Hugo

A lot of people were loudly skeptical when they heard that Martin Scorsese would be directing a 3D family movie, but for some reason I wasn't. The main things I thought were that his films are successful because they are well crafted, not because they're violent, and he is a strongly visual director, so he could probably handle the third dimension as well as anyone in the business. Both of these proved to be true when I saw Hugo, based on a book that weaves a small part of the real history of film into a nice story about a young boy who finally makes some friends.

Hugo Cabret is a young orphan who lives in the walls of a Paris train station, and is left to maintain the building's clocks on his own when his drunk uncle skips town. He's also trying to repair a broken automaton that his father found in a museum and was working on before he died, and his quest to do so introduces him to Ben Kingsley's character, the owner of a small toy shop in the station, and his adoptive daughter played by Chloë Moretz, who loves reading but has never seen a movie. He takes her to the theater, and shows her the automaton, and they eventually stumble into revelations that that bring the seemingly disparate elements of a broken robot and the love of film together.

Visually the film is pretty stunning, whether you see it in 3D or 2D, though I saw the former. The sets and costumes are impeccably gorgeous on their own, and the depth from the 3D further brings the world to life in a pretty incredible way. I was definitely more impressed than I was by Avatar. This movie proved to me that the argument that 2D film is inherently superior because it is more dreamlike is absolute garbage. The visuals in this movie make it seem almost like it's animation even though it was filmed with live actors, and they bring you into a fantasy setting that doesn't seem real, but much more imaginative and fun than that. I don't like the over-saturation of 3D in the theater market, because most films aren't made with it in mind and don't seem to really benefit from the process. But Hugo was made to be shown this way, and the effect is great at pulling you into this other place, in the same way that many people probably felt when they watched a movie for the first time.

In a funny way, that 3D thing does really well to tie into the idea of the dawn of filmmaking and the newness of the concept when the film takes place. It's a couple decades after the cinema had become commonplace, but the characters do a good deal of digging into the medium's origins, and a good portion of the running time is just devoted to celebration of the art form. Scorsese is a big proponent of film preservation and film in general, so it makes perfect sense for him to get attached to this concept, almost to the detriment of the main plot of the movie. There were some flaws with the movie that detracted from the overall good feeling I got from the experience. I thought Asa Butterfield's performance was a little uneven, and while I liked Sacha Baron Cohen's inspector character, he only seemed to be in the movie because the story needed an antagonist. I definitely liked him more when he was awkwardly trying to be friendly than when he was the villain rounding up orphans.

And for a family movie, I don't know how much kids would actually like it. A good deal of what's interesting about the film is referential to things they probably wouldn't understand, and it was neither terribly funny not terribly exciting most of the time. There were a couple really fun moments, but what I liked most about the movie was the setting it created, and pretty much every kid's movie is decent enough at that. But if you enjoy Scorsese as a filmmaker, and still have a sense of wonder, and an appreciation for the history of human entertainment, you'll probably like the movie a lot.

Shutter Island

I almost feel like Martin Scorsese should have been born twenty years later or something. He's certainly impressed me with his older movies, but what he's able to do with the advantages of modern film equipment and techniques is nothing short of amazing. With the help of cinematographer Robert Richardson (who by no real surprise most recently handled the beautiful Inglourious Basterds as well), he's crafted one of the best looking movies I've seen, one that in general is elevated from its potential B-movie status by a sharp script based on a novel by an accomplished author, a great cast of mostly recognizable faces, and excellence in nearly every facet of its production.

The movie isn't perfect, of course. There are a couple missteps. The use of greenscreen is obvious in a few shots (although you wonder a bit if that was intentional to add to the uncertainty of the narrative), and a few lines feel clumsy or melodramatic. Overall though it's a well constructed, tense film that Scorsese seems in control of the entire time despite the somewhat kinetic way in which information is doled out. Leonardo DiCaprio plays a federal marshal named Teddy Daniels assigned to investigate the disappearance of a patient at a mental hospital for violent offenders on an island off Massachusetts. He meets his new partner played by Mark Ruffalo on the boat ride over, and from there they soon realize that something is off. The island itself is intensely foreboding, introduced to some of the most sinister music I've ever heard, and it's not long before the marshals start to feel weird about the whole investigation. Ben Kingsley and the other hospital staff seem friendly enough on the surface, but it's clear pretty early that not everything is as it seems. The movie has a twist that I was partly already spoiled on, but it's completely woven into the fabric of the entire film, and it's not so much the surprise of the truth that's interesting but just the way it informs every little thing that happens.

While the normal parts of the story are interesting and well made, the movie stands out the most with its flashbacks to Daniels' experiences during World War II and a couple intense dream sequences that are drenched with amazing imagery and hint strongly at the truth behind everything. He also starts hallucinating at one point, and you're constantly being peppered with little touches that make trying to figure out what's actually going on a constantly entertaining exercise. Despite the certain visual and auditory treats, the movie wouldn't work without a good cast supporting it, and everyone seems to bring their A game. I wasn't sure about DiCaprio at first but he won me over with his reactions to the constantly increasing stress of the situation. Ruffalo is as solid as ever, Kingsley and Max von Sydow are wonderful in their intellectual menace, Michelle Williams is creepily effective in glimpses of Daniels' dead wife, and all the guards and inmates are perfectly leery and off kilter as required.

The story has the appropriate amount of twists and turns before the ending, which is of two parts. First the truth is laid bare, in a scene that might be just a bit too tidy but it ultimately effective mostly because of DiCaprio's performance, and then the plot is finally resolved in just about the perfect fashion. After everything is put together, you can either dwell on the results or think about how well it fits. Considering I was sort of looking for that already, I've already done some of the work, although it definitely still merits a second viewing. I'm not positive every single moment will still make sense, but at least the broad strokes seem to be in order. I expected to like the film, although not to be so impressed by the skill of its creation. Scorsese is definitely getting older, but I'd say his abilities are still pretty far from eroding at this point. It might even be my favorite work of his out of the handful I've seen. If I wasn't already convinced, I definitely have some catching up to do.