I have eleven grandchildren, so I see plenty of children’s movies. I have acquired a jaundiced eye. As autumn leaves drift into piles, as souvenir teacups proliferate around a royal wedding, thus do crass, crude, cynical children’s movies pile up around the family DVD player.
Until now. The Adventures of Tintin is superb. Grandparents everywhere will babble tearful thanks: it’s so much better than it had to be, given the industry’s steadily decreasing quality (everywhere but Pixar-land). Credit must go to both of the stars at the helm, Peter Jackson (of The Lord of the Rings) and Steven Spielberg (of too many hits to mention), and to the new technologies (motion-capture animation, improved 3-D process). However, none of this would be here without the hero himself.
Advertisement
Tintin, the creation of the Belgian comic-strip artist known as Hergé (1907–1983), is a boyish newspaper reporter of remarkable courage, who travels the world in pursuit of stories that reliably expose him to life-threatening danger. He appeared first in a story called “Tintin in the Land of the Soviets,” in which the brave youngster went to the Soviet Union to report on the world Josef Stalin was building — a world of artificial famine, phony elections, and political assassination. These stories, originally created for a children’s supplement to the conservative Roman Catholic weekly Le XXe Siècle, were an instant success. Book-length collections have sold over 200 million copies in 50 languages. Up till now, Tintin has not been well known in the U.S., but get ready for that to change.
The style of Hergé’s drawings is so distinctive — black lines surrounding each element, so that it stands out in simplicity — that news that a 3-D film version was under way was cause for concern among longtime fans. There was potential for disaster in any Tintin movie, but a flashy commercial 3-D version sounded worst of all. Dear Tintin’s familiar head is a sphere, with black dots for features and a peg for a nose. Any tampering with that — made cuter? more loveable? — was bound to be disastrous.
The movie’s first scene handles this problem brilliantly. It opens with someone — we don’t see his face — having his portrait made by an artist at an outdoor market. The artist finds his subject familiar, and it turns out to be Tintin himself. We see his companionable white fox terrier, Snowy, sniffing around, and hear Tintin say that he’s a journalist, but still don’t see his face. Finally the artist hands him the finished portrait, saying “I think I have captured something of your likeness.” The image shows the classic round head and button eyes of comic-book Tintin. Only then does the camera pan up (so to speak) and show us a more realistic-looking young man, who’s obviously the real Tintin; the “portrait” is only a cartoon. Very smooth touch there.
It’s hard not to gush over production value, but first let’s talk about entertainment value. This is a relentlessly exciting movie, and that’s what comes closest to being a flaw. In that regard, the movie is entirely faithful to the comics, which send Tintin rocketing (sometimes literally) from one scrape to another. Something is always blowing up, falling down, racing past, battling against, soaring aloft, jumping upon, or diving beneath. Sitting around, not so much. The stories are leavened with fine humor (provided, for example, by the inept detectives Thomson and Thompson), which prevents the stolid self-importance that afflicts some superhero movies. Still, all this breathless swinging from one cliffhanger to the next can be tiring.
Relentlessly exciting? Like a neverending rollercoaster? So it's not Pixar, but Transformers? I'll pass on the "style" taking precedence over story development. Polar Express left me flat as well. And don't get me started on 'Saving Private Ryan'.
Well, I'll try Tintin, having read him in French as well as English. (My French is not that good, but the pictures kept me reading.)
As for the Transformers parallel, my wasted half-hour with the first one was relentless, but boring. I don't mind relentless excitement, for an hour or so, and in Tintin's stories, excitement is to be expected.
Absolutely agree about Polar Express and the "uncanny valley" effect. I suspect the unease is a reflection of the fact that when animated characters are drawn with the goal of achieving a "lifelike" quality, we scan them for the details of life; imperfections and perfections both.
Polar Express tried to do too much too early. For instance, in terms of the imperfections of life, the character's faces were too perfect. There were no blemishes, no slightly off center noses, no eyebrows in need of plucking. But in terms of the perfections of life, their faces were oddly deformed. Look at their lips. Can't really see them, can you? The combined effect of these detail defects caused me to want to run away in terror. They weren't human. They were aliens trying to pass as humans.
Glad to hear Tintin has solved this problem. Looking forward to seeing it.
May I suggest that Frederica Mathewes-Green, and all other fans of the film, investigate the other works of principal screenwriter Steven Moffat, such as his new BBC Sherlock Holmes series, and such Doctor Who episodes as "Blink" and "Silence in the Library"?
Tonnere de Brest! Excellent review. I saw the movie yesterday and you have captured it quite well. Lots of action, some good laughs, all skillfully executed.
I, too, was a bit surprised at the alcohol jokes. I kept expecting Foster Brooks to show up. I also was pleased to recognize a Citroen 2CV in one of the scenes.
Not a film to be 'taken seriously' but rather to be enjoyed.
Some classic comic strips work on the silver screen, while others don't. It depends a lot on the rendition process and the skill of the producer. Superheros usually work (Dick Tracy, Batman, Superman, etc.) Others, like Asterix or Rocky and Bullwinkle, are complete flops. And don't even get me started on the Chipmunks.
Even though Saving Private Ryan had several mistakes (the hatch cover atop the tiger tank looks like a 55 gallon drum lid), it made my father in law (82nd railsplitters) cry in the theater. So eff you.
No flatulence jokes or gross-out humor, no sexual innuendo, no sappy romance, no too-cute character that appeals to 3 year old kids but is out of place, no sly aren't-we-hip pop culture references, and not many over the kids' heads adult jokes.
It is a fast-paced movie that's reminiscent of Indiana Jones/Tomb Raider. I felt Johnny Quest would be a apt comparison as well -- right down to the white dog companion that can get into trouble as well as save the day. It has a wholesome winsome quality with the old story/characters that makes it quaint and wonderful for those that grew up with the books. The only drawback is CAPT Haddock's propensity for drink but since that was in Herge's original you expect it with him. And his character is one of the most cartoonish besides the Thompsons to bring one back to the fact that it's a cartoon. It was funny to see Castiore singing. She's there for comic relief like the Thompsons. She had a beautiful voice but Herge made fun of it in all his books with her in them. It was hilarious to see Haddock unartfully running away as well as Snowy covering his ears. For some reason her movie version made me think of a Rubenesque Glenn Close. The pirate story is wonderful. The location of the Francis Haddock vs Red Rackham fighting memory gets moved around a little from where Haddock relates it to Tintin from the story arc in the cliffhanger Secret of the Unicorn/ Red Rackham's Treasure. The epic story had to be moved along in a relatively short span and Spielburg/Jackson used some wonderful poetic license to lift the 2D panels into a 3D world.
Good review. The movie is solid, without a lot of gimmicks, except, of course, that it's an over-the-top action film. Not all that unlike Indiana Jones? But it is clearly it's own style, and not just a IJ copy.
A lot of fighting might be too much for small kids, but aside from that, a great action film for all.
Perhaps people should look up the actions of Georges Remi a.k.a. Hergé, during the Nazi occuption of Belgium. Hergé disliked America and saw nothing wrong with collaborating. Although not a Rexist, Hergé was no fan of Jews. I am stunned that Spielberg was involved in this.
