The Adventures of Tintin Review

DISCLAIMER: I have never read any of the Tintin comic strips. This review is based solely on the film.

The Adventures of Tintin is the story of a young journalist/adventurer and his faithful terrier as they quest for one of the largest sunken pirate treasures in history. Based on the Secret of the Unicorn and Red Rackham's Treasure story arcs from the original comic strip, it was directed by Steven Spielberg and produced by Peter Jackson. It's visually stunning, and it might entertain children between the ages of 4 - 11, but ultimately I found it boring and derivative.

Tintin has a lot of exciting scenes, such as Tintin talking to his dog in the library, and Tintin talking to his dog in his flat. The character of Tintin is about as bland as can be. The boy adventurer has no "save the cat" moment, an event that makes the audience want to follow the character for the rest of the movie, and he is often outsmarted by his dog. Snowy the terrier is really the only smart character in the film; everyone else is portrait with a certain degree of buffoonery. There are several moments where the dog - and therefore, the audience - has figured something out well before the other characters, making the mystery aspects of the story somewhat irrelevant.

The first thing I asked my roommate after we watched the movie was, "What demographic do you think this was made for?" And though he enjoyed the movie as much as I didn't, he immediately admitted my point. Tintin is almost bipolar in it's content, moving from slapstick sight-gags to serious, emotional content with jarring speed. One moment, characters are being comically tossed about on a rolling ship, and the next moment a key character is being fatefully tempted by his alcohol addiction. One scene is nothing but talking heads, the next is a dazzling chase sequence. I just don't know who this movie was made for, kids or adults.

Again, while I've never read the source material, the film has many of the telltale signs of bad screen adaptation. In a comic, it makes sense for the lead character to explain what he's doing as he's doing it. In a movie, it comes off as redundant and boring. I often felt that Tintin only said certain lines because they were in the comic strip.

If there's one thing that can be said for Tintin, it is the quality of its visuals. It's a gorgeous movie, stretching computer generated images to their limits. There were moments when I literally forgot it was an animated movie, it looked so real. But almost too real at times, to the point of being creepy. It makes me wonder, if the goal was to make it look as real as possible, why not shoot it for real? Now, I could write an entire essay on the reliance on special effects, whether or not we should be pushing those limits, and if the medium actually supports the story or not. Ultimately, I never felt like the outstanding visual effects where used for any artistic reason or because they were the best way to make this movie; rather, because Spielberg and Jackson wanted to play with the same technology that made Avatar.

That's just my suspicion, however.

The Adventures of Tintin is a finely crafted money-maker, made to appeal to the lowest common denominator. It's stunning visuals will get most people excited, and it will surely please many "simpler" viewers. But most mature film-goers won't find any real content here.

The Adventures of Tintin releases in theaters this Wednesday.

Retro Review: Funny Face

I don't like musicals.

There. I said it.

I don't like them because, usually, their stories are nothing more than an excuse to get to the next song and dance number. And that's fine if you're into that sort of thing. It's not for me. Usually. And while Funny Face is another notch on my musicals-I-don't-care-for-stick, it did change some things up.

Funny Face tells the story of a young, intellectual woman (the ever-raveshing Audrey Hepburn) who is whisked away into the world of fashion and modeling. Of course, they go to Paris. And Fred Astaire too, and he dances. The musical numbers are decent, but only one or two memorable songs. Besides Audrey, the acting is sub par. However, unlike most musicals where the story is a slave to pushing the musical numbers forward, I found this story actually interesting! It dealt with society, and expectations, and art vs. intellect, and it almost had something to say. But then those pesky musical numbers kept popping up and it was like they were getting in the way. This movie came so close to captivating me, but every time it almost got there, people would break into another song and dance and kill the momentum.

This leads me to beg the question: why did this movie have to be a musical? I mean, seriously! Imagine if Fred and Audrey had to actually deal with their differences instead of just dancing around to make it better. There could have been actual character depth had the characters been given enough time to actually grow before randomly breaking into song. Funny Face came so close to doing something interesting, but its music, the very nature of its genre, held it back. And its music wasn't even that good.

I guess the flip side is, would it's musical numbers have been any better if it didn't have such a worthy story?

The Muppets Review

They're back! And you probably never knew how much you missed them. The Muppets, opening this Wednesday, hails the return of Kermit and the gang to cinemas. Though the world has changed quite a bit since their heyday, their message is still the same; that laughter is the third best gift you can give someone.

