Talk:Hugo (film)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

in IMAX[edit]

IMAX Release of "Hugo" in IMAX 3D to Australia and New Zealand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.210.148 (talk) 11:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Steampunk?[edit]

Would it fit into this genre? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.4.32.115 (talk) 02:50, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it is more clock punkDalek9 (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's getting pedantic. Steampunk is a genre and has many sub-genres (diesel, clock, atomic, yada yada yada). Like heavy metal (combat metal, thrash, black, pants, power...okay, maybe not pants) but at the end of the day it is all the same genre. Steampunk has a massive amount of clockwork - just look at the accessories and clothing. Cogs are to steampunk what leather is to the Hell Angels.

But I am here to say one thing. The quote says, "The film shows Méliès as having been married to Jeanne d'Alcy during their film making period, when in reality they did not marry until 1925." Does it? It shows he was 'with' her when he made films, because she was. She was his mistress. User:DarkMithras 1886 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.172.103 (talk) 23:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IMAX 3D[edit]

In Australia and New Zealand it will be released in IMAX 3D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.106.217 (talk) 03:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you got a reference for this ? I'd be surprised if IMAX were to provide special prints solely for the limited number of IMAX venues in those territories. Barry Wom (talk) 08:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

my idea[edit]

my idea is for IMAX — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.106.217 (talk) 00:48, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References to real-world history[edit]

The section, References to real-world history, is fascinating but unfortunately it's WP:OR which is not allowed on WP. Can you find a WP:RS who says those things about Hugo specifically, perhaps in a recent review? I hope you can, because otherwise, it must be deleted, under WP rules. --Nbauman (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that there is a typo (or ambiguity) in the section "References to real-world history": There is a brief cameo appearance by what appears to be James Joyce, the Irish expatriate author, in the station cafe during the movie's first chase scene. O'Neill was living in Paris at the time of this story.

Is it Joyce or O'Neill? The statement above seems pure speculation.

I have read the WP:OR rules. Does this mean that Scorsese or any of the movie direction team will need to confirm this section? Or can only newspapers or articles already published, which could be plagued with errors, be referred? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gisellas (talk • contribs) 18:09, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only newspapers, published sources, and other error-plagued WP:RS can be used. Wikipedia requires WP:VERIFIABILITY, not truth. --Nbauman (talk)
Also, having a character that looks like Joyce, or is supposed to be Joyce, in the movie wouldn't constitute a cameo. This section states that Scorsese also makes a cameo, which is correct because Scorsese was actually in the movie playing a part. James Joyce did not play a character (or himself) in this movie (having died in 1941), therefore it's not a cameo.Onlynone (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would the movie credits be an accurate source? I watched the credits, and "Salvador Dali" showed up, but I did not catch by whom he was portrayed. I'm not sure about the other facts; I know for sure that the similarities between Hugo's dream and the real-life train crash would be original research until some reliable source confirms it. Anyway, how would one cite the movie credits? Thanks. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There was a listing for James Joyce in the credits. 72.237.206.160 (talk) 20:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Line[edit]

Having just seen the film 5 minutes ago, I think the plot line in the article is extremely brief. It misses out parts such as the Inspector saving Hugo's life from a train whilst he was rescuing the automon. Also it misses out the death of his uncle and why. These are just a few things missing which I feel should be included. -90.193.86.227 (talk) 22:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the omission of the details you mentioned do not detract from the understanding of the movie's plot. That said, feel free to add them in. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 03:32, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, whoever wrote it has terrible english, maybe someone who speaks the language as their mother-tongue could iron out the creases? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.180.107.172 (talk) 20:49, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The plot mentions that Hugo lives in Gare Montparnasse, which, given that the station was viewable across the Seine from the Pont de l'Archevêché (to the East), is physically impossible. Gare de Lyon would be roughly in that spot, though most likely not viewable, even at the time. Suggest removing reference to a specific station. Soundcow (talk) 07:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC)soundcow[reply]

If one checks material written by or on behalf of the film-makers (see e.g., the official website), it is clear that the station in the story is intended to be Montparnasse (which is, indeed, where the real Georges Méliès had his shop). This said, neither the station itself nor the Paris around it are to be viewed as literally accurate recreations of historical or geographical reality (the filmmakers state, for example, that the appearance of the station is a composite). Nandt1 (talk) 22:18, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


There are other missing or incorrect information bits as well. For example: her mother is who gave the key to the girl, not Papa Georges. --187.146.226.198 (talk) 04:15, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

update[edit]

the boxoffice amount needs updated Thanks Lex Martin (talk) 06:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold and go for it! Don't forget to back up the statistics with reliable sources. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 07:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that could be a problem. My kindle does not have the RAM to handle editing a page that size, so it would be a bit till I can get to a computer.Lex Martin (talk) 08:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. From where did you see an updated box office amount? I'll take a look, and I could update the info for you, if you'd like. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 16:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I can handle it! just need to wait till my laptop gets fixed. I kinda dropped it:~( Lex Martin (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Box Office[edit]

