I have to admit that Martin Scorsese — considered by many to be one of the greatest directors of the past quarter-century — has never been one of my personal favorites. I generally like his movies, but I rarely love them.  While they are usually rich in style, I find them rather cold and calculated.  With Hugo, a warmth permeates the screen that I simply don’t see in some other Scorsese titles, possibly because he is now dealing with children, dreams and possibilities rather than what I perceive to be his usual trips to the dark side of human nature.

Not really knowing what the movie was about before seeing it was a definite plus, as I was surprised by some of the territory covered by the story.  For those of you who, like me, thought the poster was baffling (more on that in the Forum), the story places young Hugo (Asa Butterfield) at a grand Parisian rail terminal; he spends his time keeping all the terminal clocks wound and avoiding a suspicious station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen).  Hugo runs afoul of a mean old man (Ben Kingsley) and is astonished to eventually learn that he is Georges Méliès, a name all serious film fans should recognize.  The story then becomes Méliès’, which surprised me, but in a good way.

I believe Scorsese embraced this project because it was something a little different for him, but also because it allowed him to depict and explore the infancy of the film industry and to proselytize about one of his favorite subjects: film preservation.  In one fell swoop, he could tell an interesting story in ways his audience has never seen, teach that audience about the origins of his passion, and demonstrate how important it is to make the effort to save everything related to that passion for posterity.  The film’s saddest moment comes not when Hugo’s father is killed, or when Hugo is finally caught by the station inspector, but when Méliès bitterly burns the props and costumes from his movie productions.

While I really like where the story journeyed, I am not crazy about the specific path taken.  Once the premise is revealed it comes as no surprise that Hugo will try to fix everything himself and that he will be caught at the most inopportune moment by the pompous station inspector.  The film’s biggest weakness is that character.  Cohen is fine in the role, but it is a stock role that is given far too much importance in this fable, and the cute little romantic subplots between Cohen and Emily Mortimer, and between Richard Griffiths and Frances de la Tour (fresh from the Harry Potter films), are weak.  Even with Scorsese’s visual verve, this is dull, pedestrian plotting and not particularly rewarding for viewers.

But Hugo’s story, especially when it meshes with Méliès’ granddaughter, Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz), is always interesting and often compelling.  The train terminal is a wonderful setting, especially considering Hugo’s behind-the-scenes cavorting. And once Méliès enters the picture, I was hooked.  Hugo is a good movie, one that should warm the hearts of old-fashioned film fans.  ✰ ✰ ✰.  15 Dec. 2011.