The plot is fairly simple. The Muppets have disbanded and Kermit has signed over ownership of the Muppets' Theatre under the impression that it will be made into a Muppet Museum. In all actuality, he has given it to a wealthy oil tycoon who plans on tearing the place down to drill for oil. Kermit must raise a whopping $10 million in order to buy his theatre back. And that means the Muppets will have to come together for one more show. What follows is that strange mix of the sincere and the ridiculous that those of us who grew up with the Muppets have come to expect from them.

This film is a return to form, complete with musical numbers and post-modern insight where the characters reference that they're in a movie. The best part of this is that it doesn't try to modernize the Muppets. It doesn't try to make them relevant to today's audience. It recognizes that their message is still relevant, and therefore, so are they. The Muppets are about bringing laughter and joy to as many people as they can. Their zany brand of comedy is simultaneously hilarious and heartwarming. It will have you crying from laughter one moment, and choking back tears of joy the next.

So what didn't I like about it. Not enough Lew Zealand? Frank Oz's presence was sorely missed (Eric Jacobson, who takes over for Oz, does a decent job, but hardcore fans will be able to tell the difference). And there were times when I felt that Jason Segel and Amy Adams were acting a bit too childish. Part of the charm of the Muppets is how the live performers commit to the material and take it so seriously. Segel and Adams' performances might have bordered on the melodramatic a little too much. But these gripes are, for the most part, easily overlooked.

Bottom line: The Muppets is a wonderful, heartfelt comedy that's sure to please any Muppets fan or those just looking for a silly time. But it might not be for those who take their movie-going experience a little too seriously.

The Ides of March Review

I hate politics. So who'd have thought I would find myself engrossed in a film like The Ides of March, a story about a battle for the Democratic Primary? It takes a little while to get past all the rhetoric some characters spew at you, but this film is more about the sleazy, underhanded dealings that take place in our political system.

One thing I didn't know is that George Clooney directed and co-wrote this film. And he did a pretty slick job, too. A lot of the time, the composition of his frame is rather tight. Some scenes are shot entirely in close up. It crafts an intimate feeling and sets it against the backdrop of sleaze-ball politics. The final shot of the film is beautifully simplistic.

The acting is top notch across the board, which isn't too surprising considering the stellar cast. Leads include Clooney, Ryan Gosling and Philip Seymour Hoffman, and even has the likes of Paul Giamatti and Marisa Tomei in the supporting cast. Yeah, stellar.

The movie is NOT about political ideologies. It offers no forward-thinking answers to our countries current troubles, nor does it endorse one ideology over another. It paints an intimate portrait of the underhanded dealings in politics, regardless of ideology and party. In fact, it was probably a smart move on left-leaning Hollywood's part to center the story on Democrats, as using Republicans might have looked vindictive.

This was a good movie, with a compelling story and great performances. Go see it if you're looking for a character driven narrative or are interested in the behind-the-scenes world of politics. Skip it if you're looking for the answer to our current political woes, because you won't find it here.

The Avengers trailer: Details and Impressions

So most of you already know that yesterday Marvel released the first trailer for it's upcoming motion picture, The Avengers. And as most of you could assume, I've already watched it at least half a dozen times. Since I like to analyze the crap out of things, see what hidden details or secrets I can find, let's take a look at what this trailer has to offer. If you haven't seen it already, you can do so here. Okay, let's get into the nitty-gritty!

00:16:17 - Loki appears to be attacking/breaking-in/out of some facility. Where is this? The Helicarrier maybe?

00:20:11 - What is that spear-looking item that Loki is holding?

• 01:01:16 - Is that it again in the bottom right corner? So now it's in Avenger's custody?
• 01:27:14 - Another look at Loki's spear thingy.

00:21:01-00:23:14 - Cars exploding for no apparent reason. We can now assume that many of the effects shots have not been finished, which is to be expected as the film's release date is quite far away. At least the explosions look good.

00:41:21 - Cap's new costume. Honestly, I'm not sure if I like this. While it's design is accurate to the comic book, it looks too much like, well . . . a costume, and not a uniform like in his last movie. The fact the the trailer shows very little of him in action in the full getup doesn't help.

00:42:17 - Mjolnir looks different. The haft definitely has new detail, and maybe it's the angle, but the whole thing looks larger.

00:51:18 - The Quinjet? I'm putting my money on "yes!"

00:53:07 - Tony Stark wearing a Black Sabbath t-shirt. A fun little bit of fan service, and a nice nod to Jon Favreau's heavy-metal vision of the previous Iron Man films.

01:22:12 - Thor fighting Cap. Why?

01:24:07 - Cap using an assault rifle. Interesting, as Cap usually isn't portrayed as using guns. And where's his shield in this scene?

