I saw it yesterday in 2D and liked it very much. I wasn’t previously familiar with Tintin, other than to know he was an adventurous Belgian reporter with a dog named Snowy. Didn’t know about Captain Haddock et al. I loved the opening sequence and I thought the whole story was fun and exciting.
We went to see it in 3D yesterday.
We thought it was very good!
Having lived in Germany, I was very aware of Tintin, but not really sure I ever read an entire comic book - thus I can hardly be considered a “fan”, but did at least know of the characters.
The movie zipped along nicely, and I thought the animation was excellent - there were times where it didn’t feel like animation at all. The 3D was better than average - you could tell this film was designed to be in 3D and not just an afterthought. That said, I think the story is strong enough that you don’t necessarily need to see the 3D version, although this was a case where it was NOT a waste of money to pay the extra fee for 3D.
The story was good, the animation was excellent and I would most certainly go see a sequel.
No kidding! I was blown away by how spectacular it looked - the hyper-real design and physics modelling combined with the over-the-top cartoonist action made for a real treat. The chase with the falcon and the sleeping sailors were just stunning.
Saw it with trailers for the 3D conversions of Phantom Menace and Titanic followed by the Hobbit trailer. A nice demonstration in short form on how 3D as an afterthought is so underwhelming, followed by an ample demo if how it’s done properly.
Sent with my fat fingers using Tapatalk.
I’ve loved Tintin since I was a kid. I have a complete collection of the books in the original French. I would definitely be interested in seeing this movie, except that I never go to movies at all nowadays.
I just saw it and it was very, very good. I really enjoyed it and it was the perfect movie to start the new year with.
CNN.com on the disappointment of some Tintinologists: http://geekout.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/21/tintinologists-and-fans-on-the-fence-about-the-adventures-of-tintin/
Ha - bollocks. This bit, especially:
I was so relieved to find Haddock much more Haddock-y than has been braved in previous adaptations.
There’s only one part of that article I agree with:
[QUOTE=CNN]
Even Tintin himself was decidedly un-Tintin-like when he greedily urges Captain Haddock to unearth more treasure after he finds the stash hidden in the globe.
[/QUOTE]
I also thought it surprising there weren’t murmurs of selflessly taking the treasure to the authorities. But I figured, like anyone would be, Tintin was just thrilled at discovering treasure; the dreams as of a child more than of avarice.
Yeah, they make pretty clear that Tintin’s motivations are for “the story” (and the accompanying adventure), not for the riches per se.
I loved the film. Went into it worrying about both the uncanny valley and the 3D, and was pleasantly surprised not to be bothered by either in the slightest. And how has nobody mentioned the brilliant editing? The spinning through time during Haddock’s flashback scene, as objects past and present merged back and forth, was fantastically conceived and beautifully executed. Really, though, everything related to Serkis’s performance of Haddock was utter perfection. I never expected one of my favorite comic characters to be so well adapted to the big screen.
The climactic chase through the streets of Bagghar is one of the most impressive action setpieces I’ve ever seen - and I usually give CGI films an automatic downgrade for these sorts of things, since I’m just innately more awed by cool stunts and practical effects than pixel manipulation. I was astonished at how perfectly Spielberg brought back that Raiders feel in a completely CG-animated movie.
One mild complaint: did anyone else feel like Sakharine’s ultimate defeat came a little too easily? Especially how, after escaping a car suspended in midair and engaging in a giant crane battle, he just gave up when confronted by the terrifying threat of… Thompson and Thomson? I fully expected Sakharine to make an easy getaway, possibly setting up another big action sequence. So it was a bit deflating to realize that, nope, he’s done for this movie.
I was very much impressed with the animation. I think they put in things like Thom§son’s big noses to try to stay on the cartoon side of the uncanny valley, but in at least a few cases (such as Saccharine), I think they’ve finally managed to come through to the realistic side. And I found it a great adventure romp.
One thing I was left wondering, though, is just how old Tintin is supposed to be. He looks like he’s in his early teens, but he seems to be a respected and established professional, and he deals directly with other adults (the landlady, the police, etc.) without any evidence of any parent or guardian. Is he supposed to be in his early 20s, and just looks young?
Oh, and for what it’s worth, I had essentially no knowledge of the character before this movie. And even my mom, who never even goes to see movies at all, wanted to see it (I think this and the Narnia movies are the only things she’s seen on the big screen this decade). If they were able to rope in even someone like her, I can’t see the movie having any problem at all at the box office.
