tell a real story, full of banalities. Nogo recommendation
  75. Feb 26, 2012
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Hugo's magic and mystery are very slow to kick in and fade away in a nick of time. The movie itself, albeit with a very slow plot, has all the elements of Scorsese's masterpiece: good acting, convincing photography, very good makeup and setting, interesting action. However, it seems to me that at some point the story got stuck at a crossroad, unable to decide whether keep its clockwork Paris magic or develop the story of the French cinema pioneer. In my opinion, both elements could have been worked better! It's a good movie, though! Expand
  76. Feb 26, 2012
    3
    First of all I want to mention that I am a big fan of Scorsese and I love almost every movie which was directed by him! My favourite is Taxi Driver, followed by Good Fellas, Departed and even Shutter Island wasn't that bad, like some people say! So I just thought, I have to watch 'Hugo', because it's a 'Scorsese', although I don't really like fairy tales and stuff like that. Now, after I saw 'Hugo', I have to say that the movie is not so bad, but really not great!
    I also don't understand, why this movie is nominated for 11 oscars!

    Is it because Scorsese was the director?!

    Well, about the movie itself: the effects were great (not too much or less, but just right), the story was half interessting, half boring, the actors were partly good (Ben Kingsley), partly bad (Asa Butterfield, the innocent looking acting-noob) and the runtime was way too long!

    It really needs more than dirty hands and baby-blue eyes to play an orphan quite authentic!
    Asa was much too whiny...

    Also there were way too much 'coincidences', like the girl carrying the key as a necklace (of course...)!


