It is not surprising to see that some people have doubts about this movie, a movie that does not make people questionable must not be a good movie. But please don't say that the director's speech is not good and the protagonist's acting is not good, because you are doubting the innocence of an old filmmaker.
The film's Oscar win will make people's eyes focus more on the technical level. But Martin Scorsese is not a "fantastic" director, his technique is a means to express the theme. It can be said that all the special effects applied in this film are to express the intention of the director, and at the same time pay tribute to the era full of dreams a hundred years ago.
This film is a "family fun" movie. The superficial plot is a boy and girl adventure, of course, for the children at home. Behind the surface plot is a story about dreams, reality, time, and life. To see the story, we have to figure out who the protagonist is.
Many people think that the protagonist is Hugo. Of course, this boy has the most roles, and all the stories are based on him. But he is not the protagonist, and no sensible director would let a child take on the responsibility of expressing the director's inner world. Hugo is to "Hugo" what Yuan Chengzhi is to "Blood Sword". On the surface, he is the protagonist, but in fact it is just a clue. Hugo’s story is for children, the director’s for adults is the stories of other people, especially the protagonist George Merrier.
"I would recognize the sound of a movie projector anywhere." "I can hear the sound of the projector anywhere." This line, the old man said so commonly, was so sad. In the eyes of the researcher, the old man is dead; in the eyes of the audience, the old man has never existed; in the eyes of the old man himself, he has left the movie, but his heart has never left the movie. At this point, it doesn't matter how the real Merrier is, Martin's voice is the inner voice of all filmmakers (real filmmakers). What is a movie? Film is a dream that everyone can dream, and it is the lifelong dedication of filmmakers.
In the play, Merrier goes through three stages: dreaming, lost, and dreaming again.
In his early years, Merrier was full of dreams. The moment he saw the movie, he knew this was the meaning of life he had been looking for. He started dreaming, dreaming for his time. Imagine what our life would be like without Jules Verne, Georges Merrier, Jean Roddenberry, and other dream-makers opening up people's imaginations?
But dreams are beautiful, just as reality is cruel. The world war made people lose not only the lives of their relatives and friends, but also their dreams. The era of no more dreams left Mérier lost, lost in reality. Losing the dreamer in reality is tantamount to the end of life, so researchers think he is dead, and even himself thinks he is dead.
But time can destroy matter, but not dreams. People will not be lost in reality forever, they will eventually return to their dreams. Otherwise, what's the point of their life?
Merrier returns to his life, to his dreams. It wasn't just a dream, it was a home. People feel comfortable, warm, and safe at home, and everyone in the movie finally returns to their own home.
Of course it's a movie. Real life is not as ideal as the movies. But the purpose of the movie is not to remind people: you have had dreams, you have had your own life; maybe now you are lost and you are not yourself, but as long as your dream is still there, you will find it back Own. Isn't this innocent desire the childlike innocence of the old filmmaker Martin Scorsese?
So, before criticizing this movie, please think about it, do you still have dreams? If not, where does your soul reside? Before you find your soul, please don't doubt the childlike innocence of an old filmmaker
View more about Hugo reviews
