Ryan McNeil
The first movie I ever saw was Disney’s PINOCCHIO at the wide-eyed age of four. It was an afternoon of wonder for yours truly – laughing at donkeys, frightened by whales, dazzled by a pretty lady in blue. It seemed to encapsulate everything a boy wanted to do with his free time – namely, strike out for adventure.
It’s been a long time, but the closest I’ve come to feeling that way again as an adult has been inspired by TINTIN.
Tintin (Jamie Bell) is a young reporter with a knack for solving mysteries that confound the police – not that the local police are all that difficult to confound. Early on we meet the law in the form of Thompson and Thompson (Simon Pegg and Nick Frost), and we realize that they are just as likely to help a pickpocket get home safely as arrest him. But back to our hero.
One afternoon, he buys a model ship – The Unicorn specifically – and soon discovers that it is quite the find as several unsavoury gentlemen try to barter it away from him. With the help of his faithful friend Snowy, he is able to discover that the model ship contains a secret – a vial that keeps a cryptic piece of paper. However, try as he might, Tintin hasn’t the foggiest clue what the passage written on that paper means.
Before he can find out, he is suddenly kidnapped and held captive on a freighter bound for parts unknown. The ship’s commanding officer – a chap named Ivan Ivanovitch Sakharine (Daniel Craig) – seems vaguely familiar to Tintin. He should, he’s one of the men who was so desperately trying to get The Unicorn and its mysterious note from him in the marketplace. He seems bound and determined to unlock The Unicorn’s secret…by hook or by crook.
Happily, Tintin has some muscle on his side in the form of Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis). Drunk as he may be, he bonds quickly with Tintin and proves to be a valuable asset. Together they team up to learn and protect the secrets of The Unicorn, and do all they can to learn why both Sakharine and Haddock have ties to the bounty they’re being led towards.
Steven Spielberg evolved as a director after SCHINDLER’S LIST. After that watershed film in 1993, he wasn’t as interested in telling tales of adventure quite as much (his only pair of straight adventure films were both sequels to films he’s already made). That’s not to knock his choices in the last twenty years: I actually believe he has made some wonderful and sometimes underrated movies in that time. But the maturity in his films can easily be tied to his maturity as a man, since of course our palette changes and sharpens as we grow up. However, the unexpected side effect of Spielberg stepping away from adventure is that many of us forgot just how well he can direct an adventure film. Going back to where it all started is just Spielberg’s jumping-off point – the fact that this time he doesn’t need to pay any regard to the laws of physics is what elevates it to something special.
Allowing Spielberg to do this is his first foray into 3-D. TINTIN is proof-positive that intentional 3-D in the hands of a master can add depth and fluidity to a film, rather than feeling like a tacked-on gimmick. (Sidenote: I still don’t believe audiences should be charged extra for the privilege). In a way, many of the film’s best 3-D moments are excuses for Spielberg to riff off what he has done over the years in a new way. In that mindset, he riffs well…lovingly drawing without straight-out copying. One would hope that studios would pay attention to the critical success of 3-D in the hands of a visionary. They won’t…but one can always hope.
If there’s a hitch to this TINTIN story, it’s the feeling that the stakes are either low or nonexistent. When you’re listening to a tale of daring-do, you want to feel as if the brave hero is continually risking life and limb in the face of certain danger. Tintin and Haddock certainly risk their necks time and again, but it feels as if it comes without purpose. Should Sakharine succeed in uniting the three scrolls and unearthing the loot, it will be bummer for our heroes…but they’ll live. It’s not even like Indiana Jones where the engine driving his adventures were for a greater good. Tintin has a personal interest in the quest he’s on, but nobody’s world is going to end should he fail. It’s a flaw I was able to forgive thanks to the fun I was having, but from a storytelling perspective it might be too offputting for some.
TINTIN makes up for any storytelling missteps by focusing in on kinetic visuals. The hurdle for motion-capture animation has always been getting past the artifice its characters embody. TINTIN is able to clear that hurdle primarily by building off the original simplicity in these characters’ design, but more so by building up the world around them. When one reads stories like these as a child, one’s imagination swirls with visions of vast deserts, crowded markets, and stormy seas. Seeing those visions come to life – and likewise watching our heroes work so well within them – is what allows us to embrace the look of its film. We end up falling hard for the places we go, and not lingering on the flaws in the faces we see.
What Jackson and Spielberg have done with TINTIN is create an experience that has to be seen to be understood. On the page, the story might seem like something one outgrows around the age of nine. On the screen though, all of the excitement and wonder comes through, making for something sensory and joyful. The film taps into the boundless imagination we have as nine-year-olds and sends that spirit of wonder coursing through our veins. It has us playing fort, tag, and capture the flag all at the same time.
If that doesn’t sound like fun to you, then I weep for your inner nine-year-old.
Good review. I really loved this film and I agree that it fills us up with wonder like how it would if we were 9 (I’m 19 now…not much difference). I actually took along this grandmother of mine, who isn’t that old but it’s still been years since she saw the inside of a movie theatre, and she enjoyed it every bit as I did. So did the rest of the audience. It was fantastic.
I really hope the AMPAS consider it for Best Animation.
I think it is in the running for best animation, and given the sort of year it’s been, I think it has to be considered a favorite. Glad you enjoyed it as I was starting to think this was more of a “boy movie” (Every woman I’ve talked to has shrugged their shoulders at it).
Did your grandmother like the 3-D?
Yes she did. Very much.
All my female friends, who were proper Tintin fans too (I’m not) loved it.
Somehow, knowing all of that brings a big smile to my face.
It was great fun and certainly tapped into my “inner 9 year old” – only 8 years ago for myself mind you 😉
Don’t rub it in there kid-o.
I found it much too hyper for me and far from the return to form for Spielberg that everyone seems eager to label it. I don’t like the mo-cap (although it is technically impressive) and I can’t help but think that it would’ve been a much better live-action film. You mention that the stakes are low and I agree. Not only will the character’s live if the villain triumphs, I was never connected enough with them or the situation to feel any tension in the action scenes. There’s some good moments throughout but I was wholly underwhelmed. Nice review though!
The action set pieces didn’t feel like classic Spielberg to you? The two pirate ships battling it out, or the Baghar chase sequence?
Nope. The whole film was shot so modernly that for me it felt like it could have been anyone behind the camera. If I didn’t know it going in, I never would guess it was Spielberg.
The aesthetic might have been a little different (though lord knwos WAR HORSE had the Spielberg aesthetic), but the energy was definitely classic INDIANA JONES with traces of GOONIES thrown in.
He might be using different tools as time marches on (with film disappearing, he might *have* to), but the pacing and tone of a Speilberg film is unmistakeable.