The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Tintin (2011)

Tintin, in America, is almost a niche thing. You have to have accidentally been introduced to it in order to know what it is. In 3rd grade, my classmates began reading the comics in class, and I became so intrigued that I acquired the comics for myself from the library. Out of the 21 official volumes, I have read 19 (somehow never made it to two of them), but Tintin has been something that I have long since forgotten about.

Now here comes Spielberg, making a movie I would have desired 12 years ago, and one that I was skeptical about. Tintin came to Spielberg's attention in the 80s, when his Indiana Jones was compared to the intrepid reporter from Brussels. I'm thankful he didn't make the film then, even though he received Hergé's (Tintin's author) blessing to adapt it. But he didn't need to do another Indiana Jones then.

The formula of Tintin is almost Hitchcockian as he accidentally stumbles across trouble and then it gets worse from there (although unlike Hithcock's ombudsmen, he is a very resourceful and intelligent reporter). Tintin (Jamie Bell) himself is a one-dimensional character with no flaws, in both comic book and celluloid form. This is a bit unfortunate, but I guess I'm happy the screenwriters didn't try and saddle him with some made up backstory. Fans of the series will forgive this, but I'm not so sure newcomers will be as quick to accept the character.

Of course, this is why Tintin has a fairly strong array of supporting members, most notably the drunk, alliterative curser (though his vocabulary doesn't include anything that would make the film PG-13) Captain Archibald Haddock (Andy Serkis). Captain Haddock is a nice, dark contrast to the always optimistic, never-do-wrong Tintin, and his incompetence can be a bit predictable, but he shines at the right moment. There are also Interpol cops Thompson and Thomson (Simon Pegg and Nick Frost) and Tintin's dog Snowy.

I guess I should back up and give a brief summary of the story. Tintin purchases a beautiful ship model in a market, and is immediately harassed for it by two interested buyers (one is the villain, Sakharine (Daniel Craig)). He soon discovers a scroll hidden within the ship which contains a riddle, and sets out on a globe trotting quest to solve the Mystery of the Unicorn (the name of the ship the model is based on).

Probably one of the largest concerns with the film comes down to the use of Motion Capture, rather then just letting animators freely create the movements. It's a controversial format that has only been successful in James Cameron's Avatar (2009), and even that blended the Mo-Cap with live actors (and the mo-cap aliens had big eyes, so it was easy to erase the dead eye effect). Tintin is so far the best use of Mo-Cap I've seen (full use), and actually seems to address a lot of the dead eye effect issues. I still think the format needs some tweaking, and I still believe letting animators create the movements is the best way, but it still works really well in this film. Andy Serkis gives the best performance, and is a master of the art form, having portrayed Gollum, King Kong, and most recently Caesar in the last Planet of the Apes movie. His performance adds a lot.

But what it comes down to, besides story, besides character, is how much fun the film is, and I haven't been this exhilarated by a film in a long time. It takes its time getting going as Tintin gets a lot of scenes where he just speaks out loud to no one in particular (except his faithful dog Snowy) about the mysteries he is pondering, but once Haddock is introduced, the film takes off. From a thrilling sea plane ride through a thunderstorm, to an unbelievable 5 minute unbroken shot detailing a chase through Morocco, to a final battle involving shipping cranes. Spielberg takes the form of animation and uses it freely, and the result is pure...awesome.

At that's really the best justification for it: Spielberg does things in this film that could not have been achieved in Live Action without a significant amount of CGI, which would have made it look like a cartoon. The Moroccan sequence is particularly spectacular, but throughout the whole film Spielberg's camera moves freely, as if he's a child delighted by a new toy he's discovered. Granted all this movement might become a little sickening in 3D, but in 2D it is perfectly amazing (though I would like to see this on IMAX).

The film opens with a sweet scene where a man modeled after Hergé's visage (the creator of Tintin), sketches a portrait of the young lad that is exactly like the comic book drawings. We are then introduced to the "real" Tintin, and this is a memorable introduction for longtime fans of the books. But how this film will do in America is beyond me. It received an end-of-October release date across Europe and won't hit our cinemas until Christmas (in case you're wondering, I was in Europe when it came out, so I saw it then). The producers are hoping that it will do well enough in Europe that it will generate some interest in America, and if the film does well enough Peter Jackson will helm the sequel (once he's done with The Hobbit).

I highly recommend you all see it. It's a good family film as well, though some families may take the lampooning of Haddock's alcoholism as something that isn't appropriate for children (though I think they can handle it). It may not be perfect, but it's a damn good time at the cinemas. It's what Indiana Jones IV should have been.

