Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

A Newer, Bigger TINTIN Trailer!!


Merrick here...

An AICN reader named Yves called this to our attention - it's a newer, fuller trailer for the Steven Spielberg-directed, Peter Jackson-produced, John Williams-scored ADVENTURES OF TINTIN. 


The script for this is by Edgar Wright (HOT FUZZ, SHAUN OF THE DEAD, SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD), Joe Cornish (ATTACK THE BLOCK) and Steven Moffat (COUPLING, and the current DOCTOR WHO and SHERLOCK shows on BBC) - a coolness overload of almost unimaginable dimension. 


--- follow Merrick on Twitter ! ---


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • July 11, 2011, 10:43 a.m. CST

    Why are they hiding his face like it's a big surprise?

    by knowthyself

    I don't get it.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:44 a.m. CST

    Looks fucking CREEPY.

    by knowthyself

  • July 11, 2011, 10:46 a.m. CST

    still not sure about this one...

    by baronweazle

    .....but then again I'm dutch and we all grew up on tin tin(kuifje), so it has a lot to live up to to us. Hell the old theme is still hummoing through my head as I write this!

  • And by, the way, Spielberg is a producer on this film too.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:46 a.m. CST

    Doesn't BERG have anything better to do?

    by JMoe

  • July 11, 2011, 10:46 a.m. CST

    This is going to tank

    by jimmy_009

    It looks stuffy, old-fashioned, and unfunny. Guy falls down stairs!!! Comedy gold! I'm sure for baby-boomers this is nostalgic or something, but it's way too out of place and ho-hum for this decade. Add to that that they should have just used real actors seeing as how the characters aren't doing anything that requires digital stand-ins and you have another Mars Needs Moms. The only thing that could save it is the names attached.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:47 a.m. CST

    uncanny valley

    by NedNederlander

  • July 11, 2011, 10:47 a.m. CST

    Wow! The cinematography looks EXCELLENT!

    by D.Vader

    The lighting, the camera moves, the blocking... Definitely looks like an animated movie directed by a Master filmmaker.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:48 a.m. CST

    Because, knowthyself

    by D.Vader

    They're building Tintin up to be a HERO. Not just some regular joe.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:48 a.m. CST

    Pixar would never do characters like this.

    by jimmy_009

    They know it's creepy and unnecessarily. Plus they'd inject some kind of energy into it, this trailer drags along and feels lifeless.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:48 a.m. CST

    Not too bad

    by lochkray

    They might just be on the right side of the uncanny valley - but its gonna be close. May be just cartoon-y enough to pull it off, but hopefully realistic enough that the action carries some weight and urgency. Anyway, Mr.Spielberg has earned more than enough trust from this customer, so I'll give him the benefit-of-the-doubt. Looks interesting.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:50 a.m. CST

    The physics are all screwed up...

    by jimmy_009

    When that guy hits the pole you can see where they had to switch from mo-cap to hand animation. It looks terrible. He bounces up and then floats there for way too long before coming down on a completely weird arc. F mo-cap. Hopefully this and Mars Needs Mom is it's swan song.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:51 a.m. CST

    When animation looks real... then whats the point???

    by Jerry Piper

  • July 11, 2011, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Why not just make everything more expressive or cartoony?

    by D Ropaela

    Those 'real' faces just about ruin this.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:53 a.m. CST

    There is no point, other than to creep people out

    by jimmy_009

    I would watch this in a second with live action actors. You literally get nothing added here by doing it with mocap creepy characters. And we miss out on a GOOD Speilberg movie instead of a weird novelty sideshow act.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:54 a.m. CST

    Not interested in this at all

    by sunwukong86

  • How many people even know that Academy Award winning Happy Feet was motion capture (and beat Pixar)? This legitimately looks terrific and you are clearly looking for something to hate. This is done entirely differently using different technology by very talented people and it shows. (Not to mention that as far as I am concerned, the humans in Toy Story 3 were FAR creepier). The trailer is poorly edited in the beginning, I admit but they are trying very hard to sell it to people like you, who for no reason at all, throw needless accusations. You really have absolutely no baseline for what you don't like. Everything gets thrown into the same basket. But it's just a trailer the footage itself is what sells it. I am yet to meet a single person who watched the original teaser in theaters and didn't absolutely love it. This will be a HUGE hit.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:56 a.m. CST


    by MattHooper

    I'll see the movie because Steven directed it and it looks easily better than that Indiana Jones film which shall no longer be named. But if it isn't more than what's in that trailer, I'll be very disappointed. And Spielberg has now developed a nasty habit of disappointing me.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:57 a.m. CST

    People who say "nothing is added with mocap" miss the point

    by D.Vader

    The point is combine both elements- Herge's designs but with real actors performing the characters. You may not like it, but there IS a point to it and thought behind it.

  • July 11, 2011, 11 a.m. CST

    Habit, Matt? Wow, aren't you hard to please.

    by Proman1984

    And I bet you just hated Munich. Your opinion may just be worthless.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:02 a.m. CST

    The problem with that vader...

    by jimmy_009 that Herges designs aren't meant to be brought into the real world as a direct translation. That's F'ing creepy. Your brain is fighting between this being a real world and there being horribly disfigured mutants in it, or this being a cartoon world that's not behaving at all like a cartoon (i.e. real world physics and stiff characters). This would be infinitely better with real actors. Period. And don't bring up Happy Feet as a defense of -anything-. That movie is TERRIBLE.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:03 a.m. CST

    Am I out of touch or does this look really bland and unexciting?

    by Astronut

    I'm being serious. I saw nothing that could not have been filmed using real locations and real actors. Why do it as Zemeckis-style mo-cap? Why? Why not film it as live action and augment characters a bit using CG? Does anyone have a rational answer? This will go down in filmmaking history as one of the very few bombs Spielberg ever put his name on. Mark my words.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:05 a.m. CST

    Looks Wholesome!

    by PotSmokinAlien

    And I don't mean that as a bad thing. The gee-whiz attitude of the trailer combined with the fact that Edgar Wright wrote the script makes me kind of want to see this, but I'm 31-- I obsessively read Tintin as a kid, so I'm definitely who they're trying to rope in. (It's working, is what I'm trying to say here.)

