First Tin Tin review online

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'm not talking about a character's reputation nor how famous they may be. i'm talking about the emotional connection an audience member has to someone on screen.

I wasn't just talking about how famous characters are, but the fact that such fame and popularity means that much of the international audience already has an emotional connection to these characters which they'll bring to the theater and which will influence their reactions to the movie. Whether the movie properly capitalises on that pre-existing connection remains to be seen.

But you are talking about fame and reputation, and I was just talking about what was in all the footage hat has been thus far released. Sure, it's subjective, but there is nothing I've seen that makes Tintin, Haddock, Snowy or anyone else stand out at all, to make me care enough about what happens. Less important is that I don't know enough about the adventure or the quest itself to make me care enough. No idea what the line 'a whole mess of danger" really means, no idea what the stakes are. But what I do know is that Spielberg and Jackson both worked on it and it will be a motion picture event in 3-D because 1/4 of the trailers' screen time is devoted to letting me know that this is the case... kind of like a similar amount of trailer screentime for Mars Needs Moms reminded us that Zemeckis worked on it and that it will be in 3-D, and we all know how many people actually care about that film.

 

[Professor Zoom]

I'm not talking about a character's reputation nor how famous they may be. i'm talking about the emotional connection an audience member has to someone on screen.

I wasn't just talking about how famous characters are, but the fact that such fame and popularity means that much of the international audience already has an emotional connection to these characters which they'll bring to the theater and which will influence their reactions to the movie. Whether the movie properly capitalises on that pre-existing connection remains to be seen.

But you are talking about fame and reputation, and I was just talking about what was in all the footage hat has been thus far released. Sure, it's subjective, but there is nothing I've seen that makes Tintin, Haddock, Snowy or anyone else stand out at all, to make me care enough about what happens. Less important is that I don't know enough about the adventure or the quest itself to make me care enough. No idea what the line 'a whole mess of danger" really means, no idea what the stakes are. But what I do know is that Spielberg and Jackson both worked on it and it will be a motion picture event in 3-D because 1/4 of the trailers' screen time is devoted to letting me know that this is the case... kind of like a similar amount of trailer screentime for Mars Needs Moms reminded us that Zemeckis worked on it and that it will be in 3-D, and we all know how many people actually care about that film.

Jesus. Don't see the fucking movie. Why are you so worked up?

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

But you are talking about fame and reputation, and I was just talking about what was in all the footage hat has been thus far released. Sure, it's subjective, but there is nothing I've seen that makes Tintin, Haddock, Snowy or anyone else stand out at all, to make me care enough about what happens. Less important is that I don't know enough about the adventure or the quest itself to make me care enough. No idea what the line 'a whole mess of danger" really means, no idea what the stakes are.

Well, that was my point really. People who have been lifelong Tintin fans and who already have a longstanding emotional connection to the characters and the books are going to have different reactions than people who either have minimal or no familiarity with the characters. The former group doesn't need to be sold on the characters and the stakes of the adventure as much as the latter group.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I agree. Shouldn't a movie trailer be able to bring in new people? They should have had it easy, considering Spielberg and Jackson both worked on it, and the material in and of itself is 'kinda-sorta" like Indiana Jones.

 

[Owain Taggart]

They should have just made the European trailer the default trailer shown everywhere. It has more flavour overall.

 

[Professor Zoom]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

Really? EVERYTHING...?

Moneyball is a pretty good movie. Not a lick of CGI in it.

 

[Talosian]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

It is a genuine mystery to me why these two talented directors (although I put Spielberg in a category of his own) have devoted their time and resources to this project. Spielberg in particular has always struck me as an odd figure in the history of the cinema. Never has so much talent been so passionately devoted to contriving cheap sentimentality and trivial spectacle. One of my favorite directors in Hollywood, but also a man who has done more damage to filmmaking, by way of his many less talented imitators, than almost any man in the industry.

At any rate, I agree that the trailers give little sense of vitality, humor, or character to the computer generated figures involved. This despite the fact that they have been so lovingly rendered. Each of them would make a wonderful children's toy, but I wonder when technology will allow such CG creations to substitute fully for human actors. One thing is certain - the special effects and 3D wizardry will not long survive rewatching unless, as you suggest, the characters connect with us on an emotional level.

 

[Talosian]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

Really? EVERYTHING...?

Moneyball is a pretty good movie. Not a lick of CGI in it.

Brad Pitt in interviews compared it to some of his favorite sports films from the 70's. I agree, but this just shows how the film was something of a throwback. Maybe if it had CG boxing robots in it more people would have seen it.

 

[Professor Zoom]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

Really? EVERYTHING...?

Moneyball is a pretty good movie. Not a lick of CGI in it.

Brad Pitt in interviews compared it to some of his favorite sports films from the 70's. I agree, but this just shows how the film was something of a throwback. Maybe if it had CG boxing robots in it more people would have seen it.

I don't think it's the CG boxing robots, it's probably the very heart warming story of a father reconnecting to his son--I haven't seen it, just assuming. It's Rocky. Those types of stories have ALWAYS appealed to American audiences. I don't know why people are surprised it's doing well.

America likes sentimental stories.

Plenty of people still have an opportunity to see Moneyball. And while I'm sure they would love if it became a huge blockbuster, they knew it wasn't going to be.


