posted
I never read any comic books in my childhood. Ever. Except two, given to me by a French postdoc who worked in my dad's lab: The Secret of the Unicorn and Red Rackham's Treasure, part of the Adventures of Tintin. I remember quite enjoying the books when I read them; it had a unique sense of humor and was a charming combination of quirky and epic.
Now, apparently, these same books are being turned into a major motion picture. It looks like it is 100% CGI animation, which is a bit of a gamble, but it looks like they're using stylized human models to avoid the uncanny valley and make the faces more expressive. I recall that some of the characters in Tintin are drawn stylistically, especially the titular hero, so animation may be the best choice.
I'm also interested by the big names behind this film. Steven Spielberg seems to me a bit like yesterday's news, if only because he's much better-known for things like ET and Indiana Jones than anything he does nowadays. But Peter Jackson as producer? John Williams for the music? Maybe it's worth checking out.
I don't know if this will turn out to be any good, but my nostalgia-meter is going off and I'm putting the movie on my radar. I just hope they don't give Tintin a love interest, which is probably the most obvious way to ruin the adaptation.
posted
Spielberg in the director's chair gives me some hope for a good movie, I'm still a bit reserved about it. I really enjoyed the comics.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
The trailer and cgi-ness fills me with confidence; peter jackson and steven as well, and hey hey, daniel craig!
IP: Logged |
posted
Jamie Bell is more exciting to me as an actor than Daniel Craig, though I like Craig just fine.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hate the mo-cap thing. The trailer was also very unexciting and told me nothing. I don't need the story spoiled or anything, but I'd like a better look at, you know, the titular character. A brief set up beyond "adventure!" would help, too.
Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great scenery, but they seemed to be studiously avoiding showing the faces of the characters (particularly during dialogue). Doesn't make me feel any better about the potential uncanny valley-ness.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tintin punched somebody and waved a gun around in that trailer. This should satisfy everyone. No, you don't need to see them speak. I said you don't need to see them speak. La la la la la. I'm sure this time around motion capture won't suck.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I can't recall if TinTin has used a gun before, I tend to view TinTin as basically Doctor Who but Belgian and without time travel so I may be projecting.
But for sure he's punched people, and I do know he shot a rhino.
IP: Logged |
posted
Looks good! The Belgian in me will insist on seeing this one. However, the Smurf movie is not producing the same desire.
Posts: 134 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You mean it's not awesome to use the name of a beloved childhood show as a swear word stand-in? /still in need of a sarcam graemlin
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I can't recall if TinTin has used a gun before, I tend to view TinTin as basically Doctor Who but Belgian and without time travel so I may be projecting.
But for sure he's punched people, and I do know he shot a rhino.
I do recall several instances where Tintin gets shot at but none where he shoots something himself. Of course, I've only read the Secret of the Unicorn and Red Rackham's Treasure. I'll have to read those again.
Also, something I just wanted to say, I never thought of Tintin as having a British accent. But the timbre of his voice is remarkably similar to how I imagined it.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
There WAS a Tin Tin cartoon just so you know...
IP: Logged |
posted
Tintin shot a lot of guns in the books. I just don't remember how many times he was depicted shooting at and hitting other people (certainly, he was depicted as forcing surrender at gunpoint far more often).
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can agree with the Tintin uses a gun sometimes thing. He rarely actually carried a gun (if ever?) but often made use of one that was used against him.
And there was a Tintin cartoon that I remember watching as a child so it was definitely dubbed in Engish at some point.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was an animated version on HBO for a while.
I had a few of the books myself and I really enjoyed them as a kid. I think my uncle in Leeds (England) sent me my first book. I'm looking forward to this movie and reliving a fun memory of my childhood for a couple hours.
Posts: 813 | Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Peter Jackson producing means nothing to me... But Spielberg directing and screenplay by Steven Moffat and Edgar Wright?!? How can this movie *not* be awesome?!?
According to IMDB, they've already announced a THIRD Tintin movie, which is kind of funny considering there's no listing for a second one.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You guys are probably all too young to remember Rin Tin Tin. The cry, "Y'all Rinny" probably means nothing to you.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have very little faith in Spielberg, mostly due to his failure to handle Indiana Jones 4 correctly. That movie was just awful...
The trailer looks like it could be good, but there's really no way to tell. Trailers make most movies look good because that's what they're supposed to do.
Hopefully the movie ends up being good, but I'll wait to hear reviews before I check it out.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jeff, just out of curiosity, what did you find about Indy 4 ("Crystal Skull") that made the movie "just awful"?
I think that Harrison Ford was manifestly too old for the active adventurer character he was portraying. But you have to recognize a certain campiness about the movie. Imagine some hero surviving being nuked by taking refuge in a refrigerator, especially when the refrigerator flies through the air and crash lands (no padding in the fridge, mind you), and the hero climbs out shaken, but otherwise unhurt. All he needs is to be hosed down by the army dudes. When you have such campy elements in a movie, you have to be prepared to suspend disbelief big time.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Jeff C.: I have very little faith in Spielberg, mostly due to his failure to handle Indiana Jones 4 correctly. That movie was just awful...
The trailer looks like it could be good, but there's really no way to tell. Trailers make most movies look good because that's what they're supposed to do.
Hopefully the movie ends up being good, but I'll wait to hear reviews before I check it out.
Speak for yourself I loved it. (then again I never saw the first 3?)
