Thursday, March 22, 2012

Movie Review: The Adventures of Tintin (2011)


First off, no one can deny how beautifully animated The Adventures of Tintin is. That is quite a feat in itself. Was it a good movie? Forgive me for saying so, but I feel that Steven Spielberg's style has become overly predictable and played out (he also cannot do comedy; the WWII spoof 1941 is a cliche-filled demonstration of that). It is not a bad movie; it is actually pretty entertaining with a myriad of impressive action scenes (the amount of time it must have taken to make them is mind-boggling). It does, however, get a bit long and makes me wonder to whom exactly it is marketed. Those familiar with the original inception of the character (the comics ran from 1929-1976) or perhaps a younger audience? I think that the length may push the limits of attention spans, especially for these demographics, and may be difficult for the latter group to follow (or maybe it was just me). It is not that it is particularly long at 107 minutes, but one learns from commentaries to Jackie Chan movies that the average American audience member only has the patience for about 3 minutes of constant action before he or she starts to lose full attention. The fact is that Tintin has so much action it becomes a bit exhausting. For some, absolutely, this is a good thing. However, there seems to be something about the movie that doesn't sit well with me. Perhaps it is that the narrative doesn't seem to be on par with the visuals, which appears to be the trend with many high budget movies. It keeps me from giving it a full recommendation, though I do endorse it for any who enjoy computer animation, or hearing the voice of Daniel Craig talk from a non-Daniel Craig body as well as the impressive range of voices that Andy Serkis is able to create.

No comments:

Post a Comment

You're on the mike, what's your beef?