tintin2-icon tintin2-icon
motion capture

First Look: “The Adventures of Tintin”

Our first glimpse of Spielberg’s (and Jackson’s) mo-cap Tintin movie. They are still afraid to show us their faces – and I’m still not entirely sure why this film had to be motion capture – but it’s looking quite good nonetheless.

UPDATE: The Hi-Def Japanese trailer contains a few different shots

(Thanks, Chris Sobieniak)

  • PeteR

    Looks like a terrific kid’s cartoon!!!

  • tedzey

    Jerry, you stole the words I was going to write! It’s like they’re terrified to show the faces making me wonder if the motion capture on the faces are going to be yet another journey down the uncanny valley!

  • snip2354

    They only show Tintin’s face on the last shot. I demand an answer.

  • Emm

    All aboard the ship to Uncanny Valley! :(

    I’m looking forward to “The Goon” though.

  • Bob

    You can’t judge a finished film by its trailer; only whether you would want to see it or not. And based on this — I do. Could be a winner.

  • CC

    You hated Mars Needs Moms, and yet you think this looks quite good. How?

  • Bob

    You can’t judge a finished film by its trailer; only whether you would want to see it or not. And based on this — I do. I’d like to see more!

  • Pieter

    We’re talking here about Steven Spielberg & Peter Jackson, two of the most gifted, powerful and succesful directors of all time and everyone here keeps thinking they don’t know anything about “The Uncanny Valley”…

    You guys should really call them because you seem to know a lot more about film than Spielberg & Jackson combined.

    In summary: this looks great! Thumbs up!

    • Emm

      I guess you’ve forgotten about Jackson’s king-sized turd “King Kong.” Not everything Jackson turns out is spun gold. Same for Spielberg.

      And Robert Zemeckis used to make wonderful, award-winning films. And then he got sucked into the Uncanny Valley. :(

      • Hal

        Kin Kong was solid, despite dragging a bit I’ll stand by the Kong vs. 3 T rexes as one of the most amazing set pieces in any blockbuster ever – nothing in, say, AVATAR can touch it for dynamics and inventive cg camerawork. Methinks you are pushing it with “turd” monikers. Besides, the man made MEET THE FEEBLES, DEAD ALIVE/BRAINDEAD, HEAVENLY CREATURES and put the greatest “sheep being blown up by a bazooka” scene in the history of cinema in his first film BAD TASTE. If you’re going to rip on a Jackson film rip on LOVELY BONES, that one was pretty terrible on most counts and had little to offset the negatives. That said TIN TIN is right up both their alleys and couple STEPHEN MOFFAT and EDGAR WRIGHT as screenwriters and this is about as sterling a pedigree as I could imagine, uncanny valley be damned.

  • Peter H

    No sign of emulating Herge’s style (elegant flat areas and simplified, clearly deliniated details). This is full three dimensional, fully rendered in light and shade and with full camera movement exactly like any live-action film, without any reference to comic strip visualisation at all.

    (I’m not bothered by that, but the original hype was all about creating Herge’s world on the screen!)

    So this is just another photorealistic rendering of not quite realistic people in a slightly plastic world. So nothing to get excited about there!

    Now it all depends in whether the story is told well.
    That is, as well as a well-made live-action film might have done it.

    I take it that was Tintin in the last shot – I doubt that he looks much like anyone’s mental image: even the quiff had been ‘realised’ out of existance. Still – I suppose the film is merely the promo for the computer game…

    • Scott B.

      I feel exactly the same way.

      I would have loved to have seen a Tintin movie done in Hergé’s clean outline and flat fill style, but rendered in 3-D … if that make sense. What they’ve done here loses the charm of the source material, and replaces it with the failed visual language of The Polar Express and Beowulf. What a missed opportunity.

    • Popular culture seems to love destroying the soul of of comics lately, let´s hope these lousy trends implode soon.

    • Pete Bangs

      “So this is just another photorealistic rendering of not quite realistic people in a slightly plastic world. So nothing to get excited about there!” Which is exactly what’s put me off mo cap movies to date. I can’t get into the movies because I can’t switch my brain off from recognising the bizarre plasticity of everything and getting to caught up in that. Won’t be seeing this, maybe on DVD from the local library later on down the line.

  • Conor

    Well there at least seems to be some attempt at stylization, meaning at least it doesn’t veer into the uncanny valley to the same degree as the Zemeckis travesties.

