I was really skeptical of this from the trailers. Now having seen it, I'll say that the story itself isn't anything special and too much of the humour falls flat.
But... and this is a BIG but...
The film is visually stunning. Like 'holy shit I can't believe that's not real' stunning.
I came out of this thoroughly convinced that we're not far off from this being the standard of film-making. No more expensive action sequences, no on location shots, no concerns about actors' age or appearance. I'm not saying that's necessarily a good thing, but don't see this and tell me it's not quite feasible.
Originally posted by ScottyflamingoI'm predicting this thing will bomb. It just looks creepy. I think Speilberg and Jackson are really overestimating the notoriety of Tintin.
It won't be out until Christmas in the US. Unless there's some other competition for the kid money I don't know about - and I wouldn't be shocked if there was - I bet it will do phenomenal box office.
I'll probably make a rare movie theatre trip to see it (albeit in 2D - but if I'm REALLY blown away maybe I'll spring for a second viewing in 3D) - after all, I usually don't have much else to do the last two weeks of the year.
It looks mediocre to me, but I am all for doing animated versions of stories like this instead of live action with lame CGI, so that's a plus. It's too bad it's not regular 2D animation, but that's just the way the world works nowadays.
"But do Gen Y and the kiddies even know who Tintin is these days?"
I don't know what Gen I fall in, but I'm 27 and have only the vaguest sense of what/who Tintin is. The character looks familiar, and I would associate that image with that name, but I have no idea about anything else. When I first heard about this movie my first thought was Rin Tin Tin the dog.
(edited by samoflange on 24.10.11 1537) Lloyd: When I met Mary, I got that old fashioned romantic feeling, where I'd do anything to bone her. Harry: That's a special feeling.
Honestly, the trailers do not do the film justice. Only Tintin himself has that creepy factor, ironically. The rest of it is really smooth. I was ready to not like this, but I cannot help but be blown away by the technical aspects of this. For what it's worth, as a US ex-pat, I had no idea about Tintin prior to this film so who knows how well it'll fly stateside.
I attended a "Free Family Preview" this morning and came away quite entertained. This was my first Real3D presentation (and I probably would have worn contact lenses if I'd thought it would have been a 3D showing, but it worked out OK with two pairs of glasses on) and while it's nifty, I don't know that I wouldn't have liked it any more or less had I seen it in 2D. I may go see it in 2D later as it is, because I really liked it. Now granted, I'm biased because I've been into the books since I was 7 or 8, so I was probably going to like it no matter what, but as an adaptation I found it faithful enough to the source, didn't mind what WAS changed for the screen, and there were enough easter eggs for "aficionados" to keep up the knowing stroky-beard chuckles. The kids I ended up surrounded by never seemed bored by the proceedings. If you liked the books, I'd say you should go for it. If you HAVEN'T read the books...I'd say you should probably be 15 or under to really enjoy this film for its story, but if you're older you may also enjoy this film on a technical level as it's really quite remarkable. I am quite sure there will be no problem getting "Red Rackham's Treasure" greenlit. (Hmmm, IMDb says "Prisoners of the Sun" is next - I hope that's the THIRD one and my search is flawed)
I don't think that includes what it did in Quebec. We got it a couple of weeks ahead of everyone else because of the whole French thing and Spielberg being smart about that. It has been doing very well in the box office here.
I saw it once in English in 3D and once in French in 2D. You don't need to shell out for 3D, but it is well worth your time. I liked it a lot.