First of all, I would just like to say that I am totally thrilled to be answering questions from my devoted readers, who are simply the most culturally aware, emotionally available, and physically attractive people on earth. I’m not claiming that people who read other critics are small, misshapen creatures with wasted lives, but only because, like my readers, I have perfect manners.
Hello Libby — I see every new release that comes into theaters, I love cinema, but for the life of me, I cannot understand the love of Hugo. Sure, it was shot beautifully, but I felt it was choppy, as if a multitude of stories were being told at once, with no single thread coming to an acceptable conclusion. Am I crazy?
Anthony Covino
Dear Anthony,
I enjoyed Hugo, especially because it was set in the most gorgeously art-directed, turn-of-the-century Parisian railroad station; it was like an enchanted French food court, from a time before Pinkberry. Hugo himself was such an adorably tousled waif that for a second I thought he was Amelie’s kid sister, but he got to live in the train station and keep all of the station’s clocks running on time, which is a perfect form of child labor for a cinematic fairy tale. Was the movie choppy? I would say the film was a touch leisurely, but even when the plot took a hairpin turn and began depicting the birth of cinema, I was happy, because I knew that the director, Martin Scorsese, was blissing out. READ FULL STORY »