  • Tintin: The Secret of the Uncanny Valley!

  • Skip

    I realize that it’s motion capture, and mars needs moms lefty a bad taste in everyone’s mouth. However before anyone judges the trailer too harshly remember that this is only a teaser trailer, also it’s directed by Speilberg. For those two reasons I’m willing to give the film the benefit of the doubt.

    • Speilberg also directed Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

      • Jabberwocky

        I liked Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. >_> And for all that people are complaining about King Kong, it wasn’t that terrible, either. Not as fantastic as LotR, but not a travesty of film, either.

  • Clint H

    Tintin’s face is kinda weird, but I’ll still give this film a chance.

  • snip2354

    Looking at this again, why is this on Cartoon Brew? After all, it’s live-action! :P

  • Michel Van

    i grown up with Hergé’s ligne claire drawing style.
    and now i see a hyper realistic CGI Trailer
    That push true the Uncanny Valley !!!
    Hell i don’t wana count wrinkles in Tin Tin face!
    i dont wana see CGI realistic that real thing
    used live action film for that !
    wat was made with Tin Tin in 1960s
    Tintin and the Golden Fleece,
    Tintin and the Blue Oranges.
    I bet there better movies, as this future box office bomb…

  • Lib

    Are they afraid to show faces or are they intentionally hiding them because this is a teaser and that’s the one thing everybody wants to see?

    • Hal

      Pretty sure they’re intentionally hiding them to build “suspense” for the reveal of the character. Personally, I think there could have been a better money shot at the end (think how epic most Indy reveals are) than him next to a porthole, but that’s just me.

      • Ergo

        Yeah, since it’s our first real look at the character, you’d think they would’ve revealed something more powerful. The current one, especially in terms of displaying a readable emotion, just falls flat.

  • hmm

    How are they afraid to show his face when there’s a 3 second closeup of it? Of course theyre going to focus on action, it’s a teaser!

  • Law

    I’m excited about a Tintin movie, but another family film forced into the semi realistic 3D mold is a real let down for me. The great charm of most cartoons is how much they leave to the imagination in their visual simplicity.

    It would have been awesome to see cel shading or some other artistic direction explored in an effort to stay true to the feel of the comic.

    Instead I got the kind of deja vu that makes me wish I hand’t been there when I see the trailer/teaser… *shrug*


  • Paul K

    Did you see the part where the ship wrecks over the waves and crashes into sand dunes?

    That’s a visual metaphor for how this movie will likely be received by audiences.

    • Mr. James

      Another film franchise that is a sinking ship is the Pirates of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. Saw an advanced screening of that stinker on Tuesday and let me tell you folks, if you go see it LOWER YOUR EXPECTATIONS. It’s pretty awful. IMHO.

  • jordan reichek

    well, i’m not going to comment one way or another about what’s on the screen or about what the film may be in general.

    HOWEVER, i wonder if there’s a state of ‘animation shame’ that live action directors who venture in mo-cap/otherwise fully animated styles might have.

    in other words, if the characters and environmental design mimmick live action fairly closely, they really aren’t doing a ‘kiddie’ film…that it’s open to a more respected audience?

    i dunno. i generally love Spielberg’s stuff. i just don’t see how this more realistic approach helps a property that sprang from specific drawings. where’s the charm of the original?

    the French and Japanese maquettes i’ve seen of Tintin over the years seem to really capture Herge’s work in three dimensions while still holding the coolness of the drawings…it’s something that we don’t see in life.

    imagine Peanuts done this way by Joel Schumacher? yipes.

    i just wish some of these directors would ask if comic properties can suffer from too much “organic” drapery just for the sake of seeming more…live-actiony?

  • Steven M.

    I think they’ll save the reveal for when the movie releases, with which the audience will drop dead from the ugly monstrosity before them.

  • Clutch

    Why do we have to show dead people moving at Christmas time all the time?

    • Bud

      Yeah. Can’t they save that for Easter, the normal time of the year for dead people to come back to life?

  • Tintin’s face at the end … okay, may sound bad, but he looks like a pedophile. His eyes are small, its the hairstyle, the spaced-out glassy look in his eyes and his baby smooth skin that make me think that. He looks like … an adult trying to be a kid. I’ll probably still watch it because I really like the TinTin comics but based solely on this, if I was a kid I may be screaming ‘STRANGER DANGER’ in my mind if I saw a dude like that in an alley.

