"Hugo", the movie based on the kids book The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick just got 11 Oscar nominations. To be honest I'm not really surprised, it has been getting awards attention all season and its been running at 94% on Rotten Tomatoes. I finally succumbed to all the hoopla surrounding the movie and went to see it, but in 2D not 3D as I totally refuse to pay that much money for a kids movie--no matter what it is. After seeing it I'm pretty sure I understand why all fuss, but it's not for the reasons you may think. Is it a great movie--no. It's a good movie, a little slow (actually a lot slow), sort of pretty to look at and I can see why it got the cinematography and special effects nods and deservedly so as it is washed in color but it is all special effects and computer generated imagery not something filmed out on in the real world. But does it deserve to be nominated for best picture and director--for that I'm gonna say no, there were other better movies that could have made the final 10 list, and ugh don't even get me started on how "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" (to maudlin) got in with some of the worst reviews of the year.
But back to "Hugo"--this movie is made for kids, it's colorful and has fantastical elements and a kid protagonist and enough eye candy for the kids. It's not a kid movie the way Harry Potter is, that film covers themes of life and death and good versus evil (and in my opinion should have been one of the 10 best this year) where as "Hugo" is about finding where you fit in when you are an outcast--which is quite a common theme in many a young adult and tween novel these days. The basic premise of the movie is a young orphan who lives in a train station tries to figure out where he fits in much like the automaton he is trying to fix. (If you want to read to whole synopsis you can go here.) Yeah it sounds weird but this is really only a side story of the movie, once you get into it you see this whole movie is really an homage to the founding and creation of movies and the original golden age of movie making that occurred before World War 1 as is a tribute to one of the original movie creators Georges Melies. Add this to the fact that the movie is directed by Martin Scorsese (considered a directing god in Hollywood circles) and you have the makings of what I like to call Oscar bait to all those old guard in the movie business who make up a large voting block in the Academy of Arts and Sciences. By paying tribute to the movies themselves and wrapping it in a feel good story you end up with the kind of treacle that industry insiders love to laud. (see anything by Steven Spielberg)
Now I have nothing against Scorsese as he has done some fantastic stuff over the years and finally got his own due with "The Departed", a decent movie based on a Japanese film, with a twist ending and good box office and voila--he gets an Oscar--which really was just make up Oscar since he probably should have won for "Raging Bull".
The box office for this movie has also not been so boffo, it currently sits at around $57 million and it could get a boost from the nominations, but let's face it, the movie has been out for a while and if folks really wanted to see they would have by now. Thus word of mouth has probably gotten around that it is so-so. Again showing that Hollywood is more interested in promoting its own rather than what are great movies with mass appeal. And yes I mention again "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 2" and even "Bridesmaids"--a very funny film with strong themes of women's friendships and lives and their affects on each other, but that is a whole other topic about Hollywood and women--don't even get me started.
Lest you think it is just me who thinks the 11 nominations are a bit much check out this article on SFGate. Surprises and snubs happen every year with the Oscars as people get left out and others get nominated leaving you scratching your head. And sometimes the surprises even win, see "Crash", an overblown movie that is just full of its own sanctimony that stars a lot of people who surely voted for it and thus it won best picture over "Broke Back Mountain"...ugh the travesty continues.
But as with anything, folks should go and check the movie out for themselves, who knows you may find it charming and fanciful and awards show worthy...then again you may wonder why you just paid $15 to see a kids movie and you don't have any kids and that's 2 plus hours you won't get back.
But back to "Hugo"--this movie is made for kids, it's colorful and has fantastical elements and a kid protagonist and enough eye candy for the kids. It's not a kid movie the way Harry Potter is, that film covers themes of life and death and good versus evil (and in my opinion should have been one of the 10 best this year) where as "Hugo" is about finding where you fit in when you are an outcast--which is quite a common theme in many a young adult and tween novel these days. The basic premise of the movie is a young orphan who lives in a train station tries to figure out where he fits in much like the automaton he is trying to fix. (If you want to read to whole synopsis you can go here.) Yeah it sounds weird but this is really only a side story of the movie, once you get into it you see this whole movie is really an homage to the founding and creation of movies and the original golden age of movie making that occurred before World War 1 as is a tribute to one of the original movie creators Georges Melies. Add this to the fact that the movie is directed by Martin Scorsese (considered a directing god in Hollywood circles) and you have the makings of what I like to call Oscar bait to all those old guard in the movie business who make up a large voting block in the Academy of Arts and Sciences. By paying tribute to the movies themselves and wrapping it in a feel good story you end up with the kind of treacle that industry insiders love to laud. (see anything by Steven Spielberg)
Now I have nothing against Scorsese as he has done some fantastic stuff over the years and finally got his own due with "The Departed", a decent movie based on a Japanese film, with a twist ending and good box office and voila--he gets an Oscar--which really was just make up Oscar since he probably should have won for "Raging Bull".
The box office for this movie has also not been so boffo, it currently sits at around $57 million and it could get a boost from the nominations, but let's face it, the movie has been out for a while and if folks really wanted to see they would have by now. Thus word of mouth has probably gotten around that it is so-so. Again showing that Hollywood is more interested in promoting its own rather than what are great movies with mass appeal. And yes I mention again "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 2" and even "Bridesmaids"--a very funny film with strong themes of women's friendships and lives and their affects on each other, but that is a whole other topic about Hollywood and women--don't even get me started.
Lest you think it is just me who thinks the 11 nominations are a bit much check out this article on SFGate. Surprises and snubs happen every year with the Oscars as people get left out and others get nominated leaving you scratching your head. And sometimes the surprises even win, see "Crash", an overblown movie that is just full of its own sanctimony that stars a lot of people who surely voted for it and thus it won best picture over "Broke Back Mountain"...ugh the travesty continues.
But as with anything, folks should go and check the movie out for themselves, who knows you may find it charming and fanciful and awards show worthy...then again you may wonder why you just paid $15 to see a kids movie and you don't have any kids and that's 2 plus hours you won't get back.
Comments
Post a Comment