The 2009 Oscar-Nominated Short Films: Animated

It's that time again! Oscar weekend! And with Oscar weekend comes my viewing of all the short films. I saw the animated category this past Wednesday, and tomorrow morning I plan to venture out and see the Live Action shorts. So, what did this year hold?

The presentation was fixed this time, no stupid quotes from people about short films. Instead, a title card indicated whether the film was nominated or "Highly Acclaimed" (the running time was just over 60 minutes for all the films, so three were added to bring it to 90). How did this batch hold up?

Overall I'd say the quality overall was higher, though there were none that are as good as Le Maison en Petits Cubes, which to my delight won last year. Still, with a new Wallace & Gromit and a bitingly hilarious satire of our culture, there were a few stand-outs.

First up, French Roast (France, 8 minutes), a clever little film that is essentially one shot spanning an entire day at a café where a gentlemen has forgotten his money and tries different methods to get out of the situation. Recurring characters include a bum, a waiter, and a little old nun who I guess is masquerading as a serial killer. It's funny, but it ain't much of a film otherwise.

Second, La dama y la muerte (The Lady and Death, Spain, 8 min.), a zany movie about a widow who longs to join her deceased husband. Death comes to collect her, but is defied by a hunky doctor with several nurses on his bulging arms, and a battle between death and life ensues that goes way over the top. It's funny, and conveys an interesting message about when its time to die, but that also gets lost in the over-the-top humor that permeates the film. Antonio Banderas was a producer, as a side note.

Third, the new Wallace & Gromit movie "A Matter of Loaf and Death" (U.K., 30 min). The longest of the bunch, this is another classic Wallace & Gromit tale that puts the two as bakers, with a baker serial killer on the loose. It's kind of obvious right away that the woman Wallace falls for is the serial killer in question, but that doesn't stop the film from being zany fun with plenty of cheeky humor. However, it also doesn't live up to the standards of the original Wallace & Gromit shorts, A Grand Day Out, Close Shave, and The Wrong Trousers. You kind of know what to expect at this point, and while its always enjoyable to see the duo at it again, the film's climax goes way over the top and I kind of wished for something a little more original with the two. Still, funny as hell, and the likely winner since Wallace & Gromit is an Academy favorite.

Fourth, Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty (Ireland, 6 min), a very funny story of a Granny who tells her grandchild the story of Sleeping Beauty...with a few twists of her own. The movie is really funny and has a lot of laughs, but two major technical issues bothered me. First, the sound wasn't mixed properly so the old lady shrieked to high heaven and nearly made me deaf. But even more bothersome was the animation itself, which looked cheap, and out of sync with the audio. I love a good story, but if there is no polish or glaring errors, I get pulled out, which makes Granny O'Grimm my least favorite of the lot.

Then the program went to Highly Acclaimed films, which confused me because I had only counted four so far and wondered where the fifth one was (maybe they didn't get rights?). Of the Highly Acclaimed section, we got Partly Cloudy (U.S., 6 min), the cloud movie that showed up before Up; Runaway (Canada, 12 min), a very strange, yet strikingly funny tale of train ride that goes horribly, horribly wrong when the conductor goes to sleep with one of the passengers; and The Kinematograph (Poland, 10 - 12 ish min), a tale of a fictional inventor in the 19th century perfecting motion pictures. This one should have been spectacular, but it has an annoying subplot where is wife or daughter or whoever has consumption and dies. A film like this could have been much better, but is drawn down by hokey dialogue and a hokey message.

A message then appeared on the screen, saying that the final film contained violence and strong language, warning obviously the stupid parents in the theater who brought their kids thinking all animation was for children (which there were none of on a Wednesday afternoon) would leave.

Finally, we got the final nomination, Logorama (France, 16 min), by far the best film of the bunch, and one that you need to see to really understand. It takes place in an alternate Los Angeles where literally everything is some sort of corporate logo. MSN butterflies fly around, the Michelin men are the cops, Big Boy picks his nose, Pringles wolf-whistles at Esso girl, and the Pilsbury doughboy works in a diner. Literally it goes on from there, endlessly continuing on and featuring around 2,500 corporations (or so I read somewhere). Basically, you could say this is how the world sees us, and they wouldn't be far off. Ronald McDonald himself is a the villain of the piece, taking hostages and transporting arms and nuclear materials. Will this win? Probably not, I think it is too polarizing for the Academy voters, but hey, they gave it to Le Maison last year so I could be (rightfully) wrong.

Tomorrow, the Live Action films, then my predictions. Only 30 hours left until the show!