  • Manu R

    Proves yet again the hardest feature in any CG program to master is the delete button.

  • So Tilda Swinton is playing Tintin?

  • John

    Haters are going to hate!

  • Gray64

    Looks like it could be interesting, but…yes, it does beg the question why, of all things, screen capture 3D cgi? You could perfectly emulate Herge’s style in traditional 2D or a combination of 2D and cel shaded CGI, or some creative computer animation. If you wanted a 3D world, why not just do a live action film with CGI special effects? What on earth is gained through motion-capture other than seriously weirding people out?

  • After all the trouble they went through to make everything else look real, the plane crash ends up looking like cheap model work.

    Who exactly was crying out for this, aside from Spielberg himself?

    • Cody S

      What does it matter who was crying out for it?

      Spielberg and Jackson wanted to make it and they have the money and clout to do it. If you wanted to build model airplanes and sell them – and you had the ability to, why shouldn’t you? There isn’t much creativity or craft in only producing things people are “crying out for”. Why not just let the market decide “who wanted it” and leave it at that?

      It’s not like you paid for it up front or anything.

  • Spielberg?

    Ya know? I’m just going to wait and see. The trailer looks great (love the poster too). Look at it this way – if you took the name “Tintin” off the marquee – CartoonBrew would be drowning in drool.

    The thing looks gorgeous.

  • Liam Scanlan

    Looks better than Mars Needs Moms. And considering Nickelodeon’s involvement, it will go the route of the semi-mocap film Rango rather than Mars Needs Moms.

  • Tintin’s eyes (as well as all the other characters’ eyes, for that mattter) should definitely have been black dots! And the head shapes should have been more rounded, the noses more like small potatoes (at least they did that for the Dupondts)… generally, the faces should have been as stylized as in Hergé’s drawings. That stylization is part of what makes his character designs unique: Fairy realistic human bodies accompanied by caricatured faces. The fact that Spielberg and Jackson make Tintin’s body look realistic is not that much of a problem; but I think they’re losing something when doing it to the faces.

    Eyes and noses aside, however, the visual side of this movie doesn’t look too bad. I like parts of this trailer. However, I’m slightly annoyed that Hergé’s name is nowhere to be seen in its credits.

  • kongobot

    A nice trailer breakdown – and more than a few spoilers – over at the Empire mag website:


    Empire is cautiously optimistic about the last shot where Tin Tin’s face is revealed:

    “It’s hard to tell from an almost-still, or the short flash we see in this trailer, but he doesn’t appear to suffer from dead-eye syndrome.”

    • Vik

      There are some high-quality screencaps on the Empire website. Go check them out.

      I hate to say it but the Tintin in that final shot does NOT look really look like the character. The big eyes remind me of Astro Boy and Tintin’s nose looks wrong. He doesn’t look like himself when he’s rendered so realistically.

      And the shot of Snowy on the steps made me cringe. Snowy’s eyes were completely lacking in personality. The comic book “button eyes” really added to the cuteness of Snowy. Perhaps it will be different when the dog is moving/hopping around (do they mocap dogs?) but I’m not feeling good about Snowy at all.

      Also, IMO (and I’m a big Tintin fan) that out of the entire collection of Tintin stories, that they picked some of the weaker ones. I guess they were hoping to catch onto the PotC pirates craze as a hook for the kiddies. Perhaps kids who have never seen the original Tintin comics might like this movie.

      I just hope that film doesn’t degenerate into what most Hollywood action films have become…scene after scene of people running away as stuff explodes or people shoot at them. That’s all the awful “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” was and that film totally stunk.

      • Ergo

        Snowy is animated, not mo-cap.

  • Pieter

    It has been a long time since I read The Secret of the Unicorn but something keeps puzzling me.

    At the end of the trailer, you can hear Daniel Craig/Red Rackham say “who’s that man”? and then someone answers “That’s Tintin!”. If this implies that Red Rackham meets Tintin somewhere in the film, I cannot imagine how Spielberg transported our hero to a 17th century ship? From what I remember of the comic-book is that Red Rackham is only seen in relation to one of Haddock’s ancestors.

    Does anyone have more information on this?

    • Mahesh

      I’m pretty sure that is one of the present day villains asking the question to one of his henchmen.