Though my mom is a huge Harrison Ford fan and has the earlier movies, and she also liked it.
I think all complaints stem from having Shia lebouf (who I think is an interested actor that appeals to the inner socially maladjusted geek in me) and the sudden scifi shift in tone; people of course forgetting that the Indiana movies follow along with what was "in" at the time they're filmed in terms of the popular culture.
Indy 4 takes place in the 50's just right when Science fiction was entering its 'golden age' thus the scifi focus.
IP: Logged |
posted
Things I found "just awful" about Indy 4: 1) Shia LeBoeuf, Lord of the Monkeys 2) Blatant disregard for the way powerful magnets work, even within the same scene 3) Native tribespeople with nothing better to do than kill people who visit abandoned graves 4) Native tribespeople who plaster themselves inside the walls of abandoned ruins to ambush interlopers 5) Boringly passive aliens 6) Lazy scriptwriting that telegraphed every plot point 7) A ridiculous, laughable antagonist 8) Not enough anthropology. Indy's an archaeologist, true, but the tone of the best films in the series is set by his interaction with the locals.
What I liked: 1) The chase scene across campus was a bit fun
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Blayne, you liked Indiana Jones 4 and Battlefield Earth? Next you'll say Manos: The Hands of Fate is your favorite movie.
Posts: 1658 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't mind the refrigerator. It was stupid, and let you know early on that the film was going to be more stupid than you may have hoped, but it was an honest sight gag.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Things I found "just awful" about Indy 4: 1) Shia LeBoeuf, Lord of the Monkeys 2) Blatant disregard for the way powerful magnets work, even within the same scene 3) Native tribespeople with nothing better to do than kill people who visit abandoned graves 4) Native tribespeople who plaster themselves inside the walls of abandoned ruins to ambush interlopers 5) Boringly passive aliens 6) Lazy scriptwriting that telegraphed every plot point 7) A ridiculous, laughable antagonist 8) Not enough anthropology. Indy's an archaeologist, true, but the tone of the best films in the series is set by his interaction with the locals.
What I liked: 1) The chase scene across campus was a bit fun
All of this, but I have more.
9) Indie's buddy that chose to "triple cross" him... 10) "Space between spaces" 11) "Nuking the fridge" has become an internet meme and subsequent catchphrase for essentially destroying a film with a single, rediculous scene that makes little sense 12) Aliens in a film series that was originally intended to explore world religions through archeology (the first three made it work...so what happened?) 13) CGI gophers 14) Racing the military (because everyone does it in real life...right?) 15) The Jeep sword fight 16) That scene where the raft falls down three waterfalls and then on top of them and they all walk away completely unscathed.
Now, I'll grant that the movie was watchable. Shoot, I'd probably have fun watching it now, but only because I know what to expect. The first time I saw it, that was not the case. I went in expecting a real indiana jones film, with real actions scenes (not rediculously implausible and impossible CGI-heavy sequences), and a story that was at least reasonably good.
There's a reason that both Ford and Shia said the film was bad.
But, all that being said, I actually do hope they make a new one, because I think they can bounce back and do better. Speilberg has done some great work before and I think he can again. The problem he has is simple: he needs to get rid of Lucas. Lucas is obsessed with special effects and bad dialogue and, lest I forget, aliens. Take him out of the picture and there's hope for the franchise.
That's what I think, anyway.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan: You forgot the refrigerator.
Blayne, you liked Indiana Jones 4 and Battlefield Earth? Next you'll say Manos: The Hands of Fate is your favorite movie.
Not trying to be a jerk, I usually don't correct the spelling of others, but I've seen you use it 6 or 7 times in the last week or so. Just thought you'd like to know.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Everything I think needs to be said about Indiana Jones And The Crystal Skull can be summarized by South Park in The China Probrem.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indy 4 was actually pretty well directed. But he was directing a bad script. It's hard to tell how much control he had over that movie vs Lucas. Remember, the movie he made before that was Munich, and that movie was da bomb.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sean Monahan: Hey, Jeff C. It's "ridiculous".
Sean, you're being rediculous.
Anyway, Speilberg made a lot of great movies, this is true. ET and Close Encounters were pretty awesome, along with Jarassic Park, Minority Report, and Saving Private Ryan.
Maybe he just needs to stay away from his pal Lucas, every everything George touches turns ugly, unless it has something to do with special effects. It's funny because George Lucas has all these great ideas about how to make stuff look amazing, and it always does, but he can't really direct or write very well, which is usually the downside to his movies.
Indy 5 just needs a really good writer for the script, with Lucas making the effects and Speilberg directing. Seems like the script was the biggest problem with Indy 4.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Indy 5 just needs a really good writer for the script, with Lucas making the effects and Speilberg directing.
'with Lucas being told to go sit in a room and look at blinking lights and only speak to anyone else if the light stops blinking' would be appropriate. preferable.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: Indiana Jones and The Secret of Jurassic Park
Make it happen Lucas.
He's too busy making the eighty-fifth theatrical release of the original Star Wars in eye-gouging 3D.
And I don't particularly admire Lucas' and Spielberg's inability to look at a script and think "Uh... No."
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's the thing though. Spielberg may not have had a choice when push came to shove, and Indy is his baby so he probably would rather direct it and make sure it had some redeeming qualities. And the movie he made before Indy 4 was excellent.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
