Skip to main content

The Adventures of Tintin review

the-adventures-of-tintin-posterSteven Spielberg has a tendency to get a burst of energy every few years, directing a handful of films before disappearing again to produce everything, everywhere and plot his eventual return to the director’s chair. He’s got two coming out this month, and one — The Adventures of Tintin — arrives today, becoming Spielberg’s first feature since 2008’s Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull as well as his first animated feature as a director.

The movie is based on the comic book series created by Belgian artist Georges Remi, who published under the name Hergé. His collection of loosely related stories all follow a young Belgian reporter named Tintin, and his dog Milou (Snowy, in English translations). Spielberg nabbed the rights to the series in 1983, shortly after Remi’s death, and he’s worked since then at various times to bring the comic creator’s world and colorful characters to the big screen. The Adventures of Tintin is the result of those efforts, a computer animated 3D action/adventure adapted from a trio of Tintin books that were released in the early ’40s.

Recommended Videos

Spielberg’s talents as a filmmaker and reputation as the man who created the blockbuster movie (see: Jaws) are on full display in this animated romp. It’s a little light on story, but the action-oriented set pieces fly fast and frequently. The bulk of the movie is consumed by death-defying pursuits, escapes, knockdown brawls and the like, and all of it is beautifully staged. WETA Digital gets a lot of credit here too, as the performance capture looks lifelike without ever veering off into the unsettling Uncanny Valley territory. The 3D work is also solid too, and in a very understated way; think Avatar, not Piranha 3D.

Image used with permission by copyright holder

It all comes back to the action though. Tintin is at its very best when it’s not stopping to let you think. Most will probably walk out of Tintin struggling to recall what motivated the hero’s grand adventure, but gesticulating excitedly about the big chase through Bagghar or the Red Rackham sword fight or some other spectacle-driven sequence.

It’s not that the story is bad per se. The characters are definitely memorable, but that’s probably due more to the charm of Hergé’s original creations. The A-to-B flow of the larger narrative carries a very strong “too many chefs” vibe. The chefs in this case — Steven Moffat (Doctor Who), Edgar Wright (Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World) and Joe Cornish (Attack the Block) — are all quite talented, but the core story doesn’t ever really get to find a rhythm before the action kicks into high gear action again.

The individual pieces are strong, they just don’t come together all that well. It’s actually rather fitting for a movie based on a series that started life as a comic strip. The movie is peppered with action-free, character-driven scenes that are perfectly entertaining. An ongoing subplot involving a pickpoccket and bumbling policemen Thompson and Thomson comes to mind. The Captain Haddock character is frequently a joy to watch as well, especially when he starts sharing stories of his seafaring ancestor.

Image used with permission by copyright holder

One thing that might catch some off guard is the movie’s tone. While Tintin is undoubtedly a family-friendly movie-going experience, there’s some mature content here. Not the sort of well-disguised adult humor that you’d see in a Pixar movie either; this is much darker. Tintin is the rare animated film that boasts a body count. It’s an admittedly small one, and most of it occurs off-screen, but there’s definitely more edge here than you might expect from a movie you’d take the young’uns to see.

Again, we’re back to the action. It’s the big win that Tintin can hang its hat on. Spielberg brings his blockbuster-making A-game, and it’s clear that he reveled in the opportunity to create the sort of elaborate action sequences that he probably saw in his head when making films like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom way back in the day. The script’s shortcomings are tough to ignore, but that’s only because the level of craft in evidence elsewhere in the production sets the bar so high. This is a Steven Spielberg movie for Steven Spielberg fans, by which I mean: everyone, everywhere can trust that their money will be well-spent when picking up a ticket to see Tintin.

Adam Rosenberg
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Previously, Adam worked in the games press as a freelance writer and critic for a range of outlets, including Digital Trends…
Decision to Leave review: An achingly romantic noir thriller
Tang Wei looks at Park Hae-il in Park Chan-wook's Decision to Leave.

With its lush sets and perpetually probing camera, Decision to Leave looks and moves like any other Park Chan-wook film, but it reverberates with the same untempered passion present in Golden Age noirs like In a Lonely Place and Double Indemnity. Unlike those two films, though, which center their stories around a hot-tempered screenwriter and naïve insurance salesman, respectively, Decision to Leave follows another common noir archetype: the lovelorn detective (played here by Park Hae-il).

In the film’s opening moments, Hae-jun, the detective in question, lands a case involving the mysterious death of a recreational rock climber. The case, in typical noir fashion, leads to Hae-jun crossing paths with Seo-rae (a spellbinding Tang Wei), his victim’s gorgeous but eccentric widow. Perturbed by how disinterested she is in unpacking her abusive husband’s death, Hae-jun begins to tail and spy on Seo-rae, unaware that doing so will only further intensify his attraction to her. As far as noir plots go, this is about as familiar as it gets. With its nods to Hitchcock and lightly self-aware attitude, Decision to Leave makes it clear that it doesn’t mind treading the same narrative terrain as so many of the noir classics that have come before it, either.

Read more
Conversations with A Killer: The Jeffrey Dahmer Tapes review: killer’s words yield little insight
A superimposed image of Jeffrey Dahmer in Conversations with a Killer.

It’s spooky season this month, and that means the atrocity mine is currently being plundered by content creators across America. The three-episode docuseries Conversations with a Killer: The Jeffrey Dahmer Tapes, directed by noted documentarian Joe Berlinger (Brother's Keeper, Paradise Lost), is Netflix’s second project tackling the infamous cannibal/necrophiliac/serial killer to debut in a matter of weeks. It follows Ryan Murphy’s 10-hour miniseries drama, Dahmer-Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story. This Dahmer double dose mirrors the barrage of Ted Bundy content that Netflix put out in early 2019, following up the Zac Efron-led drama Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile with the docuseries Conversations with a Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes (also directed by Berlinger). 

As was the case with Bundy, Netflix is convinced that a multipronged examination of Dahmer could lead to a better understanding of his psychology and motivations, teaching viewers warning signs or expanding our capacity for empathy. Or maybe they recognize that people are addicted to unspeakable tragedies and will do anything they can to maximize viewers’ compulsion for true crime? Attempting to satisfy on all accounts, The Dahmer Tapes oscillates uneasily between character study, social commentary, and pure shock value, landing somewhere in between all three.
In Dahmer's own words

Read more
Amsterdam review: An exhausting, overlong conspiracy thriller
Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, and John David Washington walk through a lobby together in Amsterdam.

Amsterdam could have been forgiven for being a lot of things, but dull is not one of them. The new film from writer-director David O. Russell boasts one of the most impressive ensemble casts of the year and is photographed by Emmanuel Lubezki, one of Hollywood’s premier cinematographers. Beyond that, its kooky premise and even wackier cast of characters open the door for Amsterdam to be the kind of screwball murder mystery that O. Russell, at the very least, seems uniquely well-equipped to make.

Instead, Amsterdam is a disaster of the highest order. It’s a film made up of so many disparate, incongruent parts that it becomes clear very early on in its 134-minute runtime that no one involved — O. Russell most of all — really knew what it is they were making. It is a misfire of epic proportions, a comedic conspiracy thriller that is written like a haphazard screwball comedy but paced like a meandering detective drama. Every element seems to be at odds with another, resulting in a film that is rarely funny but consistently irritating.

Read more