  • July 11, 2011, 11:06 a.m. CST

    Took out the appeal of the character

    by rur

    Whatever appeal TinTin had visually has been blasted by the power of realism. Those are not Herge's designs. If you want to see Herge's designs work in 3D see some of the TinTin sculpts that have been done over the years, in Europe. Those sculpts are simple, clean, have appeal and more importantly are the designs Herge created. I wonder what would happen if Mickey Mouse or any other of our popular characters were taken by another country and redesigned. Mickey Realistic Rat.. This film looks like a case of a bunch of men who nobody can say no to, running amok with a creation they never invented or which they had. The first thing they will tell you is the all black eyes don't work.. It used to be that animators could bring anything to life, trees, cars, buildings.. suddenly these days.. all black eyes do not work. You know what does not work? Lack of imagination.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:06 a.m. CST

    That bearded guy

    by dukeroberts

    That bearded guy looks just like Morgan from Chuck.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:07 a.m. CST

    The problem is that you're actually -in- touch astronut ...

    by jimmy_009

    It's the filmmakers who are out of touch shooting a stuffy bunch of stories in a completely pointless, creepy, and no doubt soon-to-be-out-the-door fashion.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:08 a.m. CST

    And regarding why Indy 4 is an awesome movie

    by Proman1984

    I really get a strong sense, that most so-called Indy fans don't even understand the franchise they are so enamoured with. Each installement had been a masterful twist on a different genre. Raiders was primarily an Action film. Temple of Doom (my favorite) is Adventure/Mistery and Last Crusade was another staple, Action Comedy. What all of these films have in common though, is that they are grounded in the same realm of 1930s Adventure Serials. Obviosuly something had to change in the next film but, to that extent, Indy 4 continued that tradition with a riff on Science Fiction movies of the 1950s. It is amazing to me how many people miss that. Yes, it is in a different tradition, and it does play by different rules but the switch is an entirely understandable one. Once you understand that the change had to be made, it because extremely easy to not only accept it but to see the film as actually something quite brilliant and very very clever. Things that some people claim as silly are actually perfectly in line with the paranoiadal, faux-science, nuclear destructed, creature infested sprit of those works. I dug that a heck of a lot. There are scenes here that are in the best traditions but still entirely original, that I love. It practically oozes that kind of appeal but I guess you just have to know. Still, what amazes me, is how people pretend that previous films were always very realistic. Like, that wouldn't have happened in Raiders. Again, I ask, do you even understand the franchise? Speaking purely of its directorial merits (as in, how it was _directed_), Indy 4 is pretty superb and uses every opportunity in the script to the maximum. Now, I acknowlege that the script has *some* flaws (though many ways, their extent come down to taste) but let's get real here, most people who make comments about how the film was made either don't understand the job of the director or don't know what they wanted from the movie in the first place. Just as they don't realize that Spieberg was more restricted in decisions pertaining to this particular film than he normally would be (hint: he isn't a producer on the franchise) and had other important people to compromise with. The script does have certan flaws and, if Spielberg had his say it would have been a *different* one but the end result is one fine film that gave this viewer an enourmous amount of pleasure. There is a reason why it's rated 'Certified Fresh' on Rotten Tomatoes. I don't want there to be note of defensiveness in my tone - I am bullish on the film because I like it a lot. Yes, some people are very vocal about that movie, and in the end, I think it comes down to them having widely different ideas about where THEY (and they alone) wanted the franchise to go after so many years. Or maybe, they just didn't want to see an old(er) Indy. However, instead of buing squimish about Ford's age they should marvel and how phsyicial he is that role and how much he had to do. Also, get a baseline what falls into a "should not be named" category. Don't pretend like you don't know how bad, bad films really are. Spare me your hyberbolic AICN drama cr@p.

  • If it walks like a turd, looks like a turd, it IS a turd.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:08 a.m. CST

    Way better than teaser trailer, IMO

    by firewhale

    Like many, I got a bad Zemeckis vibe from the first trailer. Not sure how they did it, but I got almost none of the creepy, "doll eyes" feel in this trailer. Cautiously optimistic...

  • July 11, 2011, 11:09 a.m. CST

    My brain is fighting nothing, jimmy

    by D.Vader

    I don't have a conflict between realistic lighting and Herge's designs looking a bit more realistic but still a bit faithful to his drawings. "Horribly disfigured mutants" is incredibly hyperbolic. If this was live-action, you're not going to find the actors you want who also look like the original drawings. You're creeped out. You're not alone. But don't assume that feeling applies to everyone, because it doesn't. As for Happy Feet, I didn't bring it up, someone else did. But its not a terrible movie either.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Jimmy_009... sunwukong86... haters...

    by workshed

    ...if you don't like Tintin why the hell are you watching this..? F*cking trolls with too much time on their hands.? You bet. I grew up watching and reading Tintin and I'm hoping my kids will fall in love with TT, Snowy, Haddock and the Thomsons as much as I did as a young lad in the 1970s. Imo this looks like Spielberg and Jackson have nailed it. Magic. Now, where's that 1080p trailer.?

  • I cannot stress how freaking excited I am about PROMETHIUS, especially. God I hope Ridley still has the LV-426 love and magic in his bag..............

  • July 11, 2011, 11:23 a.m. CST

    At least someone would laugh instead of no one.

    by jimmy_009

    I think there are plenty of ways to make that cat gag funny. They went with one that didn't.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:27 a.m. CST

    @Workshed I have to like everything?

    by sunwukong86

    Oh, I'm a hater because I dont like something you do? Grow up dude. People who use the term hater usually cant give a good reason why someone else should like the same thing they do.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:28 a.m. CST

    this looks like shit

    by suckabagofdicks

    initial thoughts? this looks like pure shit. it has that awful polar express "creepy dead eyes" problem. None of the jokes work, NOT ONE OF THEM, and the tone seems all over the place. WHY IS THIS MOVIE EVEN A CARTOON!?! Ug steven, just accept that you no longer make FUN amblin movies and every time you try you fail (i'm looking at you indiana jones and the kingdom of the crystal skulls, easily one of the worst movies of the year it came out in, i don't even recall what year it came out and neither do you because NO ONE has seen that shitty movie since it came out) I miss GREMLINS and EMPIRE OF THE SUN Spielberg as much as the next movie nerd but after Jurrasic Park the Lost World you transitioned to more mature, thought provoking and subtle films. thats great. i LOVES ME SOME MUNICH!!!!!!! but this just looks awful. it doesn't help that they are treating this like it's based on some legendary classic literature and we should all be very familiar with these characters. WHO IN AMERICA HAS EVER HEARD OF THIS TINTIN UNICORN SHIT?!?!?! ug.

  • This looks like it would be fantastic as a live action movie. I don't see the point of animating it.

  • Especially after that E.T. debacle. But other than that, I'm just not feeling it just yet.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:32 a.m. CST

    Let the whining begin in 1. 2. Oh crap, too late...

    by Jay

    Honestly, all I hear is that nobody's ever heard of Tintin and it will flop because of it. And yet all of a sudden everyone's an experts on this 80 year old Belgian comic. Funny how that happens on the internet. Guess what guys, America isn't the only place in the world. Even in Canada we had a Tintin cartoon and the comics. As far as Tintin is concerned, America is in the minority. And this movie looks exactly like those comics. Sorry doubters, this movie will be huge. Maybe not all that domestically, but again, you're not the only people on the globe.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST

    proman1984 re: Indy 4

    by bah

    What 1950s sci-fi movies does Indy 4 resemble? I'm no aficionado of the genre, but the movie is nothing like the 50s sci-fi I'm familiar with. Also, the genre-bending hypothesis ignores the other Indy media -- books, video games, and Young Indy. All action adventure, period.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:36 a.m. CST

    It's Spielberg so it will atleast be decent

    by Ryan

  • July 11, 2011, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Mouth movement looks good

    by Inexplicable_Nuclear_Balls

    At least they're getting closer to displaying natural speaking movements. I'm indifferent to this film. If I see it, fine. If I don't, no problem.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:38 a.m. CST

    d.vader re: missing the point

    by bah

    If that's true, then only the characters should have been mocapped, with the rest of it real. *That* would have been revolutionary. But I'm watching this and thinking how cool it would be to see these as real stunts and real sets.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:39 a.m. CST