    • Chris

      To be honest, Pieter, I think that Daniel Craig’s line (and it is definitely him) has been taken out of context and chopped for the purpose of the trailer. The “That’s Tintin” line said by another character more than likely occurs in a completely different scene to the one Red Rackham is in, as a guess…

    • am i watching a different trailer? I didnt hear those lines….

  • This doesn’t look bad at all! I think it looks much nicer than the first material that we saw. It looks like they’re putting a lot of care into this production!

    The dead-eye problem shouldn’t be such a big concern. They’re bound to look more life-like than single dots!

  • wgan

    we still get some hope if WETA is behind this

  • Ergo

    It’s Tintin. Not TinTin, not Tin Tin, not Tin-Tin or any other of the weird versions everyone keeps coming up with. Like any other name, it is a signle word with one capital.

  • My first thoughts:

    -I’m not a fan of Herge’s drawings. I know they are good drawings but I find the characters he draws boring to look at. That’s why I have read very little Tintin and a lot more Asterix, cause Uderzo’s drawings and characters are full of life and funny to look at.

    -Herge’s style wouldn’t work especially well in 3D anyway. The line is the most defined part of his drawings.

    -Life action has been tried before and the actors looked a little ridiculous with the clothes and hairdos.

    – That’s why motion capture doesn’t look like such a bad idea.

    Second thoughts:

    -Realistic comics work in life action while ‘comedy comics’ don’t. Asterix doesn’t work in life action cause Depardieu would never be as fat as Obelix, and he won’t have the same nose. That kind of thing makes the characters less funny.

    -Although its drawings are ‘humoristic’ Tintin is more of an adventure comic with some little comedy here and there, so we won’t loose a lot if the characters don’t look ‘so funny’. Also Herge was obsessed with details in the backgrounds. What can be more detailed than photorealism?

    Thoughts about the trailer:

    -This may be the same technique Zemeckis is using but so far I find it a lot more convincing. The movements of the characters are not too awkward and the eyes look more lively. There also seem to be more taste in the details. They don’t make characters extremely ugly like Zemeckis usually does (the kid in Mars Needs Moms).

    Thoughts about motion capture:

    -As much as I dislike the last Zemeckis’ movies and as much as I think certain movies shouldn’t be done in motion capture I’m not certain that the technique should be used for special effects only. I love cartoony cartoons more than anything else but I can understand people liking photorealistic animation, since there are photorealistic paintings and sculptures. Who am I to invalidate that option or the advance of the techniques?
    I’ll complain if, while watching Tintin, I feel the same awkwardness I felt when I watched Zemeckis movies, cause many times in those features I just don’t get the intention of the director. There were supposedly serious scenes in Beowulf and Christmas Carol that felt comedic because of the strange movements.

    So far Tintin looks ok at that. The characters that are supposed to be funny (Milu, Thompson and Thomson) seem to move funny and the others (Tintin, the bad guys) seem to move more dynamic.

    I don’t know what function should be the ‘adequate’ for motion capture but this movie looks like an interesting experiment that seems to look less ugly than Zemeckis’ works.

    But maybe I’m just biased cause I don’t like Herge’s drawings that much…

  • The Obvious

    Some history about this film:

    Realism was the look that Hergé wanted Spielberg to do when he scheduled a meeting with him about making a “Tintin” film just before he died (although motion capture did not exist at the time). After seeing “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” Hergé arranged to meet Steven Spielberg and Kathleen Kennedy in 1983 to discuss making a live action adaptation. Unfortunately, Hergé died just before they were to meet and instead, Spielberg met with Hergé’s widow.

    Ever since then, Spielberg has had her blessing to make this film. It was Peter Jackson(also a huge “Tintin” fan) who suggested that live action would be fine for the environments and not for the characters. He suggested that Spielberg should consider using “realistic” animated characters that would still honor Hergé’s wish to have a “realistic” depiction of the world without having actors in make-up like the early “Tintin” film Hergé did not like.

    This film is a long time coming, and I think the trailer looks great. It is nice to see Spielberg honoring one of Hergé’s last wishes.

    Of course “Tintin” would make a great animated film that was done with Hergé’s “ligne claire” drawing style, but that isn’t what Hergé wanted Spielberg to do. The television series that Nelvana did a while back uses Hergé’s style to tell the stories fairly well, and I’m sure it will be used again in the future. The look of this film, however, was not an arbitrary decision, and it honors the artist’s wishes with its realistic approach and with its choice of director.

