The “liberating” cinematic advancement Martin Scorsese got wrong
It’s fair to say that Martin Scorsese has provided a revolutionary output on the cinematic medium throughout his career. Whether detailing narratives of criminal enterprise and toxic masculinity or showing his bold visual style with impressive tracking shots or glorious cinematography, Scorsese has always been ahead of the curve.
Countless masterpieces have arrived on screen as a result of Scorsese’s prowess as a director. To name just a few, think of the brilliance of the likes of Taxi Driver, Mean Streets, Goodfellas and Casino, and it’s easy to see why Scorsese is held in acclaim as one of the greatest filmmakers of all time.
Scorsese has also never been afraid of experimenting with new technology either, and as the 2010s arrived, he consulted the world of 3D cinema through his adventure drama film Hugo, based on the 2007 book The Invention of Hugo Cabret, written by Brian Selznick. The film tells of a lonely boy who lives in a Parisian railway station in the 1930s and becomes wrapped up in a mystery surrounding his late father.
Hugo went on to receive a whopping 11 Academy Award nominations, winning five awards, including ‘Best Cinematography’, ‘Best Art Direction’ and perhaps most importantly ‘Best Visual Effects’. The reason for the latter award’s importance is because Scorsese’s 2011 film was his first shot entirely in 3D.
3D filmmaking is not something one can completely associate with Scorsese, but he took on the technology in both hands to see what he could achieve. From the impact of the film, it’s fair to say that the director accomplished his task of using 3D, and he once spoke of his experience using it.
“I found 3D to be really interesting because the actors were more upfront emotionally,” the director told the BBC. “Their slightest move, their slightest intention is picked up much more precisely.” Some had hoped that Scorsese’s 3D movie might revolutionise the format, but since the film was released, it’s fair to say that it has dwindled in use and acclaim.
Still, the director himself was keen to stress the importance of 3D at the time, telling The Guardian, “I’ve always liked 3D. I mean, we’re sitting here in 3D. We see in 3D. So why not?” Clearly, Scorsese was keen to dive into the potential of the 3D format, but even more evidently, Hugo largely served as its swansong.
Adamant on showcasing the quality of his film, though, Scorsese had said at the time, “Every shot is rethinking cinema, rethinking narrative – how to tell a story with a picture.” Having grown up with the first wave of 3D movies, Scorsese refused to admit that his use was in line with the medium’s previous gimmicks.
Rather, he said that he found 3D to be a “liberating” experience. “It’s literally a Rubik’s Cube every time you go out to design a shot, and work out a camera move, or a crane move,” he noted. “But it has a beauty to it also. People look like… like moving statues. They move like sculpture, as if sculpture is moving in a way. Like dancers…”
Ever the artist, Scorsese really believed he could revolutionise 3D, but even despite Hugo’s widespread admiration, 3D movies these days are rarely, if ever, found, showing that even someone like Scorsese could have his plans fall by the wayside.
Check out the trailer for Hugo below.