    All in all I would say take another child actor, wrap up the story a little bit, shorten it and show it again.
    Otherwise, it's not worth an oscar!
    Expand
  77. Feb 25, 2012
    7
    Definitely not as good as I thought it would be. I wonder how it can get so many Oscar nominations and the Global Award. The scenes are not beautiful. The robot is ugly. The plot is also boring. And it's really strange all the cast speaking English while the story supposed to take place in French. Only the music is satifting and Paris in night is really extraordinary.
  78. Feb 24, 2012
    9
    In one word "GREAT" . I have never read the book but seeing the way Martin directed the film i think i don't have to . He literary bought toe book to life . My deepest respect to Brian Selznick for the amazing book about Georges Méliès . Nothing to say about Martin coz he is always like this (Awesome) . This movie was a box office bomb but in my box office its the biggest hit of 2011's or even the decades . The way the movie goes was so amazing . From how the story turned out from a Little boy to the Greatest Georges Méliès was unbelievable . Never imagined this movie would be like this ! WOW ! Expand
  79. Feb 21, 2012
    10
    A great movie for all ages....timeless/classic/etc....but I was lucky to see it at a movie company's private theatre on a very wide screen and in 3D with great sound....do yourself a favor, and see it at the best theatre you can find, and you must see it in 3D....I promise you if you love movies, you will be blown away. its like a charles dickens classic in 3D.
  80. Feb 21, 2012
    8
    I can understand the viewpoints of the people that did not enjoy this movie. I can also see how the trailers of this movie can be misleading to the final film presented as the movie itself is more methodically paced than the action adventure portrayal. I, on the other hand, did not watch this film immediately in the theaters so I came to the movie with more of an open mind. Others criticized that they did not get any story out of the people in the train station and their rhyme and reason were convoluted, however, I thought it was well done. Especially if you try to look at them from Hugos perspective. Like him, looking upon them somewhat from a distance, you come to realize that that's how we look upon each other most of the time. Others commented that they wanted those relationships more spelled out, but In the end, I didn't think that was necessary. This is more about Discovery, and within that discovery, lies the adventure. Whether it be in ourselves or each other. This movie reminds me why I love movies in the first place. Expand
  81. Feb 21, 2012
    8
    This movie is a little messy. It's like two movies in one. The first one - about the boy looking for a key - is a little boring and doesn't really go anywhere. But the second one - about Georges Melies - is wonderful.
  82. Feb 21, 2012
    10
    My favorite movie of 2011. The story of friendship, filial loyalty and love of the cinema greatly appealed to me.
    It was certainly a departure from the usual fare serve up by Martin Scorsese, showing us his range.
  83. Feb 19, 2012
    10
    Scorsese's another masterpiece. I have always adored him as the master of gangster genre - however, this family film also proves that Scorsese has talent in almost all genres of films. In sports genre, 'Raging Bull'; in gangster genre, well... too many; in romance genre, 'The Age of Innocence' and maybe 'Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore'; in family film genre, 'Hugo'... All his films impressed us with his brilliant direction, imagination and courage. Thank you so much, Mr. Scorsese. Expand
  84. Feb 13, 2012
    8
    "Hugo" is tedious to start off with, which is Martin Scorsese's biggest problem when making his movies. But I give credit for his imaginative visuals and rich designs. A good movie to enjoy in the end.
  85. Feb 9, 2012
    7
    This flick seems to be aimed at the minds of children who can best appreciate insignificant fantasies such as this movie is. Hugo does have strengths in its visual and technical qualities such as set design, but these are not enough to catapult it to a higher level.
  86. Feb 9, 2012
    9
    Hugo takes place in the train station in Paris, France. Very great cute film directed by the legendary Martin Scorsese. Going into this movie I had low exceptions because of Scorsese's past films. Hugo is about a little boy who works at a train station in the clocks where he finds this machine robot that has the power to do many things. Isabelle played by Chloe Grace Moretz, is a friend he finds while running away from the guards. Later on he finds out the secret behind the machine. Over all great amazing piece of art. Everyone go see it today! Expand
  87. Feb 7, 2012
    9
    This year a blossoming homage to the genesis of the film industry has progressed into raptures for film aficionados and filmmakers (two frontrunners of the imminent Oscar, THE ARTIST, which I have yet to watch, and HUGO have aimed at B&W silent film and innovator Georges Méliès respectively). Martin Scorsese stews this $170,000,000 budgeted 1930s Paris Gare Montparnasse train station adventure feature in an almost immaculate way, and for the generation which may not be stupefied by Georges Mélièsâ Expand
  88. Feb 5, 2012
    7
    Scorsese steps outside of his typically gritty box and achieves pure magic filming a gorgeous rendition of the popular children's book, "The Invention of Hugo Cabret." While pieces of the story change for the purposes of film, my personal opinion is that (and I'm going to offend hardcore readers here) it tried too hard to be a film version of a book. As a result, the first hour was very hard to sit through. It was long, it was slow, but so beautifully shot that I couldn't fall entirely asleep. However, the second hour more than made up for it. The movie, which takes a while to get to its point, eventually uncovers a sweet, precious film with a wonderful message. That is, our dreams make us who we are. If our dreams die, so do we. To "fix" ourselves, to truly live life, we must chase our dreams, even when we perceive ourselves to fail. Only then can we truly become what we were meant to become. Expand
  89. Feb 3, 2012
    8
    Conducted steadily by Scorsese and enriched by a glorious cinematography, "Hugo" is a true love letter to the magic of the cinema and well-deserved of its eleven academy-award nominations.
  90. Jan 29, 2012
    6
    I found it beautiful and thought it was well done in 3D. However, I was bored throughout and went to buy M &M's so I would not keep staring at my watch. The story simply did not interest me in the slightest. "Hugo" summed up what a mediocre film year 2011 was. When "The Descendants", "Moneyball", and "The Tree of Life " are Oscar nominees , it is a poor year. I hope 2012 brings me a substantial improvement. Expand
  91. Jan 28, 2012
    5
    Extremely visually wonderful (the opening scene is such a masterpiece take), in a beautiful 30's Paris, but a bit long, a bit too much of a homage (although deserved) and, for me, with a story and main character uncomfortably showing harrypotter-wannabeism.
  92. Jan 24, 2012
    10
    Spectacular, Magical -- a Joy! A movie truly for the ages! Any review is meaningless - just go see it,
    in a movie theater, on a big screen -- you will have it with you
    forever!
  93. lbl
    Jan 20, 2012
    5
    Too long. Do film makers today believe that every movie they make has to be more than two hours to qualify as a good film? Hugo needed at least twenty to thirty minutes cut out of it. I was so bored in the middle I didn't think I was going to make it to the end of the film. It got good in the end, but it took SO long to get there.
  94. Jan 18, 2012
    9
    Hello and I am aspiring critic. I am 16 years of age and have created a blog for a few reviews that I have written. I was hoping that you may be interested in checking it out http://shutethecritic.blogspot.com/2012/01/inbetweeners-movie-2011-film-review.html
    One day I hope to have a an impact on metascores, but first I need some feedback
  95. Jan 17, 2012
    10
    Hugo is clearly one of the best movies of the year, for many reasons. First, is an adaptation of a book that has nothing to envy to Harry Potter or The Lord of the rings. Second, its use of 3D is breathtaking and that is more surprising because is a non-animated movie. Third, the picture has amazing performances of Asa Butterfield and Ben Kingsley. Finally, the film has some beautiful messages, the most important for me are the one that the whole world is like a machine and we all are the parts of it, so everyone has a role to play; and the other is that the movies can capture our dreams. These four things mixed with typical Scorsese criminal stuff and visceral fantasies, and the recollection of old movies; make this picture a tribute to cinematography.
    This tribute is explicit when are shown in screen The Arrival of a Train, Exiting the Lumiere Factory, Intolerance, A Trip to the Moon, The Great Train Robbery, The Cabinet of Doctor Caligary, and many more. And add to this, that in the film appears George Melies, the father of science fiction movies. The implicit things are the automata, which remind me the robot of Metropolis, and the derailment of the train with the same camera position of Lumiere Brothers picture.
    This film makes us nostalgic, but not in a sad way, because we notice that these classics have not been forgotten and never will. They are the foundation of cinematography as an art. Hugo is one of the few movies that are not boring to watch again an again.
    Expand
  96. Jan 12, 2012
    8
    After reading some reviews I was hesitant to take my nine year old to this movie. It was a fantastic movie visually, and my child was engaged with the movie all the way through. Really glad I saw it.
  97. Jan 12, 2012
    5
    Any film directed by Scorsese is automatically awarded a place on my 'must see' list. I was somewhat dubious about Hugo, but went along anyway. My views on the film are mixed - I'd say it had high aspirations, and occasional flashes of brilliance, but ultimately it fell short for me. The story was functional, and it had some moments which bordered on the profound, but the plot was somewhat mechanical (like the subject matter) and ties between various elements were wafer thin such that the conclusion was not as satisfying as it could have been. The environments and the cinematography were beautiful throughout, but the pacing was a bit off - leading to several patches were I was bored (and feeling guilty for being so), in spite of the beautiful visuals and breathtaking recreation of a bygone era.