    The Unicorn Express

    by hotairballoons

    ...but a bit less creepy, I must say.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:39 a.m. CST

    Can some of you guys get a real opinion please...

    by Andrew Coleman

    "It looks like shit!"... Wow you bitter fuck. As a fan of the comics or books whatever you want to call them as a kid this looks amazing. I get these days it's really "cool" or whatever to be bitter all the fucking time. For me this looks very interesting. I get the use of mocap instead of using actors because they want it to look like the books. Come on you guys I thought this movie would be the one to break this endless cycle of self loathing bull shit. Guess I'm wrong. I guess to you guys everything sucks all the time. It's boring. Get a real opinion.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    In-cinema 3D made a HUGE difference in the first trailer

    by Arteska

    Much much more compelling that way than on computer. I imagine it's the same for this one, which is still very good. The talent behind this already feels like it's for the ages.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    creepy as hell

    by redmule

    they should have made it MORE cartoony. Uncanny valley like a mo fo.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST


    by werewolfbynight

    It does'nt look nearly as creepy the Zemeckis stuff. Polar Express and Beowulf and A Christmas Carol were fucking freaky, man. The only one I watched all the way through was Beowulf. After it was over i felt like I had been raped by my grandma. This looks better. Why? Because the characters are well suited for animation. And the motion capture was altered to look animated.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Alternatively, why not hand animate it?

    by bah

    Make it *truly* look like the comic. Somewhere between making them look like the comic and making them look real there's a serious disconnect.

  • Watching the trailer again, they nailed Herges style. They simply couldn't do this without CG. It would look silly live action because the fantastical elements would be CG anyways. Essentially you guys would have got what you complain about anyways: actors in front of a green screen. I feel so bad for the people who see animation and scoff. I'm amazed the medium is still is being looked down upon. I feel even worse for people who say "Who's Tintin?" or "Who cares about Tintin?" like it's a bad thing. Please, go add more to Transformers 3s domestic gross. Tintin hasn't needed you for the last 80 years. So I think he'll do just fine without you.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:44 a.m. CST

    so everyone kind of resembles their chracter..


    except tin-tin, who looks like generic boy, but with the hair thing. he looks more 'realistic' in the face than the rest, who all bear some stylistic, though quasi realistic resemblance to their illustrated characters. add me to the list that think this will be a creepy flop. it probably seemed like a good idea when they started it years ago and pirates were still in vogue along with turning children's novels into movies... now it already seems passe.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:46 a.m. CST


    by D.Vader

    Whoa now that would have been trippy. Honestly, I think that would have made the complainers complain even more. These characters do not fit in a real live-action background at all. They're in the spaces between spaces.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:47 a.m. CST

    hate on me haters......

    by suckabagofdicks

    a movie is a movie. it needs to stand on it's own. PERIOD. this trailer sells TINTIN to the TINTIN fan crowd very well i'm sure. Too bad not one single person i have ever spoken to has EVER heard of it. What they SHOULD be doing is selling the uninitiated (just about everyone in america at least) to this world. Also, i can have an opinion. And some people could look past the dead eyes and weird mouth lip syncing thing going on in all of zemekis' mo cap movies. I could not. Unfortunatly the VERY few snippets of dialogue in this tintin trailer look just as bad and distracting as polar express and it's kin. Also, FACT, just because it's a kids movie doens't mean the jokes have to be immature. PIXAR knows this. no one else, unfortunatly not even speilberg seems too.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Bummer, I'll wait for a live action Tintin

    by Flip63Hole

    This looks terrible. First Spielberg movie I'll be passing on...

  • July 11, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Looks wank.

    by BiggusDickus

    Getting a Dick Tracy vibe from the prosthetics, but overall? Wank.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:49 a.m. CST

    Watching this, I kept waiting for Davy, Goliath and Gumby to show up.

    by cookylamoo

  • July 11, 2011, 11:49 a.m. CST

    That looked fucking spectacular

    by SilentP

    You guys are such cynical douchebags, I swear to god. The faces are weird, but otherwise that looks amazing. I just watched that trailer like 3 times in a row. Haven't seen an adventure movie of this caliber in awhile. I think this is my most anticipated movie of the year now.

  • On the other hand, I still think this thing is going to do massive business overseas, and I really don't give a flying fuck if the U.S. cares. We're a bunch of fucking spoiled children in this country. My complaints, as well as most on this TB, has to do with the disappointing and uneasy blend of the 'real' and the stylized. The real faces are a big drawback at this stage right now, and faces, last time I checked, are pretty fucking important when it comes to having any kind of emotional connection to the characters.

  • With limited CG, no less. Maybe the books have more insane landscapes, but there's nothing in this trailer. And again, I'm a proponent of CG where applicable. Basically, I see this as a missed opportunity for a great, old school, live action adventure movie.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:50 a.m. CST

    *have to do*


  • July 11, 2011, 11:51 a.m. CST

    d.vader: actually, now I think of it...

    by bah

    it would probably look like the end of that Simpsons Halloween episode, with CG Homer in the real world. I take it back.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Not getting my hard earned shilling

    by kingralphuk

    Looks like a dull kids film that kids won't watch because it doesn't have robots lobotomising one another in it.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:52 a.m. CST

    Million Dollar FAIL

    by teddy_duchamp

    What a waste of time and money. Why not just shoot real actors??

  • July 11, 2011, 11:52 a.m. CST

    Live action!?

    by mus42

    Why are people aking for a Live action Tintin? I guess no one here remembers live action Popeye. I think Tintin looks great, but then I'm not a sad Yank who demands every movie is based on some American folk hero...wankers...

  • July 11, 2011, 11:53 a.m. CST

    there is still no real weight, contact or connection


    like other people said, its in this weird realm of being realistic and being stylized but is not enough of either. it's 'in between'. the entire THING is uncanny valley. people getting hit didn't look like they were being hit. all the physical action looked 'soft' somehow.all of that would have been fine if it was pure animation or cartoon, but seeing as how it's about 85% realism, it doesn't work. it's off putting. and i'm not hating on it, i'm just saying if it doesn't bother you or feel 'off' then you need to get your eyes and possibly brain checked out. liking something because everyone hates it is just as pitiful as hating something because everyone likes it. admit it, this shit looks OFF

  • July 11, 2011, 11:55 a.m. CST

    @myphdisdoom I'll give you a real opinion

    by sunwukong86

    The trailer didnt sell me on anything. The animation looks like what we've seen before. Sure i might be ignorant to the whole world of TinTin, but the trailer didnt give me any reason not to be. I knew nothing about LOTR or Harry Potter before the movies and the trailers got me wanting to see the movies. Nothing to me says go see this on opening weekend other than maybe Spielberg and Williams. Im not bashing this or saying its going to suck. Its simply something im not interested in.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:56 a.m. CST


    by seasider

    I don't think Mickey Mouse is a good example for the point you're trying to make. I suppose Spielberg and Jackson could've just taken Herge's drawings on Tintin and simply aped it into their movie but then critics would accuse them of being lazy or unoriginal. This is not the first time Tintin has been adapted nor is it the first time "liberties" were taken with the character. As for your label of Spielberg and Jackson as someone nobody can no to. Spielberg had to really fight to get financing of this movie after studios like Universal were turning him down. You may disagree with his take on Tintin but to accuse him of not caring about the material is just stupid.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Haha, Bah

    by D.Vader

    That's EXACTLY what I was thinking about too!