Edited to add: Tin Tin is going to CRUSH it at the box office. Especially world wide.

 

[USS Kongo]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

Welcome to adulthood.

I admit that I was also greatly underwhelmed by the trailer for Tintin, as well. I'll catch this when it hits video, or maybe even cable.

Sean

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I'm kinda interested in how this will do in the USA because we have very little nostalgia for or hell, even recognition, of Tintin.

 

[Ubik]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

It's a cartoon. Some of the best films ever made are cartoons. Half of them are by Miyazaki, and the other half are by Pixar. In some of those Miyazaki films (My Neighbour Totoro, for example), the facial expressions are almost non-existent. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a work of art being produced in that medium - they don't rely on facial expressions the same say Harrison Ford does. The medium of animation works differently.

And if you think Wall-E or Up didn't draw you in, or didn't make you care, then I will repeat what I said at the beginning of this thread: maybe you're dead inside.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

Really? EVERYTHING...?

Moneyball is a pretty good movie. Not a lick of CGI in it.

I have not seen it. I will try to be fair. I heard that, even for people who don't care about sports (me) it's a good film. Even for people who despise Jonah Hill (which is me) it's a good film. Even for people who have no interest in the subject matter (that would be me as well) it's a good film. Maybe at some point I'll watch it and give it a fair review. Whatever. But comparing Moneyball to Tintin - or even using it as a point of comparison in the same thread - is like me comparing Lorenzo's Oil to Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Yeah, they are both movies...

 

[Professor Zoom]

I have not seen it. I will try to be fair. I heard that, even for people who don't care about sports (me) it's a good film. Even for people who despise Jonah Hill (which is me) it's a good film. Even for people who have no interest in the subject matter (that would be me as well) it's a good film. Maybe at some point I'll watch it and give it a fair review. Whatever.

My wife, who grew up in India, and really knows NOTHING about baseball loved it.

But comparing Moneyball to Tintin - or even using it as a point of comparison in the same thread - is like me comparing Lorenzo's Oil to Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Yeah, they are both movies...

Um. I'm not COMPARING them... so much as refuting your idea that EVERYTHING is CG, EVERY movie is trying to be slick.

In other words, hyperbolic opinion is hyperbolic.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'm worked up because it's not just this film. It's like everything out there these days feels so flat, 3-D or not. I give Ewan McGregor doing his darndest to at least trying to save the last two prequels, because nowhere in George's direction did he have us look at a character and actually make us truly care what that person may be thinking. It's like every film is all about how "amazing" it will look, how glossy it will be, all that but I haven't seen a film where I truly cared about someone beyond the simple fact that script obviously wants me to. Now, two of the best directors in Hollywood have teamed up at last, and what do we get, something that is just as bad, if not worse, than everything i was hoping that these two men would help us avoid.

It's a cartoon. Some of the best films ever made are cartoons. Half of them are by Miyazaki, and the other half are by Pixar. In some of those Miyazaki films (My Neighbour Totoro, for example), the facial expressions are almost non-existent. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a work of art being produced in that medium - they don't rely on facial expressions the same say Harrison Ford does. The medium of animation works differently.

And if you think Wall-E or Up didn't draw you in, or didn't make you care, then I will repeat what I said at the beginning of this thread: maybe you're dead inside.

Did you notice that I mentioned Gromit in one of my posts? Maybe you missed that. Maybe I should add that, even though it's just shy of a half hour, The Wrong Trousers has forever earned a spot in my top five favorite films of all time. Yes, it has, because it has everything I could ever ask for in a film, from perfect pacing, great character development, to a satisfying payoff. The fact that it's short, or done with clay, or has a protagonist with no mouth hardly matters. There aren't many films, animated or otherwise, that I think could do as much

 

[Robert Maxwell]

So, you started a thread about a movie you haven't liked since you first heard about it, and you're taking the opportunity to expound upon why you don't like it in ever more detail, despite having not seen it, and indicating you apparently have no intention of seeing it, so you can just go on disliking it for no real reason?

Cool, carry on then.

 

[Saga]

yeah, i fail to see why you have so much hate for this movie. ok, you think it looks terrible. the rest is just beating a dead horse.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

So, you started a thread about a movie you haven't liked since you first heard about it, and you're taking the opportunity to expound upon why you don't like it in ever more detail, despite having not seen it, and indicating you apparently have no intention of seeing it, so you can just go on disliking it for no real reason?

Cool, carry on then.

Oh stop it. The point of a message board is to talk about upcoming films. Otherwise they might as well take down the Avengers thread. Or the Man of Steel thread.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

So, you started a thread about a movie you haven't liked since you first heard about it, and you're taking the opportunity to expound upon why you don't like it in ever more detail, despite having not seen it, and indicating you apparently have no intention of seeing it, so you can just go on disliking it for no real reason?

Cool, carry on then.

Oh stop it. The point of a message board is to talk about upcoming films. Otherwise they might as well take down the Avengers thread. Or the Man of Steel thread.

Yeah, except the people participating in those threads tend to be interested in the final product, and you aren't. You just want to complain about a movie you're not even going to see. It's bullshit.

And hey, if you're allowed to gripe about a movie you dislike sight unseen, then I'm allowed to call you out for it.