    Sir Ben Kingsley was magnificent - as was the cast generally; although the young lad playing the lead was sometimes annoying for me. But the most disappointing aspect of the film for me was where it crossed the line between plot progression and telling a story into the realm of self-serving indulgence. Film critics will lap it up given it spends a great deal of time lecturing the audience on events of historical significance if you are a film buff. The film tries to weave this into the story by tying it to the characters but it comes off forced and grating. Would I see it again? No. Would I recommended it... probably not.
    Expand
  98. j30
    Jan 11, 2012
    8
    The lush colors, direction, and cinematography have always been some of Marty's strong suites. When i first saw the trailers to this movie, I cursed the movie gods and doubted Scorsese's ability to make a kid's movie. I was sadly mistaken. The movie is eye candy and an ultimate tribute to movies and suitable for all ages. Now that this movie is out of the way hopefully he'll move onto more adult themed movies, but this was a nice detour. Expand
Metascore
83

Universal acclaim - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 41
  2. Negative: 0 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: Marjorie Baumgarten
    Nov 29, 2011
    89
    Although a nip and a tuck here and there might improve Hugo's overall pace, there is no denying that this love letter to the movies is something to cherish.
  2. 70
    For all the wizardry on display, Hugo often feels like a film about magic instead of a magical film.
  3. Reviewed by: Joe Morgenstern
    Nov 28, 2011
    50
    Visually Hugo is a marvel, but dramatically it's a clockwork lemon.