  • July 11, 2011, 11:57 a.m. CST

    Live action Popeye? That was gorgeous!

    by bah

    Its problem had nothing to do with being live action. It was the meandering, incoherent script. Visually, it was stunning, including the comci-y stuff.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:02 p.m. CST

    That's a good argument goldentribe

    by SilentP

    You back up your point excellently.

  • So fuck off.

  • I'm saying this looks like a movie the calibre of which I have not seen in awhile. Are you retarded?

  • The modern world is a ridiculous place.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:07 p.m. CST

    moronic backpedalling response in 3 ... 2 .... 1 ...

    by golden tribw

  • July 11, 2011, 12:09 p.m. CST

    Huh. Well I'll be damned. That looked...decent

    by FeralAngel

    Extremely decent. One of the best trailers I've seen recently. May check this out after all...

  • July 11, 2011, 12:09 p.m. CST

    I do have a clue! The trailer is a clue!

    by SilentP

    Yeah, no, it's clear from your comments that I am more retarded, emphatic and extreme than you.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:10 p.m. CST

    Than I? I'm not hating on this movie, I'm hating on you, dumbass.

    by golden tribw

  • July 11, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST


    by golden tribw

  • July 11, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    As much as I would like to see a Tintin movie...

    by bubcus

    This is half-cartoony / half-creep factor. It reminds me why I didn't bother seeing Polar Bear Express. I look at this trailer and keep thinking: "they should have kept the black beady eyes of the comics." The "action" in this trailer seems very stiff... the slow motion trip at the top of the stairs, the punches, ... it looks very sluggish. I'm torn about this. I would love to support a Tintin movie but what I see in this trailer frustrates me. (*for the record, I am an animator so I'm used to having to study fluidity of motion).

  • July 11, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Surprise, surprise.


    Someone named bibleman acting like an insecure, jingoistic, homophobic whiner. CHOPPED.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    You're hating on me for thinking the movie looks awesome

    by SilentP

    Because apparently I'm not allowed to form opinions based on trailers.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST

    Unless it is that the movie looks awful.

    by SilentP

    That opinion is okay to have. But saying it looks amazing makes me retarded because I haven't seen the movie and how could I know that omg I'm so stupid!!!1one

  • You are 'allowed' to do whatever you like. Go ahead and look forward to it -- they're going to need your box office dollars, let me tell you right now. It's seeing someone rave about how it's their most-anticipated movie of the year after a trailer this mediocre, not only that but declaring it to be a whole different quality level from (whatever else) based on same that gets my goat. My point is that your response to the trailer was more emotional and irrational than the hatingest troll-flung diatribes, simply in the opposite (positive) direction. And that earns you contempt.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:25 p.m. CST

    It was an exciting trailer

    by SilentP

    It excited me. I'm not seeing how that's irrational... unless you think the only rational opinion possible is that it is not exciting.

  • deserves their sad and fearful lot in life.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Looks awful

    by Munsford

    The story may work, the camera visuals are great, but the motion capture and character designs look awful. I think the live action Tintin films made in France looked better. Motion capture only works if you have real animators really work it over. This looks like real people in bad masks.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:29 p.m. CST

    It looks good

    by wildphantom07

    It doesn't look like the second coming. Just a really fun exciting family adventure movie, in an interesting style. No more, no less. I'm there.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:30 p.m. CST


    by workshed

    There are already two 'live action' TinTin movies. 'TT+ the Golden Fleece' and TT and the Blue Oranges'. Golden Fleece is superb but Blue Oranges is a boring by comparison. I can't believe the amount of hate for this already. I've been coming here fourteen years and I've never seen opinion so divided. Btw... I'm no fan of Polar Express/Mars Needs Moms, or ANY previous mo-cap - but this looks a gamechanger. Also, the haters at AICN need to get their heads around the fact that the good ol' days of Dick Smith sfx make-up, Henson animatronic creature design, big-budget location shooting etc etc... it's gone, unaffordable. We've entered a world of digital blood and smoke and, unfortunately, there's no going back.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:37 p.m. CST

    No Bibleman...

    by workshed

    ...that's a race on the Isle of Wight! I think I'll be calling this 'Tintin', but then I have to be careful not to get confused with that excellent songsmith and early member of Duran Duran (the band, not the character from Barbarella), Stephen Duffy. That's Stephen Duffy, not 'Duffy'. Oh, fuck it. TT it is. Oh, wait... Terminator Two? Three?

  • July 11, 2011, 12:41 p.m. CST

    TT in 3D...

    by workshed

    Despite my liking of Herge's creation, THIS is the TT you've been looking for...

  • The atmospheric-'mystery' mood is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:01 p.m. CST

    Children all over the worlds are rushing to see TINTIN!

    by Knobules

    Except in the US where they dont give sht.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:02 p.m. CST

    World not worlds. So many beers...

    by Knobules

  • July 11, 2011, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Looks like utter shit

    by Volllllume3

    And I'm not joking. Looks like Spielberg completely missed the point on TinTin.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Haddock is Scottish?

    by BenBraddock

    I did not know that. Anyway, he looks OK, and the rest of them too, it's just Tintin himself that should have been less realistic. Any-hoo, I'm interested!!

  • July 11, 2011, 1:22 p.m. CST

    Those of you that come here to whine make me sad.

    by End_Of_Line

    This looks like a fun adventure film. I am an American. I read Tintin. Maybe I'm not the norm, but everyone saying American's don't give a shit are missing the point. Maybe YOU aren't familiar, maybe YOU don't give a shit - but don't say no one in America knows who this character is. This country is a melting pot of people from all over the world, and there is room for this film - I think it will do a lot better than some of you are guessing. Maybe after seeing this film, American's WILL give a shit about Tintin. They are fun adventure comics of a slightly different breed (what? you actually have to read??). I believe Spielberg and Jackson's intent is to introduce this character to millions of people that maybe they aren't familiar with. Bravo for them. America is NOT the only market in the world. More and more, films are making more money outside of the States. Is it wrong of them to make a film that is beloved by those audiences? Not one bit. I think they are making this movie to have FUN - and when Spielberg and Jackson are having fun, the results are usually pretty darn entertaining. This film looks like it will be a great afternoon at the cinema, and I'm in. So many of y'all are so jaded and bitter about being grown up that it seems you just forgot how to have fun - not every movie is for everybody. Get over yourselves. If you don't like it - move on. More for us.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:23 p.m. CST

    THIS!!! WILL!!! BOMB!!! FACT!!!

    by CreepyThinMan

  • July 11, 2011, 1:27 p.m. CST

    This is going to tank

    by Saracen1

    It might tank in the US. So? <p> The Adventures of Tintin are published in 80 languages and have sold hundreds of millions of copies worldwide. I spent five years of my childhood in a foreign country, and in that time I read all the Tintin books. I LOVED them. There are generations of readers out there all through the world that grew up reading Tintin. <p> This movie will make enormous bank, and will possibly be the highest grossing animated film of all time. <p> There IS an entire world out there besides our United States that goes to the movies, you know. <p> But what else should I be expect from your typical stupid, ignorant talkbalker?

