Simon Dillon reviews the film

If this review were a tabloid headline, I would probably go with something like: Martin Scorsese in U-rated children's film shocker!

Actually, Hugo is just as much for adults as for children. In fact, it's for anyone who has ever fallen in love with the cinema. What Scorsese has done in crafting his first ever film for a family audience is make his most personal film to date.

The story - based on the book by Brian Selznick (which I haven't read) - deals with orphan Hugo (Asa Butterfield) who lives in the walls and clocks of a Parisian train station in the 1930s. Whilst dodging the Station Inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen), he forms a friendship with Isabelle (Chloe Moretz), the granddaughter of mysterious toymaker George (Ben Kingsley); with whom he has also had an unfortunate run-in. Flashbacks reveal that before he died, Hugo's father (Jude Law) was a clockmaker who recovered an unwanted automaton from a museum fire, which he (and subsequently Hugo) laboured to fix. This automaton proves pivotal to subsequent events, and quite frankly to say any more would spoil the fun.

This is an absolutely wonderful film that deserves to be seen by as many people as possible on the big screen, and in 3D. Tragically though, judging by box office figures and poor marketing, I fear it won't be. However, I predict that it will be revered as a classic in years to come.

Regarding the 3D, Hugo marks the best use of the format I have ever seen. It is not merely there to give depth to certain shots, or poke you in the eye, but it is a comment on both the action and subject matter of the film itself. Every frame is cunningly designed so the 3D enhances the emotional response of the audience - not just in the big, swooping long takes that Scorsese is famous for (such as the stunning opening shot), but also the intimate, subtle use of 3D in close-ups. The 3D even adds irony in certain sequences. Just as Scorsese is grappling with how to use a format he has never used before, so too was a character in the story grappling with a technology that had never been used in the way he was using it before (I can't say anything more specific than that without spoiling the story). In most 3D films, you forget you're watching in 3D after a few minutes, but with Hugo, you'll still be noticing how the format enhances the production design - again, commenting on both the story and emotions of the characters - two hours into the film. And boy is the production design staggering. I would say an Oscar will be forthcoming for Best Art Direction/Set Direction, and the cinematography and special effects are tremendous.

The cast are all wonderful. Asa Butterfield is as good here as he was in The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, Chloe Moretz is excellent (particularly in sequences where she indulges in wordplay), Ben Kingsley is heartbreakingly poignant, and there's even a rare, non-sinister performance from Christopher Lee as a kindly bookseller. Elsewhere, Emily Mortimer, Richard Griffiths, Helen McCrory, Frances de la Tour and Ray Winstone pop up in minor but memorable roles. Howard Shore contributes a lovely music score, and regular Scorsese collaborator Thelma Schoonmaker edits the film to perfection. It's not completely flawless - some of the slapstick in early scenes is a little forced - but such nits are easily disregarded in the face of such sheer artistic brilliance.

Slight spoiler warning for the following paragraph:

I have read a number of reviews suggesting that this film is too geared to cinema history enthusiasts to generate much interest from anyone other than film scholars. I have also read suggestions that it will not play well to younger audiences who are used to a diet of bland Hollywood product that's been marketed to within an inch of its life. I beg to differ. My seven year old son adored the film, to the point that he is now hugely interested in the early film history referenced herein (the famous Lumiere Brothers "train arriving at a station" that had people screaming, the works of George Melies, early silent classics like Harold Lloyd's Safety Last, Buster Keaton's The General, etc). In this film, Martin Scorsese's passion for film preservation comes across not as a lecture, but as the deep conviction of someone who wants these early artists to be recognised and remembered. Furthermore, on a moral and spiritual level, this isn't really about film per se. It's about the importance of family and friends, confronting the demons of the past, redemption and above all finding your destiny. As Hugo says, machines are always built with exactly the right number of parts. If the world is like a great machine, then we all have a purpose. In short, this isn't just an intellectual film for cineastes, its also heartfelt and deeply moving.

I strongly disagree with the notion that this is a film too intelligent or esoteric for children. Tolkien once wrote that children don't develop a great vocabulary from reading at their level, but by reading above their level. The same is true with cinema. If we show children films that patronise them, insult their intelligence and assume they have the attention span of a goldfish, then that will ultimately be the case. If, on the other hand, we challenge them once in a while with a film like Hugo, they will find the experience immensely rewarding.