LOGIN
REGISTER
RSS
HOME
I've been a fan of Tintin since I was 6 years old and I can't wait to see this. I hate 3D with passion tho and I will definatly see it in 2D.
You gotta hand it to Hollywood: once it gets an idea in its head, it refuses to let go despite all warning signs to the contrary. The great 3D experiment seems to be fading, and yet not only do various directorial legends insist on using it, but with The Adventures of Tintin, they seem to be doubling down. “See it in 3D or nuts to you!” they proclaim, while placing Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson on top of it all as if defying us to look away. The stunt does a grave disservice to what is otherwise a charming bit of Boys Own fun: the film doesn’t deserve to be shouldered with this larger debate about the future of movies.
Spielberg (who directs) and Jackson (who produces) make the perfect pair of overgrown boys to deliver such a confection, and you can sense their eagerness to tackle this particular task. A number of other interesting names appear in the credits -- including Edgar Wright, who co-wrote the screenplay -- and the presence of so many talented figures almost ensures that we'll have a good time. The motion capture technology feels more fluid than it has in previous endeavors, which makes a solid fit for the slightly fantastical universe Spielberg and company hope to conjure. It’s ostensibly our world, just colored by the pre-pubescent romance evinced by pulp magazine covers and Saturday morning serials. In many cases, the artifice of motion capture gets in the way of the story. Here, it actively compliments it.
Tintin (Jamie Bell) – originally appearing in Belgian comic strips -- served as inspiration for Indiana Jones, though he’s slightly more innocent and a little less (ahem) snakebit. He works as a reporter for a big paper: thwarting sinister crime rings and rescuing kidnapped heiresses on a weekly basis. Along with his loyal dog Snowy, he stumbles across the greatest adventure of all: a lost treasure, complete with map hidden in the body of a model ship. To get it, he needs the help of the drunken Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis) while avoiding the gaggle of ruffians on the same trail.
Spielberg keeps his various escapades light and bubbly: centered around spectacular set pieces, but limiting the dangers to the PG variety. The director has been around the block once or twice, but his embrace of the technology seems to have rejuvenated him and he constantly discovers new applications for it. Dream and reality merge on a trek across a lonely desert, for instance, while the showstopper involves an extended chase through a hillside town… delivered in a single shot that would have been impossible had they performed it with live action. It’s the sort of moment Big Steve used to trundle out regularly, but which have become fewer and farther between of late.
Tintin can’t always match such brilliance. The script stays very loyal to the source material – combining elements of three printed Tintin adventures – but still cobbles them together rather than letting them flow as one. At times, it devolves into haphazard sections, and the action gives way to plot exposition that never quite makes everything clear. This becomes especially apparent at the end, which is intended to create a serialized format, but really just sets us up for more franchise fodder. Indiana Jones managed the same trick much more neatly. Though based on a Belgian comic strip that presumably used the same cliffhanger techniques, the end of Tintin can’t escape the sense of old-fashioned money grabbing rather than genuine swashbuckling.
Then there’s the lingering 3D issue, which seems more pertinent here than ever. As with other entries in the third-dimensional madness, Tintin can’t do more than deliver a decent depth of field: something Spielberg used to do in his sleep with ordinary cameras and which does nothing more than force an extra five dollars out of people’s wallets. It leaves a sour taste this holiday season, which – combined with the film’s other shortcomings – render it merely a dependable good time instead of a modern classic. We’ll see if the audience is large enough to demand a sequel. If they do, the filmmakers will have plenty of opportunities to correct the oversight.
I've been a fan of Tintin since I was 6 years old and I can't wait to see this. I hate 3D with passion tho and I will definatly see it in 2D.
Same here, 2D sounds great and will see this one for sure in it's 2D glory.
Looks pretty good but not good enough to see in the theater this will be a rental for me. But If they ever get around to doing a Johnny Quest movie this is how it should be done, now that I would go to the theater to see.
This movie seems more like it was made for a select audience of Tintin fans. Just not interested.
Revector, I feel the same way. Everytime I see a Tintin commcerial I wish it was Jonny Quest done in that way. I mean it's got a boy and dog in globetrotting adventures! All you need is Hadjii, Race and Dr. Quest! But, the belgian creation has worldwide appeal so that is the obvious way to go for money.
I'll probably see it at some point becuase its done by master filmmakers and it looks gorgeous. Don't know if I'll go 3D though.
Oh, if you do want a Jonny quest fix, go to Vimeo and search for "Jonny Quest Opening Titles". An ardent fan remade the opening sequence in stop-motion and it is fantastic! Two thumbs up!
Isn't there already a sequel to this being made? My understanding was that it was a 2-picture deal where Stevie was directing the first film (with PJ producing) and PJ was directing the second (with Stevie producing).
I was under the same impression redhairs. And I haven't heard anything to the contrary. I'll see this in either 2D or 3D. Whatever is on at the time I see it.
I saw this in 2D and enjoyed it. I would echo the review - good setpieces and some comedy moments that raised some smiles. It is not a perfect film but worth the money to see in 2D