01:28:04 - Who is shooting what?

• 01:29:04 - Thor and Cap looking up, presumably at whatever was shooting the weird energy blasts in the previous shot. Who/what are they looking at? The Skrull?

General Impressions

Overall, I like this trailer. It hints at some of the tension between characters, and hopefully will fulfill that group dynamic we've been waiting for. It certainly looks like Robert Downey Jr. will continue to steal the show.

Hopes

I'd like to see a little more of the Hulk, and I hope he gets some lines beyond the obligatory "Hulk smash!" Also, let's get a glimpse of this mystery-thing in the air that everyone is looking up at. We already know that the Avengers are an epic team, but they need a villain worthy of their epicness. Give us a clue as to what kind of challenge they're facing!

Fears

There's potential for this to be a bit cheesy. The Nick Fury speech at the beginning is kind of lame, but I get the distinct impression that it's cut to match the pacing of the trailer, and may even be taken from multiple scenes. And I'm betting Tony's "we'll avenge it" line doesn't make the final cut. As for now, I trust this film's creative team.

Well, those are my thoughts anyway. What did you think of the trailer?

"Old Movies That Should Be Games"

IGN just posted this article a few hours ago where they discuss (cult) classic films that should be made into brand new video games. It's pretty fun in a nostalgic sort of way. But I think they got it wrong, or maybe played it just a little too safe. Almost all of their choices fit neatly into a pre-established genre of game. Would a Lethal Weapon game really fare much better than all those failed Matrix games? Nearly every pick they have would be made into just another generic action game with a new coat of paint (not a better coat, just a different one). They wouldn't do anything new, taking away from the uniqueness off the license. The only films on this list that I think could make good games are Escape From New York and Equilibrium. If those were handled correctly, I could see them offering a unique gaming experience.

But can we put together a better list?

I have two nominations for this proposed old-movie-new-game treatment. The first is The Great Escape. I imagine this would be like something like Batman: Arkum Asylum mixed with a puzzle game. You'd be stuck in this one location for basically the whole game, but as you gain new tools and information, you unlock new areas of the POW camp. They could also make it reactive, so if you screw up on one interaction with the guards, they find your secret tunnel, and you have to move on to a new plan. Of course, the final level would end up as a motor cycle chase across the German countryside.

My second pick is Gladiator. Sure, it's not that old, but it's still a classic. I'd like to see this as a kind of RPG with elements of both real-time strategy and 3D fighter mechanics. The game would basically be broken down into two kinds of "levels" or phases, preparation and battle. Since I'm all about decision-making in games, the actions you take in the preparation phase can have a dramatic influence on the course of the battle. And the reputation you gain in the battle will garner you new abilities for both on and off the field. And . . . maybe make it open ended? Give the player the chance to conquer all of Rome!

So, those are my ideas. What do you think? What old movies would you like to see made into a game?

Real Steel

'Real Steel' is a boxing movie. And like all good boxing movies, that means it's about redemption and that it has a lot of heart. 'Real Steel's' turbulent first act pays off big in the end in some surprising ways. It's not ground breaking, but what it does, it does well.

The characters in this movie get off to a rocky start. Hugh Jackman plays a lowlife degenerate who makes every wrong choice and appears to have no redeeming qualities what-so-ever. It's not until nearly the end of the first act that he does anything that makes me want to follow him for the rest of the movie. What follows is a long, hard road to becoming the good-guy. It's not the type of hero that audiences are used to seeing Jackman play, but he pulls it off well.

The acting in general is top notch. Even the kid, a venerable kiss-of-death to any movie (in this one played by Dakota Goyo) puts on a decent performance. And he seems to have no qualms appearing along side Hollywood A-listers. He might be one to watch for in the future.

If I were to try to find something wrong with this movie, it would probably be the characterization of the lead robot, Atom. It is, for the most part, rather bland and one dimensional. Now I have to admit, I was expecting/hoping for a kind of 'Old Yeller' tale with this guy. But rather than making Atom a character in his own right, he's more of a mechanism for the Jackman and Goyo characters to connect. Still, they kept saying/implying there was something special about him, but we never find out what or why. It almost feels like a whole subplot was cut out of the movie. I can't help but feel this was a missed opportunity to do something really cool, something to personify the father/son relationship in a non-living character.

But that might be asking too much from this kind of movie. 'Real Steel' is about a rocky father/son relationship and boxing. And it does both those things well. This movie is good for what it is.

If you like boxing or sporting movies, or flicks with big robots that pound each other, you'll probably enjoy 'Real Steel.' It may not be much, but it's got a lot of heart.