Carl the Critic: Reviews "The Adventures of Tintin"
It appears that my review for “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” will have to wait, but until then, let’s all talk about this new Spielberg movie about a boy and his pet… No! Not “War Horse”, the other movie; “The Adventures of Tintin”.
Now first let’s get a little history. “The Adventures of Tintin” is a Belgium Comic by cartoonist Georges Remi (a.k.a. Hergé), and is known for being one of the most popular comics of the 20th Century. It is also known for its controversial depictions of animal cruelty, racial stereotypes, and political satire. Although I have never read the comic books myself, I know many people who have, and I understand the basic premise. Tintin is a young reporter who solves mysteries with his canine companion Snowy.
Simple enough, and it sounds like good old fashion family fun, so my family and I decided to check it out.
The film is based on three of the Tintin comics: "The Crab with the Golden Claw", "The Secrets of the Unicorn", and "Red Rackham's Treasure". It starts off with our funny haired hero getting his picture painted and then we are introduced to a beautiful looking ship called the "Unicorn" which for some reason is Steven Spielberg... I mean Sakharine, wants to buy it. But then Tintin brings it home after telling Spielberg-sorry I mean Sakharine (he looks a lot like a young Steven Spielberg) to piss off, where there the ship breaks, Tintin goes to the Library leaving his door unlocked for some reason, learns everything that we already know, Tintin then goes home finds the ship missing, confronts Spielberg (damn it I mean Sakharine) finds out that he didn't steal the ship (or maybe he did there wasn't explained who stole the ship so who cares) Tintin goes back home finds a piece that broke off the ship, finds a hidden message with strange writing, meets a guy at his front door who gets shot but not before- OH CHRIST MOVIE SLOW THE HELL DOWN! IT'S BEEN TEN MINUTES AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS GOING ON! Well actually I do, sort of but seriously this movie is so fasted paced, and yet I can predict what's going to happen an hour from now.
Try to understand what I mean when I say this, but this is the fastest slow movie I have ever seen in my life. The pacing of the film was fast, camera movements were fast, editing was fast, transitions were fast, actions were fast, dialogue was fast, but the story itself was slow in the sense that I knew what was going to happen moments before it happened. I guess this isn't a bad thing, but it was very strange, it's like if someone took an over dose of steroids and tranquilizers at the same time.
For his first animated film, Spielberg did have some fun, that definitely shows, I'm glad that he was able to incorporate a gag from cartoons of the 1930's in the most natural way. In other words remember those old cartoons where Character A hits Character B over the head with a frying pan and character B sees birds (or sometimes stars) flying around their head? Well in this movie a man has an accident by bumping into a woman with a cage full of canaries and they collide with such great force that the canaries fly around the man's head (which if you can picture this, is pretty clever). There was some clever moments in the film, but it really didn't leave that much of an impression, I didn't leave the theater inspired or seeing the world in a new light, it was just a fun little action packed adventure.
Here's a fun little drinking game you can play in the theater (with your soda, or water, or whatever you're drinking) take a drink every time you see a reference to another Spielberg movie. I saw references to "Jaws", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "Empire of the Sun", and there was probably more that I missed but if you look hard enough you will find them.
Now I want you to look at this picture of Stephen Spielberg for a moment:
Now look at this photo of Sakharine.
... Okay that's a bad picture I'll admit, but seriously these two look identical. This was bothering me through out the entire movie, it was like this was done on purpose.
Again, I have not read the comic book, so I do not know how this compares to the original comics. I know that it is full of references to the three it was based on but I feel like this movie took some liberties with the original material.
Is this a bad movie? Well I can see why people will without a doubt find this annoying. I watched this with 5 people, and at least one person gave it a 2.5 out of 10. So I guess this is another Hit-or-Miss movie, you'll like it or you'll hate it, I personally found the film to be a fun filled, action packed adventure, with some good acting, but with it has a strange pace that's fast and slow at the same time.
You know what else is weird? Daniel Craig is in two movies this week. I'll have to do "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" sometime later but until then I give "The Adventures of Tintin" what I think is a fair score of 7.3 out of 10.
What about you?
If you saw "The Adventures of Tintin", what did you think?See results without voting
More by this Author
It's Carl the Critic's review of Steven Soderbergh's latest film "Contagion"
Carl the Critic reviews "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" and tells you why it is better than the first film.
If there was ever a kind of horror I had always wanted to make, it would be a psychological horror film. But what text book films would I have to watch before I make my first psychological horror film horror?