Reading the Oscars: 'Hugo' the book vs. the movie
24.05.12
Pays tribute to. One of the most striking aspects of the Martin Scorsese-directed film is the lush, Oscar-nominated cinematography; Selznick’s illustrations — dark, scratchy, and obviously hand-drawn — couldn’t be more aesthetically different, but they’re every bit as powerful as the expensive, high-definition imagery of the movie. The first 45 pages of the book could have been a shot-for-shot storyboard for the film’s breathtaking opening sequence.
In the book, pages of text are interspersed with long stretches of sequential illustrations, which you can turn through almost like a flip-book. The resulting effect is akin to watching a choppy, flickering black-and-white movie in a dark theater. Selznick’s drawings are intentionally a bit fuzzy, but the lack of detail only enhances the mystery of the story.
Oddly enough, the movie didn’t cut much of the novel’s plot, as adaptations typically do; it actually added a few beats, especially to the Station Master’s (Sacha Baron Cohen) storyline and Hugo (Asa Butterfield) and Isabelle’s (Chloë Moretz) discovery of George Méliès’ (Ben Kingsley) past as a filmmaker. For those who thought the movie was too obsessive about its cineaste-y themes, the novel hits those notes faster and with a lighter touch.
Source: Entertainment Weekly (blog)