I’ve been promising to go and see this for weeks but on Saturday I seized my free morning, went and got my friend a nice bottle of something for their engagement party, blitzed Coventry City Centre for some Christmas shopping and, as a reward for doing Santa’s work, took myself off to the cinema to see ‘The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn” (I’ll just call it ‘Adventures of Tintin’ from now on).
Based on some of the titles from the classic Hergé comic books (‘The Crab with the Golden Claws’ 1941, ‘The Secret of the Unicorn’ 1943 and ‘Red Rackham's Treasure’ 1944) ‘Adventures of Tintin’ follows the titular young journalist as he uncovers clues to a mystery held by a model ship named the ‘Unicorn’. Through his own investigations Tintin joins forces with the Whiskey soaked Captain Haddock and the two set off on an adventure to uncover the secret of the Unicorn.
Oh Mr Spielberg! Come in from the cold, it’s lovely to have you back! This is a directorial return to form after some questionable choices Spielberg has made (COUGHcrystalskullCOUGHtheterminalCOUGH!). Unlike those other endeavours, ‘Adventures of Tintin’ is a joy to behold.
I haven’t read any of the source material but I’m aware of it (aware enough to get the joke at the start of the film). As I understand it, the plot is an amalgam of three different Hergé stories and I can see how this would annoy the purists (but then everything annoys purists…) however it never came across on screen; it didn’t feel patched together. I think it was a very old school adventure. The way the story darts from a European city to a boat in the middle of the sea to made up middle-eastern country felt very much like those bits in Indiana Jones when he’s travelling from one country to another and a map comes up and a picture of a plane and a red line tracks his journey! I like that about it, it makes it feel like a proper global adventure :-)
The film has been shot using Performance Capture. Please note the use of the word ‘Performance’ as opposed to the more commonly used phrase, ‘Motion Capture’. I’m deliberately calling it that because in this film they are definitely performing and not just moving about.
Many reviews have praised Andy Serkis (who plays both Captain Archibald Haddock and his ancestor Sir Francis Haddocke) and they’re right to do so. It’s a stunning turn, highly comedic, enjoyable for adults and children alike and it’s cemented him as the irrefutable King of this technology.
I think, maybe because Serkis turns out such a blinder, Jamie Bell has been forgotten slightly and I don’t think that’s very fair. It’s not a flashy performance but I really think
Nick Frost and Simon Pegg are good as Thomson and Thompson (try and spot the difference, there’s at least one). I found their little sub-plot story with Aristides Silk (played by Toby ‘Dreamlord’ Jones) quite funny and will appeal to fans of slapstick.
I was a bit let down by Ivan Ivanovitch Sakharine (Daniel Craig). Not that I think he’s soft or anything (quite the contrary, I think he could potentially be brilliant), it’s just for me he was a bit underwritten. There wasn’t a great deal to him other than standing around looking ominous, I think he needs ramping up to ‘Jafar from Aladdin’ levels of bad-assery.
The script is excellent. It drags you in to Tintin’s world and I was pleasantly surprised that, seeing as three people had a hand in it, the dialogue felt like one voice. It never got too heavy and was always family friendly. I also want to applaud who ever came up with the name ‘Karaboudjan’ because it’s a great name to hear and to say!
The set pieces are fantastic. There is a flash back sequence set on the Unicorn that is nothing short of breathtaking. Likewise the chase sequence around Bagghar, the airplane scene, the scene on the Karaboudjan, they’re all stunning. I’ve heard some people say that it just goes from one big set piece to another big set piece; I’d disagree. I thought, for a film that travels around the world as much as this one does, it fits together quite nicely and I never felt the action sequences were at the expense of the story.
I went to a 3D screening and I don’t think it added anything to my overall enjoyment of the film; in fact there were bits where the camera swoops and spins around where my eyes just couldn’t keep up and it all went a bit blurry. The animation (it’s doing it a disservice to call it animation but I can think of no other word) is sublime. The depictions of the characters are a mix of real life and caricature which I quite like. It’s real enough to be impressive (the wind blowing through Tintin’s hair is awesome) but they’ve all got a slightly cartoony, round faced (all except Sakharine who has a bad guy, angular face) quality which I found really endearing.
There is an argument that it’s a ‘boy’s own’ adventure and I’m inclined to agree. The screening I was in was me and an audience full of young boys and their dads, which I thought was rather sweet. It is male orientated but I’m a girl and I never felt alienated by it. As far as I’m concerned a good film is a good film, end of.
So, aside from a slightly under-developed bad guy and unnecessary 3D I thoroughly enjoyed ‘Adventures of Tintin’. Wholesome enough for kids, funny and engaging enough for adults with actions sequences that will leave all ages speechless. I’ll fess up, it wasn’t until I read a review of this on ‘Den of Geek’ that I decided I wanted to see it, I thought the animation might freak me out or the story might be a bit non-existent but I’ve never been happier to be wrong. Great snakes indeed :-)
It’s Tuesday, it’s grey and cold, I fancy some…
Reasons to be Cheerful :-)
1. The next JJ Abrams ‘Star Trek’ film has a release date! It’s looking like a Mid-May 2013 US release, which sounds like a long way away but with the ‘Avengers’ and ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ coming out next year 2012 is going to be RAMMED with cinematic Sci-fi nerdery so perhaps 2013 is a better bet. Also, this might just be me, but there isn’t enough room between sequels anymore. As much as I love Chris Hemsworth I do not need to see three films featuring Thor (get you teeth round that one!) in as many years (Thor in 2011, Avengers in 2012 and Thor 2 has a 2013 release date), I think a 4 year gap is fine between films. There’s no mention of a
2. Good lord aren’t these men attractive?!?!? Two lovely men in one film (all my Christmases etc etc). ‘This Means War’ pits Chris ‘Kirk’ Pine against Tom ‘Bane’ Hardy in a story of two CIA Agents and best friends that fall for the same girl (Reece Witherspoon). The trailer looks alright if a bit cheesy. But hey, even if it is tosh, those boys are very very pretty :-)
3. Official Christmas ‘Who’ info! So after the first (rather uninformative) picture and the subtle trailer we have a trio of pictures from the Christmas special and the official plot synopsis. It sounds delightful, Christmassy fare and I’m looking forward to it!
4. I’ve read one of the first reviews for ‘The Muppets’. I was almost in tears reading the review so it’s entirely possible I’ll have a full on emotional breakdown when I go and see it next February. 73 days to go!!!
That’s all I’ve got for you today. I’ll be back later this week with a review of Misfits, series 3 episode 5 :-)
Goodbye till next time :-)
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
No comments:
Post a Comment