  • July 11, 2011, 1:34 p.m. CST

    My two cents.

    by Lobanhaki2

    First, would so many people think it was creepy if they weren't concentrating on trying to discern the flaws because it was motion captured? Second, what is the criteria by which the motion capture is being judged as terrible? It's like people saying "Bad CGI", even though the thing is globally illuminated within an inch of it's life, rendered with photorealistic textures, and animated with realistic physics. Truth is, it's all fake, nothing's real, and once you get that, you don't get creeped out. I don't. I just say, it's animated, and whatever makes it more really just is icing on the cake.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Someone convince me why i should care about TinTin

    by sunwukong86

    So far all its been is, youre an ignorant American who has no understanding of outside culture. Seriously, convince me, because the trailer hasnt.

  • And the rest of the world turns Tintin into one of the most successful movie series ever. While America jumps up and down screaming like a spoilt brat because it's not the centre of attention anymore.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:41 p.m. CST

    don't know the comics

    by driftwood

    will not know the movie.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:42 p.m. CST

    If it isn't in HD, then I'm not watching it.

    by Lee

    *Entitled new-ager stands his ground*

  • A kid with a gun? In 2011? In a kids movie? That, my friends, is gonna go over like a lead brick when this movie opens. No one will be talking about mo cap, slo cap and no crap...they will be talking about a major motion picture in which the hero is a Kid...WITH A GUN!

  • July 11, 2011, 1:50 p.m. CST

    Christ, if the TBs are anything to go by...

    by Lee wonder Hollywood is afraid to take a punt. If that trailer doesn't stir a sense of adventure in you, then you've obviously lost any shred of wonder. ...and in my most condescending voice: I feel pretty sorry for those unwilling to just enjoy things for what they are. Those announcing that they 'won't see it' just come across as having a serious case of over-entitlement.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:59 p.m. CST

    Tin Tin looks 10, sound 20.

    by jimmy_009

    How old is he supposed to be in the comics?

  • July 11, 2011, 2 p.m. CST


    by Lee

    Mid-teens, I think. He's a schoolboy reporter, so around that age anyway.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Tintin, Spielberg, Williams, Jackson, Wright.

    by Carl XVI Gustaf

    It had me on Tintin, Spielberg! The rest is just added awesome. It will make a ridiculous amount of money outside of the U.S. (I am still surprised how "unknown" Tintin apparently is there.) Not that it will matter much tho, they'll get their money back and then some anyway.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:09 p.m. CST

    To all who whine about how mo-cap makes it look creepy.

    by pr0g2west

    I think it looks great. As close to real as you can get with pure cgi these days. As time goes on, it will become more and more realistic, and more and more creepy. Because when the day comes that you cant tell cgi from real life, that will be truly creepy. At least Spielberg put some cartoonish fantasy elements into this, as to remind the audience that this isnt an attempt to emulate realism, but to simply tell an adventure story.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Looks good but...

    by Benja

    Far more excited about War Horse.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:48 p.m. CST


    by CreepyThinMan

  • July 11, 2011, 2:49 p.m. CST

    Very dull trailer.

    by Paul Dronet

    That trailer did absolutely nothing to get me excited or interested in the film. I shall pass.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:49 p.m. CST

    So much talent involved, yet it looks like boring shit

    by ShiftyEyedDog

    Spielberg, Jackson, Wright, Moffat.... wow, what a group! ...but this looks like crap, is completely uninteresting, and yes, will flop.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:50 p.m. CST

    Lets hope its as good as Hook.

    by Knobules

    Because like TinTin. The Peter Pan story has been enjoyed by children around the world for many years. Oh right. That was Spielberg and it was disgusting (good colored slop food) and stupid.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:02 p.m. CST


    by vorlonkosh

  • July 11, 2011, 3:11 p.m. CST


    by Roketopunch

    This looks like a group of older fanboys whipped up that nobody really cares about... Wait...

  • July 11, 2011, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Looks like SHIT.

    by KilliK

    I like it.

  • I don't need it to be in 3D, though.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:42 p.m. CST

    So the XXX Parody of TINTIN will be titled TEENTEEN?

    by KilliK


  • No Uncanny here...move on. Don't jump on the bandwagon.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:55 p.m. CST

    No idea why this is animated

    by orange84

    I got bored just watching the trailer. The animation was just ok. I am sure a lot of work into it but I do not understand why it was done this way. Live action would have brought in bigger BO. It looks like a video game.

  • July 11, 2011, 4:14 p.m. CST

    I thought the comic was from Belgium....

    by The_guy_in_the_rated_R_movie

    Why go with a bunch of accents from the UK?? I thought the series spanned the globe. Either way, I still looks pretty cool. Glad they didn't try to go photo-real and went with a stylized animated look that mirrors the comics.

  • July 11, 2011, 5 p.m. CST

    The Final Nail in the Motion Crapture coffin...

    by tailhook

    The look of this movie is just god awful. There is a disconnect between the movements of the characters in general, the way they speak, and just how the whole thing comes off that is just 10 shades of wrong. The funny part about getting Big Money behind something is that they tend to go into massive denial about its viability. ITS never the problem, there just wasn't The Auteur that could pull it off properly. Well, you got Spielberg, and you also got 10 tons of shit masquerading as a movie. The sad part is, I can tell they're trying really hard and the story is there... BUT THE MOTION CRAPTURE UNDERCUTS IT AT EVERY TURN. They've tried to shovel this shit at as for 10 years now. May this movie bomb So Bad that nobody *EVER* even thinks about making another movie with motion crapture again. As per the actual character Tintin, having a punk kid as a cartoon character is one thing. Trying to convince me some snot nosed kid is an Investigative Journalist in a major motion picture is another. You need a real actor with gravitas(note: 30 and older) to even have a hope of pulling off a part like that. It would be like if Indiana Jones were played by Justin Bieber. Nobody would buy it, and nobody will buy this on as simple a gut-level Test.

  • July 11, 2011, 6 p.m. CST

    And I don't need horseshit like The Uncanny Valley...

    by tailhook

    to just see they fucked this shit up bad. They simply cannot pull off with motion capture the same level of animation we've come to expect from various 3D CGI Animated films. There is something fundamentally wrong and missing with the process as it pertains to human characters. It simply does not work and has not worked since Day One. Toy Story(the original from almost 20 years ago) looks a good 10 times better than this trash. You can have all the detail you want, if the magic doesn't happen and the shit doesn't work on a base level and pull you in, you're 10 shades of Fucked. 50 years from now this Motion Capture Experiment from the early years of the 21st century will be laughed at and be considered a dismal failure. If The Beard can't pull it off and bring the magic, its not the makers, its the process.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:02 p.m. CST

    Looks a bit weird but I trust Steven

    by MovieGeekBlog

    Please be good, please be good, please. Be good!!!!