Box office section? --190.172.136.144 (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Manual of Style, there should be one. I'm a bit tight on time, so feel free to add it in if you have enough info from reliable sources. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from Argentina... I can read, but i can't write in English... :( --190.172.142.117 (talk) 04:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no box office analysis? The WP entries for most other movies have a paragraph of box office analysis. Relative to its budget, Hugo underperformed at the box office. Surely that should be mentioned? I would add something myself but this is not really my area. Stanley Oliver (talk) 12:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Video Game[edit]

The article mentions that a video game is in development for the DS and 3DS. Where's the citation for this? I can find no sources that confirms that this video game exists. If no such title exists, then the video game secion should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.243.144 (talk) 21:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Video game section deleted[edit]

I've been looking all evening for references to the video game. Non exist. References must be added if the section is to be included again.WP:CRYSTAL Generalpompeyo (talk) 02:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

stereotyping of french people[edit]

No mention of stereotyping of french from the mid 30 by the Anglo-saxons culture. I think this is worth mentioning for anyone neither of British culture or American culture. 82.41.180.21 (talk) 22:14, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find a valid source discussing such an issue, then by all means add it in --Allthestrongbowintheworld (talk) 02:07, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that well known stereotype about French people that they are all small boys who wind clocks in stations. 83.100.158.141 (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Improving History Accuracy[edit]

I located a site that discusses how the early film director came to love film. I hope this is sufficient. I will look to add more resources to this section to help eliminate the quality control of that section.(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Differences from Book[edit]

This section is interesting but quite obviously OR, unless a source can be found detailing these, they need to be removed. DragonsDream (talk) 22:09, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saint-Saëns[edit]

Although I understand why it was edited that way, Saint-Saëns is mentioned twice, one after another, under "Production" apparently to create links both for the article on the Danse Macabre and for the composer. I believe there is an easy way to fix the first link so the composer's name is not mentioned the first time in the text of the Danse Macabre but only on the second link. But I've forgotten how to do this and would ask a more experienced editor to fix it. Very awkward as it is now.Ed (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But I have now fixed it. Ed (talk) 17:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed claims that the film also is British and French[edit]

I've just removed the claims that the film is British and French in addition to American. All established databases, such as BFI, AFI and IMDb only state USA as country, as both production companies (GK Films and Infinium Nihil) are US based. As a consequence of this, in accordance with Wikii guidelines, I've also removed UK release date and UK distributor name. Thomas Blomberg (talk) 08:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed language about box office performance[edit]

Please discuss proposed changes to the language describing the box office performance here.

At least a few editors have expressed concern about attempts by an anonymous IP6 user to introduce non-encyclopedic language that may violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view standard. I have reverted or removed these edits several times, & the efforts have at time interfered with others edits.

I personally feel strongly that the language beginning the last paragraph in the lede, "was financially unsuccessful, only grossing $185 million at the box office, barely passing its budget," is adequate & should not be changed. I am open to moderate language changes in the Box office performance section provided the anonymous IP6 editor explains why the more empathetical language befits an encyclopedic tone and does not violate WP:NOV.

I am particularly concerned that this anonymous editor in question has used a ½ dozen different IP6 addresses. It may be just a matter of DHCP, but we do not know this. In addition to edit warring, this editor has also removed a number of references on one occasion, & has added blank characters that I typically recognize as a tab character paste from MS-Word. I invite this editor to register with a user name & to have a discussion about his or her proposed changes. I am not here to bite the newbies, but I do not typically tolerate edit warring either, particularly when someone neglects to take responsibility for his or her actions.

Peaceray (talk) 01:55, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually not historically accurate at all[edit]

Apart from starting out as a magician and ending up as a shopkeeper, the depiction of Méliès' life is sweetened to the extent of a deliberate falsification. He was bankrupt in 1913, unable to produce films furthermore and lucky that a moratorium due to the war prevented him from loosing even his home. The studio building was not destroyed but used as a hospital for soldiers. Méliès did not sell his films, only the prints were confiscated and turned into heels for the army. The reason for the loss of a substantial part of his work was he himself, in 1923 he burnt the negatives in a fit of a rage over the loss of his production company. It is true that the Théâtre Robert-Houdin featured automatons, but these have to be attributed to its chief mechanic Eugène Calmels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.4.99.92 (talk) 10:38, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hugo (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:17, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hugo (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:59, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hugo (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:16, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The railway station is not Gare de Montparnasse[edit]

The article states from the introduction that the railway station depicted in the film is the ancient Gare de Montparnasse (here in a postcard from the early 20th century), while, actually, it does not resemble at all the historical station in Paris. To me it seems to be a kind of pastiche of several Belle Époque railway stations of Paris: the facade of the Gare du Nord, the clock of the Gare d'Orsay, the tower of the Gare de Lyon as well as elements from the Gare de Montparnasse. So, maybe we should replace "Gare de Montparnasse" with "a railway station in Paris". What do you think? FilBenLeafBoy (Let's Talk!) 18:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How did film lose money?[edit]

If the budget was no greater than $170 million and receipts were $185 million, how was the film "estimated to have had a net loss of $100 million?"

Any ideas?

63.155.96.30 (talk) 06:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hugo_(film)&oldid=1202743359"