The Adventures of Tintin

Tinindytin. Not many of this type of movie is made anymore/yet. “Yet" applies to a playful, ingenious, adventurous watch that sparks children’s enthusiasm; you know, that timeless Spielberg-Jones-esque dime-press entertainment. And “yet" applies to a picture where the special effects are there more than just to dazzle, but are for the good of the movie in all (creators’ and viewers’) respects. But this applies to the possibilities of non-static camera than about the excellently done 3D. The one, but absolutely fundamental hitch was the lackluster hero. Which was a problem already in the books, but here it is all the more obvious and Tintin ends up overshadowed by the Haddock/Snowy duo. OST score: 3/5 (10/26/2011)

I wasn’t looking forward to Tintin, so I can’t say I’m disappointed with the results. Actually, watching it in cinema on a very hectic day felt quite good. It’s nice to look at, undemanding, relaxing, entertaining… The humour is often almost cringe-worthy, but it’s effective in its own way. The animation was surprising, if the characters hadn’t been so clearly stylised, in some scenes I wouldn’t have been able to tell I’m not looking at something real (for instance, the first minutes at the marketplace). It’s not something to swoon over, but it’s OK for single-use fun. PS: Yesterday on TV I watched several scenes of the fourth Indiana Jones and I realised that in the last few years Spielberg has lost his sense of measure. I don’t like that kind of relentless action anymore. (11/20/2011)

A seemingly ideal combination of Spielberg and Hergé's comic book albums "The Crab with the Golden Claws," "The Secret of the Unicorn" and "Red Rackham's Treasure." Unfortunately, it used motion capture animation that ruined the whole thing. Personally, I remain faithful to the series and the old 1947 puppet film. (03/29/2022)

A technically perfect flick with a lot of visual ideas, but its inwardly impersonal and not funny at all. Did any of the characters work their way into your heart? Did Thomson and Thompson make you laugh? I suspect that this whole thing is just the first of the trailers for a future tourist attraction at Universal Studios. The BRILLIANT action scene in Morocco (which is the only highlight of the film apart from the opera scene) seems to indicate as much. (11/06/2011)

It is no longer necessary for anyone to bother with making a film adaptation of the legendary adventure game Broken Sword – in terms of atmosphere, that’s exactly how I imagined it. The exotic settings, the interconnectedness of the plot with history, the brilliant combination of humour and action. Furthermore, there is some slightly adventurous problem solving (figuring out what to do with what’s currently at hand, finding keys, combining objects). The economically managed narrative without a single unnecessary diversion is fully subordinated to the fluidity of the action, which, after the initial explanation of the context and the express introduction of the protagonist, only continues to build. The objective is clear, the fun can begin. With an average shot length of 4.8 seconds (according to the Cinemetrics website), it may have the fastest editing of any of Spielberg’s films, but compared to other 3D action movies, the shots do not alternate very often. On the contrary, great care is taken to arrange the action in space and to work with multiple plans of action simultaneously. It’s a bit in the spirit of slapstick; Spielberg long ago mastered the art of making the context clear through movement instead of words. The movement, whether vertical (forward) or horizontal (into the past), almost never stops and when, as in the middle of the desert, it seems for a moment that no action will happen, the wild hallucinations of one of the characters appear. In addition, the transitions between scenes are very inventively designed, which contributes to the impression of unprecedented fluidity. The rising action curve reaches its peak in a scene lasting several minutes without a single cut, for which I would not shy away from usin the word “masterful” to describe it. It’s all about having fun, isn’t it? But wasn’t the summation of the entire story in the title sequence intended to be a call to lower the demands on the intricacy and intellectually stimulating nature of the content and, with the fascination of a small child, to mainly enjoy the exciting spectacle? I haven’t had this much fun in a long time. Without feeling guilty about the silliness I was watching. The first time, the second time and the third time. And I have zero doubt that I will enjoy it the fourth time. 90% (01/15/2016)