  • July 11, 2011, 6:06 p.m. CST

    The Only One that has Worked...

    by tailhook

    James Cameron with Avatar. Whatever he figured out and the way he did his stuff, needs to be replicated and this Robert Zemeckis-type trash should go the way of the dodo.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:10 p.m. CST

    I was pulling for this movie


    I love the cinematography. I'm really bored with the kiddie animated films and don't bother watching them anymore unless it's something like Toy Story 3. So I very much don't mind a different style. The weird facial animations aren't a big deal to me. It would be nice if they were more realistic but it takes way too much work and takes too long to do a Golum quality job. This trailer is underwhelming. I wouldn't go as far as other people calling it "shit," but it is a disappointment. I agree the jokes aren't good, and the story and characters shown in the trailer aren't very interesting. It looks like they turned a Young Indiana Jones script into a Tintin movie. They shoulda made a Young Indiana Jones cartoon, that would sell.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:15 p.m. CST

    the thing about mo-cap: pantomime


    i think what us 'haters' se wrong with the action here is, it's all soft, fake pantomime, captured from someone who wasn't really doing those things. i mean, who wasn't really interacting with them in a WORLD. you can get a guy to swing a hammer or throw a punch or run and come to a stop, but in a green room in green tights is different than doing those things outside, with environment, more objects, real interactions, etc. mo-cap actors over exaggerate their actions into something that can't quite be called cartoon physics but isn't real eiter. it's 'safe'...staged. poorly choreographed. it really bugs me when mocap creations are walking or running and then come to this little scuffling stop that carries no weight. people don't do that in real life, but mocap characters do, and it looks like every surface they walk on is icy, because the actor thought they had to exaggerate what it looks like to come to a comical stop.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:22 p.m. CST

    why only live action or 3d?

    by movieManiac

    you know what, I know its not in fashion and all that with every shitty movie going 3d (three musketeers anyone?) but the beauty of Herge's art lies in his colorful 2D style. With a little bit of work, a 2D animated movie could have been perfect, it would have brought to life his characters, and helped root the story in an older time period. It would have also made sense given that Tintin's story lines are a little dated and aren't as exciting as stuff we see today. I'm still cautiously optimistic, but Haddock is all wrong, Snowy isn't even cute and the Thompson twins look weird. On top of that, it looks like they are planning this as a series. This trailer looks like its a blend of the Crab with the Golden claws and Secret of the Unicorn. Which means Red Rackham's treasure is going to be a sequel.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:23 p.m. CST

    How exactly is this movie "groundbreaking"

    by jimmy_009

    What ground is it breaking? There's some hype for ya.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:25 p.m. CST

    Haddock with a rocket launcher

    by Gorgomel

    Hergé is rolling in his grave

  • July 11, 2011, 6:26 p.m. CST

    The sad part is if you look...

    by jimmy_009 the original characters they are PERFECT for a Pixar or Dreamworks style animation. Instead they make them look like humans in the real world wearing weird masks. Go away mo-cap. Everyone hates you.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:33 p.m. CST

    Tintin fans: Explain why I should be excited about this

    by Raymar

    What's so special about the characters/stories?

  • (and raymar -- no one can explain the appear of anything to anybody. You either get it or you don't.)

  • July 11, 2011, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Up is basically how Pixar would have done Tintin

    by Terrence

    I like the look of this though, it does capture the color palette of the strips and the humor does work.

  • this is just a teaser trailer. Closer to release, we'll get a trailer showing the more spectacular aspects of the story; the flashback of the pirate attack on the ship of Haddock's ancestor, the shark-shaped submarine, the shipwreck, the treasure island, the castle. Or is all of that going to be in some sequel movie?

  • July 11, 2011, 6:51 p.m. CST

    if this were live action, it could have ended up two ways:


    like the live action popeye, or something like MICMACS or Amelie. any of which i'd have preferred to the quasi-real characters that DON'T pay enough respect to the artist's drawings.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:56 p.m. CST

    at least 2 reasons to not hate this:

    by scenic

    The camerawork and staging alone are masterclass and it sounds like John Williams got his mojo back with a full-bodied rousing score. So Mr. Spielberg didn't want to go balloon-head-bug-eyed characters ... this still looks great even if it doesn't satisfy the norm for an animated movie.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:10 p.m. CST

    I thought Tintin was the name of the dog.

    by Chariowalda_Barbarossa


  • July 11, 2011, 7:21 p.m. CST

    Popeye the movie...

    by Norman Colson

    I fucking loved that shit!!! it was surreal and robin williams was dead on... for it's time it was a great movie i enjoyed as a child. looking back even now the performance was great. Tintin could have been live action. not mo-capped. and animated. im not even excited. But it's funny because aint tintin suppoed to be a kid. why is he carrying a gun, shooting at people? and yet cops dont arrest him, WTF...

  • July 11, 2011, 7:26 p.m. CST

    Also, every time you watch it the cat-trip gets worse and worse

    by golden tribw

    It's not right for real-world in-camera physics... It's not right for cartoon physics... It's not right for comedy timing/physics... It's just WRONG. It doesn't look good, real, OR funny.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:38 p.m. CST

    SyFy should do a show called UNCANNY VALLEY...

    by CountryBoy

    Dead-eyed characters in a Twin Peaks-like town solve mysteries...

  • July 11, 2011, 8:16 p.m. CST

    Crappy-ass CGI!

    by James Robert Smith

    Either make a live action film or make a cartoon (or stop-motion). But if you're going to make a CGI film that looks like live action filled with actors who have fruit attached to their noses, then do me a goddamned favor and make something else! TINTIN is great stuff, no doubt. But Jove fuck us all with a pitchfork if I have to sit through another lousy use of CGI, which this apparently is going to be.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:26 p.m. CST

    Yeah, visuals are all that matters

    by locater16

    I totally agree with everyone. Visuals are all that matter in CG cartoons. The one and only indicator of quality is whether I, personally, approve of the animation and visual style. Director, producer, writers, cast and crew of the absolute best Hollywood has to offer? Pfft, please. Story? Acting, action, whatever. I'm like, totally distracted by that unfamiliar visual style. It doesn't look ANYTHING like every last Pixar movie that has had the exact same visual style for their past fifteen years without deviation so it MUST suck.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:36 p.m. CST

    locater16...Thread winner!

    by DoctorWho?

  • July 11, 2011, 9:07 p.m. CST

    Spielberg needs to do a CG Indy Jones!!

    by Onin Solstice

    Live action isn't working for him so much anymore. Get Kasdan back from his island seclusion and have him write a glorious tribute to Raiders, with kick ass animation and Indy looking like his glorious 30 year old self!!!

  • July 11, 2011, 9:28 p.m. CST

    What am I missing?

    by Winston Smith

    I just don't get this, it looks so fucking lame. And I usually like European-styled but American cinema, but fuck, I feel left out of the loop with this one. I don't think I'd watch it for free, right now, if I had the opportunity. I'm missing something...