    Just some background information for anyone who believes that Spielberg and Jackson made a recent decision to make a “Tintin” film and arbitrarily decided to not use Hergé’s style and instead use realism and motion capture because they just weren’t clever enough to see Hergé’s style is breathtaking.

    It’s easy to take a negative stance on this film after viewing the trailer by asserting that this film would have been better if it looked like the classic bandes dessinées it was based on, but the reality is that what Hergé himself wanted was a realistic “Tintin” film directed by Steven Spielberg, and that is what Jackson and Spielberg are trying to accomplish.

    • Hal

      Thank you for the history, had no idea how longstanding the Herge estate/Spielberg relationship has been.

    • Emm

      Hergé never had objections to live-action films based on Tintin (look at the list of films made). The characters looked ridiculous in the live-action Tintin films. I remember reading about the meeting between Hergé and Spielberg right before Hergé’s very sad death in 1983. :(

      Yes, Hergé was most enthusiastic about Spielberg making a Tintin film. Then again, there’s no where to go but up after “Tintin and the Blue Oranges,” so I can’t really blame Hergé for being excited about a kickass Tintin adventure film like “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom” being made.

      I dunno. I can’t work up much enthusiasm for this. I just have the idea that this was a concept whose time passed a long time back, probably in the late ’90s.

    • Hmm…thanks for that, I never knew that at all. Nice to know. A buddy of mine figures that with Spielberg AND Jackson working on this, its in really good hands and the guys know their stuff. I think sometimes comic-book adaptions to screen can lose a whole whack-load of the stuff that endeared them to audiences in the first place, especially when translated into a whole new format, like Garfield mixed with real life in 3D, or Sonic the Hedgehog in an animated series. I just wanted more of the same – 2D Garfield from the comics … but animated. Its too … different and bears only a passing resemblance to the original material. In fact I can’t really think of any property that got it really right, though I like the Spider-Man movies.

      Anyways, interesting to know this was Herge’s personal wish.

    • I’m afraid such explanation, that you consider obvious, does not stand up.

      • The Obvious

        The name “The Obvious” is used ‘tongue-in-cheek” and isn’t meant to be taken quite so literally. What I wrote in my comment was meant to convey some background information on the production history of the film. The contents of the comment probably don’t “stand up” because facts don’t have legs.

        Sorry about that.

    • Spencer

      My reaction:

      Mo-Cap is NOT REAL.

      • The Obvious

        Of course, and neither are CG set extensions, CG animals or props, or prosthetics in “live action” films. Realism and real are two different things, and I think the aim was to create something “realistic” and not “real.” This was never going to be a neorealism “Tintin” film.

        If someone thinks that the trailer looks awful and that the aesthetic is terrible that is their right. That is not the point of the post. I just wanted to address why the creators did not choose to make the characters look like Hergé’s drawings.

  • Matt Bell

    Blue screen blues, how wondrous new film making technologies seem to have currently killed off the magic & art of film making.

    Lets hope film makers acquire some RESTRAINT and TASTE in the implication of these and other technologies in the years to come. Currently all the dials are set to ELEVEN and are staying there.

    Dear Mr Spielberg, it’s like you’re no longer interested in actually making films that we might enjoy. And that you’re simply more interested in seeing how fast you can make us cry.

  • Reed Farralone

    Jackson’s “King Kong” wasn’t as big a misfire as “The Lovely Bones”. What a mess. Talk about not knowing what parts of a book to use or to leave out. “Tintin” should work but the filmmakers’ terror at revealing the main character only about seven seconds before the trailer ends tells us something. Hopefully this thing will amount to more than the more dead people at Christmas prediction of several posts ago.

  • Mark McDermott

    I think what concerned the Brew was the still several hundred posts back of the strange, doughy mass that was supposed to represent Captain Haddock’s head. If that was fixed (and couldn’t pros like Spielberg and Jackson have noticed the problems before they let that still loose) then maybe that’s a good sign.

  • Don’t show the faces! It creeps out the kids and enrages the fans!

  • The_Anim8r

    I appreciate what “the Obvious” sates a few posts above me. BUt even if there was no element of respecting Herge’s wishes in the choice of medium for this film, i wonder, how loyal should an interpretation be to its original source..if at all?
    Or can we just accept one artist’s (Spielberg/jackson here) re-imagination /interpretation of another artist’s work, in their own preferred medium (film), using their preferred tools (Mo-cap).
    That way there will be more surprises (sometimes good, sometimes bad). And after all, even Spielberg & Jackson can take away my original “bande dessinee” from me!:)

  • Oh man, with Edgar Wright and Steven Moffat writing?! If not for the uncanny valley effect, this movie would be an unstoppable force!

