Hugo (2011)

5/5

Martin Scorsese's Hugo is pure magic. Its conception and creation were very clearly labors of love by exquisitely talented craftsmen. The story begins with a boy, Hugo (Butterfield), who lives in a train station. He is caught stealing gears from a toy shop owned by Papa Georges (Kingsley), who forces him to empty his pockets. Among the stolen goods is a notebook that was given to him by his late father (Law). The drawings in the notebook seem to bring back unwanted memories for Papa Georges, who threatens to burn it and report the boy to the station master (Baron Cohen). He follows Papa Georges home, pleading with his eyes, and waits outside the house until he sees Papa George's niece (Moretz). Hugo enlists her help and they soon find themselves on an adventure that grows beyond their wildest imagination.

I know the book on which this movie is based has a lot of illustrations, so I can't give Scorsese all the credit for its visual power, but boy does this movie pack a punch. The story is told in images, with snippets of silent film interspersed with inspiration from Hitchcock's Rear Window. And it is an emotional roller coaster, juxtaposing the kind of pure sorrow and exhilaration as only a child could experience. It combines complex characters with expressive acting to tremendous effect. The energetic pacing complements the classic storytelling structure, thanks in no small part to Thelma Schoonmaker's efficient editing. Even the 3D technology was well-done. I know that because it did not give me a headache. (Whether a 3D movie gives me a headache is really my only criterion now for how good the 3D is--Avatar is the only other movie to have good 3D by these standards.)

Not all is perfect in this movie, but its flaws are easily overlooked. I have no doubt that the special effects used in this movie will one day look as dated and comical as King Kong or The Birds. But for now, they're passable. Also, the side characters are somewhat poorly developed. There are hints at uniqueness and charm--and the atmosphere itself is already filled to the brim with wonder and awe--but the side characters never get fully fleshed-out. Jean-Pierre Jeunet would have perhaps been a better choice to breathe life into the subplots and side stories, as he did in Amélie and Delicatessen.

This film succeeds on all fronts: as entertainment, as art, and as heartfelt nostalgia for cinema. Go into the movie knowing nothing and you will be surprised and delighted. Go into the movie a second time and I am certain you will still be profoundly shaken. That is the mark of good storytelling, and that is the mark of phenomenal filmmaking.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0970179/

Diary of a Wimpy Kid (2010)

2/5

Diary of a Wimpy Kid is an inappropriately-titled movie. The kid (Gordon) is not wimpy; he's just a superficial, image-obsessed boy who thinks he's cooler than he is and will do anything to make the "Class Favorites" section of the yearbook, even betray his best friend (Capron). Quite frankly, it's difficult to sympathize with his plight, and to even cheer him on at the end once he learns the error of his ways. I don't know if I would want my kids to watch this, because I'm not convinced that the protagonist's heart is in the right place. I don't want my kids to have the same motivations he has. And the movie is clearly directed towards kids, with nothing for adults to enjoy as one would find in a Pixar film. Even so, it contains the occasional scene where I smiled or laughed. My favorite character was actually the best friend, who should have been the model of the movie. He is big, childish, and out of place, but he believes in himself and puts himself out there for his friend. And the movie shows that he is rewarded for it. He was the heart and soul of the movie; the wimpy kid was just a jerk. Not my first choice for a kids movie, but not my last either. Watch at your own discretion.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1196141/

Kick-Ass (2010)

3/5

Kick-Ass tells the story of a normal high schooler (Johnson) who reads comic books and wonders why no insane prepubescent kid has ever tried being a superhero like in the comics. So he decides to try it. And gets his ass kicked. So bad, in fact, that most of his body is replaced by metal plates and his nerve endings are destroyed. But he gets videotaped defending a stranger and becomes famous via YouTube and MySpace, which attracts the attention of two real life superheros: Big Daddy (Cage) and Hit-Girl (Moretz). Things spin wildly out of control and what started as an experiment quickly turns deadly.

The movie has graphic violence and language. Their presence in and of itself does not concern me. What bugs me is that they use it repetitively for comic effect and, quite frankly, it gets old. Hearing an 11-year-old girl swear is only (potentially) funny the first time. As is seeing her disembowel someone; seeing it more than once makes it seem like she has a weird fetish or something. The piece's writing was fairly solid. The jokes were great (although some were quite predictable) and Cage's intonation and prosody were absolutely hilarious. The acting was surprisingly good. However, Kick-Ass's real life relationship just didn't strike me as very compelling or original. I just didn't care about what was going on in his personal life. All in all, however, this movie is engaging and exciting. It takes a relatively old genre and spins it in a new direction. And it does so with humor and no sense of boundary. And for that it deserves at least some credit.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1250777/

(500) Days of Summer (2009)

4.9/5

Marc Webb's (500) Days of Summer has an infuriating title. It's annoying typing all those parentheses while organizing an outing to see the movie; or while adding, deleting, and re-adding it to Google Calendar when plans change; or while talking about how good it is with friends. And I would bet money on the fact that the parentheses don't even mean anything. They're just flourishes to make the movie seem indie-cool. Luckily, that's the worst part about the movie. Everything else is perfect.

Starring two of the leading indie actors working today (Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel), you can tell this is going to be an indie film. And it is. From the hipster outfits to the eclectic soundtrack, from the quirky habits to the unique sensibilities, this is indie to a T. But not the original independent of the 70's, the now-mainstream, now-conventional independent of contemporary cinema. Being what it is, it's not always original. In fact, most of the filmmaking techniques are repackagings of those found in Annie Hall (which is incidentally my favorite romantic comedy of all time). But what it copies, it copies well. It is polished and pristine. And most importantly, it works. I've seen characters break into song and dance before, I've seen unorthodox or broken timelines before, and I've seen brilliant use of split-screen before, but it all comes together here to create a compelling, fulfilling, emotional whole.

The story is a typical boy-meets-girl tale, but the narrator warns us that it is not a love story. And he's right. To a romantic, every girl you fall for is the love of your life. And since the movie is told from the guy's point of view, it seems like she really is "the one." And in that tender moment where he finally realizes that she isn't right for him, where he accurately pinpoints her role in his life, the movie peaks. You get that warm, fuzzy feeling in the film's bittersweet finale that every romance aspires to. You cherish the film, realizing that all the special effect gimmicks, all the "experimental" styles, all the editing, the cinematography, the acting, the writing--all that was there for the sole purpose of sending your heart aflutter. And like I said, it works. If you liked Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind or Garden State, don't hesitate to watch this movie. You will fall in love with it.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1022603/