  • July 11, 2011, 9:38 p.m. CST

    Haddock is Scottish??

    by BBSloth

    I don't remember that from the books...

  • July 11, 2011, 9:45 p.m. CST

    goldentribe - you are an idiot

    by Deadmouth

    *drops mike*

  • July 11, 2011, 10:12 p.m. CST


    by awardgiver

    might see it, might not. meh.

  • Get a clue.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:33 p.m. CST

    The Adventures of Young Conan O'Brian!

    by slicer

    That's what Tin Tin looks like to me! lol

  • He was a simply rendered dog in classic two-dimensional cartoon/comic style. This does not look or feel like Snowy. It's like Michael Bay's pussy Megatron after what was in all the comics (I didn't read), cartoons (which preceded my media experience), and early CG TV shows (which rocked my preteen world). A mere shade. Despite everything I've said, I do trust Spielberg and Peter Jackson to deliver something entertaining -- TO AN EXTENT. The thing is, Indiana Jones 4 was (frankly) 'entertaining' the first time I saw it ... but I have no real desire to ever see it again. TEMPLE OF DOOM and RAIDERS and LAST CRUSADE (I love you Sean Connery!) get better every time I see them. I haven't really been truly wowed by a Steven Spielberg movie since Jurassic Park except Saving Private Ryan (everything else was forgettable by the standard of a singular auteur film but don't get me wrong I'm not saying Minority Report and War of the Worlds were awful or anything). Peter Jackson has been making vastly entertaining movies since Brain Dead/Dead-Alive, but he demonstrated with King Kong that he can get sucked into the gratuitous self-indulgent Hollywood CGI schtick as readily as anybody. Their involvement does not guarantee this will be an amazing movie. It does offer hope that at worst it will be mediocre as opposed to abysmal -- I never bothered to watch Zemeckis's CHRISTMAS CAROL or POLAR EXPRESS because they looked boring beyond belief (I liked Jim Carrey in his prime, in the flesh) but I saw Beowulf and found it awfully underwhelming. I'm not convinced mo-cap has ever proven its worth to date. I've got nothing inherently against the format, but Tintin's got a big hill to climb.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:30 p.m. CST

    A Crushing Disappointment -- gives off the INDY IV Trailer Vibe

    by Dursman2000

    I thought this was going to be more animated than "mo-cap". Unfortunately it looks like Spielberg and Jackson are going to learn the hard way what Robert Zemeckis just did -- creepy animation that's halfway between reality and fantasy doesn't work. It doesn't look good, it doesn't draw audiences in (as Zemeckis just found out with Disney dumping his remaining movies on their deal)....I really want to like it, but it looks AWFUL.

  • July 12, 2011, 12:24 a.m. CST

    The TB trolling and hating cracks me up.

    by beastie

    I'm sure many of the comments are made in pure exagerated jest for the sake of site redundancy and it makes me laugh. A couple of years back, when a picture of Stardust was released, showing Michelle Pfeifer with some goats, on TBer declared "Those are some bullshit goats". To this day, thinking about that statement and the wierdness of what that dude was saying makes me tear up laughing. It was the epitomy of what is typically said on the AICN TBs. Whatever. I'll take my kids to this as they love the cartoon. One of them has just started reading, I'll make sure to have him read the book before we go. And I'm American. My kids like Tin Tin and Asterix.

  • July 12, 2011, 12:30 a.m. CST


    by redkamel

    I was really looking forward to this. 1. Shitty animations, especially the Thompson brothers 2. Why is it not live action? 3. At least they got the colors and the ships look the Tintin-world look 4.Why the FUCK does Haddock sound like Shrek? 5. Where the hell is professor Calculus?

  • July 12, 2011, 12:46 a.m. CST


    by D.Vader

    I'm raving about camerawork and cinematography and yes I'm a filmmaker so I know what those fucking words mean.

  • July 12, 2011, 1:14 a.m. CST

    Well that didn't come out right

    by D.Vader

    Was supposed to say "and I'm a filmmaker so yes I know what those words mean," not "and yes I'm a filmmaker so I know what those words mean." Sheesh, I don't want a repeat of the whole "And yes I am an actual ninja," debacle. I blame it on the alcohol. Never go to a talkback after thyouve been drinking.

  • July 12, 2011, 1:16 a.m. CST



    Um, that's when the movie looks cool or not so cool, right?

  • July 12, 2011, 3:14 a.m. CST

    genderblender, but it has been done.

    by Carl XVI Gustaf

    Comics, cartoon shorts, live-action, animation, stop-motion, TV, radio, theater, exhibitions, documentaries, video games, board games, coins, stamps and on and on. And not sure you've heard but there's a new big budget Tintin movie coming. Made by Spielberg and Peter Jackson, music by John Williams. Nice.

  • July 12, 2011, 4:03 a.m. CST

    Don't feed the troll. It's just a talkback character like

    by Dennis_Moore

    Choclat Woman or JettL Probably the same person.

  • July 12, 2011, 8:52 a.m. CST

    Complete fucking waste

    by caprica

    of time effort and money. This shitty technology, that never lets you get invested in characters because you are watching doll portrayals, MIGHT make sense if you are portraying a world too tough to film properly (which is a stretch given the state of CGI). But why in the name of all the gods that are or aren't, when you are filming mostly real people, would you ever choose this stupid fucking process? Why didn't Jackson do this with LOTR? Or Spielberg with Jurassic? Because it fucking sucks.

  • July 12, 2011, 9:01 a.m. CST

    I like JettL. He's creative.

    by beastie

  • July 12, 2011, 9:18 a.m. CST

    Why does a gay Dutch kid with a fluffy dog

    by Brian Hopper

    have a British accent?

  • July 12, 2011, 9:24 a.m. CST

    Oops, I meant gay Belgian kid.

    by Brian Hopper

    I'm from America, and thus don't understand the distinction between Dutch and Belgian stuff, and don't care about European stuff generally, which is why I (like most Americans) don't care about Tintin.

  • July 12, 2011, 10:13 a.m. CST


    by D.Vader

    Americans are more likely to see a movie where someone has a British accent rather than French or Belgian.

  • July 12, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST

    This Will Need a Heavy Sell Job Just to Break Even

    by Jack Desmondi

    Does anybody under 50 and living in the USA actually know who friggin Tin Tin is? This looks like it cost a fortune, and will have a hell of a hard time breaking even. Premise looks dark, threatening and unappealing too-which will severely limit its audience. If Speilberg's name wasn't attached to this, there is no way it would have gotten green lit.

  • July 12, 2011, 11:18 a.m. CST

    The Tintin property itself aside,...

    by Orbots Commander

    ...why the hell did Spielberg and Jackson decide to go Zemeckis-dead-eyed-zombie motion capture with this thing? Really dumb decision.

  • July 12, 2011, 11:22 a.m. CST

    The action stuff looks fine...

    by Orbots Commander

    ...but when you get a look at the character faces, mouth movements and reaction shots, it's a hot mess. Movies live and die on the reaction shot, thereby this movie's goose is cooked, right out of the gate.