    • Ergo

      Yeah, the mo-cap stuff aside, every name attached to this just makes me look forward to it more.

  • Jane

    This should have been made in stop motion with CGI effects.

    But it wasn’t and what we have here is dead-ish. The eyes still look dead, the faces still look bad and on top of that the colors/light of this movie are really drab. Looking at the pictures on Empire everything there is so much blue. It’s like they said

    “We have complected control over this world, what colors should bring to it?”

    “I like blue”

    “I like blue too, let’s tint everything in blue!”

  • Justin

    set aside the wishes and over all. mo-cap.

    lets look at the details. of what tin tin is.

    exotic places
    and ground suspension of disbelief

    the trailer seemed to show all of that.
    the movement of the characters are that of frames from the comics and some from the cartoon. from the early 1990’s

    granted the screen shoots of the characters faces look pleasing and does feel like a a real version of the Tin Tin Cast. My only criticism is that Tin Tin himself is to thin, he has a rounded face and no define cheek bones, and he has a curved nose not a narrow nose.

    But the post production renderings look great, so I want to appualed the folks in set modeling, texture, lighting and comping, for all the long hours.

    TO address the lack of faces. It might be that give sense of “who is Tintin”. But it does give me an eh-erk, while the characters may look beutiful they won;t act buetifully.
    However the compensation for the lack of facial mo-cap maybe hidden with camera angels and directions of lights, that could be very dramatic, and give a suspenseful narrative.

  • Andrew Kieswetter

    It looks promising. I wonder if Rastapopulos (sic?) is the villain and will Bianca Castafiore and General Alcazar make appearences?

  • First, even for a teaser, this was weak; there was no sense of the characters or the story. The editor seemed to select every non-storytelling scene to increase the “mystery” but it only succeeded in making me say, “Wha’ the…?” Second, I don’t understand why the creators didn’t go full live-action or full animation. At this time, mocap in movies just doesn’t work, especially for humans. Why not just accept that limitation? This one will be a Netflix rental for me [can’t help but be curious :)]

    • Ergo

      The problem with mo-cap is that it is half live action, half animation… But it doesn’t take the best of both worlds and combines them. No, it takes the worst.

      Animation comes from a long history of illustration. We push poses, we create strong silouettes, the motion is pushed into a place that isn’t real, but is totally believable. Mo-cap is limited by the physicality of a real actor’s performance.

      Likewise, live action cinema, the joy comes from it all being so real, tangible and tactile. All of which goes out the window in mo-cap.

      The reason Gollum and King Kong looked so good wasn’t because they were motion captured, but because the motion capture was just the beginning. Each shot still had an animtor in there to push things to where it needed to be. I some cases, the motion capture information was thrown out altogether and replaced by pure animation. That seems to be forgotten by so many news sites I’ve seen.

  • Thanks for the trailer. Now I can save my money to best stuff.

    • …save my money FOR… an English Dictionary, probably…

  • this is not worthy of a remark.. (he remarked)

  • You guys, I don’t understand what all the uproar is about. I thought everyone realized that Hollywood is just out and out trolling us now. For the LULZ. Also, monies.

    • Matt

      “A man’s gotta be angry about SOMETHING” – a Sad Rule of the Universe

  • Donnie

    Looked good until that last second mo-cap face. Just shoot it in live action. Why make an animated film if all your going to do is make it look as life-like/ creepy as possible?

  • Royce

    I’ve no particular interest in seeing this movie. While I like Tintin I don’t think a live-action/CG mix was ever the way to go. On the plus side maybe Nelvana will finally release their animated series on Region 1 DVD finally to ride the film’s coattails.

  • Like the saying goes, “Just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean you SHOULD.

    Spielberg would have been better off just directing Tintin in full live action with simply good production design, strong performances and good direction.

    That’s all Steven. That’s all you had to do. And everyone would have loved you for it.

  • Pez

    I guess making the movie look like the comic was out of the question?

  • philippe

    I feel like american executives are great at extracting beautiful home grown foreign plants but forgeting to take the roots with them.The social and geographical context of Hergé and his Tintin made what they are. Erasing the local contexte is similar to taking the smurfs to Manhattan…another great branding idea.