This is something that Hergé left purposely ambiguous in the comics (and I guess you could say that the film’s character design for Tintin succeeded if it maintained that ambiguity as well). As Wikipedia says:
I’m a big fan of the Tintin comics, but found the movie a bit dull. It did a reasonably good job of capturing the characters though , maybe with the exception of the big chase scene. I can’t see Tintin wantonly destroying an entire town to further his treasure hunt. Much of Tintin’s success hinges on him being infallibly polite and respectful to everyone, at least until they arouse his suspicions. I loved the look of Allan and other minor characters. They looked exactly as they did in the books. Another good point was showing Snowy’s heroism as well as his weaknesses (cats, whiskey, and sandwiches).
Oh, and Steve, my man, if you’re reading this: Tintin is usually ridiculously lucky with one exception. If he’s chasing a bad guy, he’ll often trip over some minor obstacle and go sprawling while the baddie gets away. Put that in the sequel and maybe you’ll appease those “Tintinologists”.
Also, one plot point that I noticed, that I’m surprised nobody mentioned in the movie (deleted scene, maybe?): When the butler is escorting Tintin out of the mansion, he says something like “I’m sorry the mast broke on yours”. But at that point, Tintin never actually mentioned that it was the mast that broke, just “But it fell… Oh.”. Thus providing evidence that the villain knew something that he shouldn’t have, and was thus involved with the theft.
Seems like the movie is a flop with ardent Tintin fans but a success with those less familiar with him maybe for whatever reason? Interesting!
It’s interesting to me how many people love the chase scene best. I thought that was SLIGHTLY over-the-top. My fave was the airplane almost crashing, almost crashing, almost crashing: crashing scene.
I don’t think he looks THAT young* but the scanning of his walls of all the stories he’d uncovered was far too impressive for a lad of 17, IMHO. But perhaps he’s the French Encyclopedia Brown? heh.
*Quiet, you.
I may be misinterpreting the scene, but I don’t think Tintin did wantonly destroy an entire town. It’s a rather subtle point, but IIRC it’s hinted that Ben Salaad is, in the film, using the dam to control Bagghar’s water supply. Tintin and Haddock open the dam but, in contrast to every other action scene ever set near a dam, ever, don’t destroy it. The resultant flow of water similarly defies genre convention in that it doesn’t really destroy anything in the city. Instead, it returns free water to all parts of the town, literally and thematically shattering the barrier between the super-rich and the regular citizens. This is lampshaded at the end when a man puts a starfish on the one building that is “destroyed” (i.e. moved from midtown to the shore), to indicate its new beachfront status. Its “destruction” has actually served to improve its property value!
Assuming this was all intentional (and Spielberg does seem to put a lot of effort into making the scene as painless to passerby and their property as possible), I’d say that this all fits the Tintin style quite nicely.
Well, I think you’re at least mis-remembering the scene, though I agree that Tintin didn’t blow up the dam, so that’s something. He did however ride a motorcycle through several buildings, causing upper floors to crash into lower floors. He knocked at least one building off its moorings causing it to slide down the hill to the harbor. He basically acts like James Bond in Goldeneye during the tank rampage through St. Petersburg.
At every turn he would have been putting people in mortal peril, and that’s not really Tintin’s style. He puts *himself *in mortal peril more-or-less constantly, but doesn’t bring it down on innocent bystanders.
Presuming that you’re talking about the hotel that ends up at the harborfront with Thomson and Thompson on the balcony, Tintin didn’t cause it to move, at least not directly. And it’s interesting you mention a tank. The hotel moved because there was a tank – presumably pursuing Tintin and Capt. Haddock for the theft of the Unicorn model – stuck inside it!
The wife and I finally saw it. We both enjoyed it very much and are pleased it was left open for a sequel at the end.
I noticed that too! Nestor (the butler) was aware of the nefarious activities of his employers.
<nitpick>
Belgian
</nitpick>
I don’t think Tintin’s age is ever discussed in the comics, and of course he never grows any older, but before he contented himself with lounging around Moulinsart living off the Captain’s money he was a professional reporter, and a fairly renowned one at that (because you don’t send a scrub on expensive, all expenses paid trips to the Belgian Congo), so he’d have to have worked for some time to grow a reputation.
With that in mind I’d say he’s in his late twenties, early thirties. FWIW, here’s what live action Tintin looks like.