  • July 12, 2011, noon CST

    A nitpick about the cinematography...

    by v3d

    There isn't any. This film is 100% cgi, therefore no film was exposed, hence no photography or cinematography. The people who deserve the credit are those who lit the virtual environments, the programmers who wrote the shaders and renderers, the animation director and the director. I have the same issue with people saying they "filmed" something have clearly video recorded something. But I did see a guy a few weeks back with an actual Super 8mm camera and he was indeed "filming" something.

  • July 12, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST


    by D.Vader

    Clearly you don't know exactly what you think you're talking about. CGI movies have Directors of Photography, for camera and lighting. They're still called that despite "no film" being exposed.

  • July 12, 2011, 12:12 p.m. CST

    I don't exactly what I'm talking about either

    by D.Vader

    But those roles still exist in animation was my point.

  • July 12, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST


    by gringostar

    You are a tool. Get an atlas and pull your head out of your ass. It is embarrassing listening to people brag about how ignorant they are - you sound like a fucking idiot and an insult to intelligent, well rounded Americans.

  • July 12, 2011, 12:45 p.m. CST

    This movie will make money people...

    by gringostar

    As of today America has a population of 311,748,866, the world has a reported population of 6,948,518,625. Take America out of the world total and you are left with 6,636,769,759 people, get rid of 2/3 right off the top and that leaves you with 2,212,256,586. Of this number perhaps 20% could even be bothered to go to the cinima which leaves you with 442,451,317. This number is still larger than the total population of the United States which is roughly 312 million. We all know that less that 1/2 of the population either can, or will see a movie in theaters, so this number will shrink to 160 million bearing in mind that there is competition for the entertainment dollar which will shrink this number even further - is America important to the overall box office take, absolutely! It isn't however nearly as important as it once was - due impart to the fact that the economy is in the shit and people are not going to the movies if they are losing their houses. This movie will make money - trust.

  • July 12, 2011, 1:59 p.m. CST

    The Adventures of Tintin in the Uncanny Valley

    by Royston Lodge

    'nuff said.

  • July 12, 2011, 2:03 p.m. CST

    The budget is $135 million...

    by tailhook

    And apparently the property is popular overseas. It'll be extremely hard for it not to make some money and very hard for it not to at the least break even given Spielberg's name :P. The hope is the numbers are bad enough they never contemplating making another. Or at least find some people who know how to actually do animation.

  • July 12, 2011, 2:10 p.m. CST

    why not real life?? because it's not meant to look like real life

    by T 1000 xp professional

    I think it's great that they have the designs with an added sense of magical realism. It also allows for complete control of every visual aspect. Feels and looks like animation, and guess what, I like that.

  • July 12, 2011, 2:11 p.m. CST

    great trailer with a great sense of adventure

    by T 1000 xp professional

    I just hope they just sync the voices with the mouths as good as possible

  • July 12, 2011, 2:53 p.m. CST

    yup, still looks fuck-awful

    by Billy_D_Williams

    like most everyone else is saying, why not use real actors??? it would be much more exciting than this Nintendo looking shit.

  • July 12, 2011, 2:57 p.m. CST

    this is a milestone in cinema though...

    by Billy_D_Williams

    do you realize this is probably the first Spielberg movie that most of his fans are not interested in seeing??? WOW, that is huge when you think about it...the old Spielberg really is dead...I dont like this new guy with his billions, private jets, massive rugrat family, and turn to the dark side... i'm also assuming this is the first movie he's NOT editing on film? as he was pretty much the last director to edit strictly on a moviola...that is also, what the fuck is going in hollywood?

  • July 12, 2011, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Who wants to bet?

    by Abhimanyu

    Ok, this is semi-serious here - what do we mean by 'will bomb'? And where/how? I don't know about the mo-cap, but I think that may be the ONLY thing going against this movie right now (I know, it's a big one...) However, I am willing to say that this movie will be a financial success, and may even end up being a critical one. The material and talent is top notch, and all of those complaining about blandness and old-fashioned etc may find themselves surprised. Global gross will cross 300 mill. That's what I think. And I am saying this sportingly and as an honest wager - not trying to stoke any flames. Also, I believe non-major markets like India (I think India get's the first release, actually) will post decent numbers on this one, alongside Europe and Russia. Brazil - which way you gonna go?

  • July 12, 2011, 4:40 p.m. CST

    The Catfall

    by Abhimanyu

    I get very irritated by things not flying right or arcs looking wired etc., so I sympathize with those type of comments BUT you guys complaining about the catfall, are you sure you're seeing it right? Didn't seem like no physics problem to me - the cat's nails are stuck on the rug, so there's a tug-delay! Looks fine to me!

  • July 12, 2011, 5:25 p.m. CST

    $135M budget ... $130M of that for advertising.

    by ReportAbuse

    And it looks awesome. If this was 1999.

  • July 12, 2011, 7:25 p.m. CST

    Looks great, really does.

    by blueant

  • July 12, 2011, 8:20 p.m. CST


    by catlettuce4

    Indy 4 - I don't mind that it is a sci-fi genre film, but I do mind that it is really poor all-around. You sound like an apologist of the highest order who would love anything with the Indy name on it. "Understand the franchise you love?" That alone tells me you consider yourself to LOVE a FRANCHISE (corporate-speak for film series that they hope to make more money off of) rather than loving individual films or the characters involved. I love Raiders of the Lost Ark, cause it is a masterful film, period. Crystal Skull was pretty damn sad as any kind of supposed legacy to that level of brilliance. And it wasn't saucer men that caused it, rather the quality level. Tintin looks visually interesting, but I had no interest previously and still don't after watching that. I'm sure it will be a good adventure movie for kiddies or Tintin fans, of which I am neither. And Pixar comparisons are silly Pixar doesn't do adaptations, they create new things.

  • July 12, 2011, 8:25 p.m. CST

    Mixed signals

    by catlettuce4

    Interesting how someone above mentioned this looks kind of dark and threatening... I wonder how that, combined with it being animated (in the USA that is the exact same as saying "for kids" by the way) will affect box office. If this were a live action, Harry Potter-esque kids film it would be one thing... but a dark/scary animated film? I think it's going to be a hard sell to parents. American audiences are funny that way.

  • July 12, 2011, 8:31 p.m. CST

    And no, Tintin will not be a bomb or fail.

    by catlettuce4

    There's enough popularity for it to be a hit outside the USA, and that can be enough to warrant making more movies (although I wonder if the budget will be lowered on sequels to reflect unpopularity in the US... should it prove unpopular, that is.) A good example of how this works is the Highlander series, which, despite never being hugely popular in the USA (and only having one good film, the first) made enough overseas that there are a lot of the damn things, and a TV series. That wasn't US box office/TV ratings that kept it going either, it was overseas markets.

  • July 13, 2011, 3:17 p.m. CST

    Umm, yeah, huge stinking bomb

    by orange84

    The animation is weird and off putting. Story or no story, it looks bad. Really fucking odd. Can you see any 8 year old, begging to go to this? Seriously? I don't care if the kid can see the Arc de Triomphe from his flat and he has crepes every morning for breakfast, it looks like shit.