The Adventures of Tintin

[Bluecast]

TBH I thought Beowolf was rather dull and ruined Grendal. CG was rather like a PS2 CG cutscene. It just looked fake even then. Spirits Within even though done earlier I think worked well for it considering it was a sci fi and works for FFAC. Beowulf was just bleh.

[Clint]

TBH I thought Beowolf was rather dull and ruined Grendal. CG was rather like a PS2 CG cutscene. It just looked fake even then. Spirits Within even though done earlier I think worked well for it considering it was a sci fi and works for FFAC. Beowulf was just bleh.

Some stuff looked great. Others, not so much.

Personally, I can suspend my belief for a good film. And I thought Beowulf was just that.

This Tintin movie looks nothing special, IMO. I don't know much about Tintin, but if people are getting excited over a dull trailer like that (seriously, wtf?), then we're gonna be stuck in a movie decline for many years to come.

The movie industry is at such an all-time low, that i've just lost tons of interest in film. I'm now more focused on books and games. And TV. At least TV has some great stuff left to offer.

Hollywood just absolutely fucking sucks right now. And I blame the american audience (yes, americans) who want to see more superhero bullshit and trash comedies that arnt' even slightly amusing.

Also, i'm not one to hop on the Batman train either. (although I will watch it) So yeah, fuck movies.

[Who Really Cares?]

I allways thought they should have got Sean Bean for that film seeing as Beowolf was made to look like him anyways.

It was ok but at time the animation ruined it a little.

[KiBa]

I don't get how can anyone can not be impressed by the trailer and images. It looks amazing.

Because it's been done.
I was impressed when I saw trailers for FF: The Spirits Within. I was impressed when I saw a trailer for The Polar Express. I was impressed when I saw stuff for Beowulf.
Seeing stuff for A Christmas Carol?
No longer impressive.
Mars Needs Moms?
A little better... but still "meh".

This style of cg has been done enough now that it just doesn't have the same "oomph" that it used to. It's worn off.

But it's not in the same style as FF, Beowulf, Christmas Carol, or Martian Moms. It's cartoony, like Tintin... with texture... This isn't a Zemeckis film. It's not made by the same people at all... So... It hasn't been done before.


Also, if you're opposed to using CG in general more than a few times as an art form, then I guess you're positively sick of traditional animation by now....

No, sir. I don't like it.

[OL]

Didn't say I was "opposed" to it. You said you didn't see how anyone could not be impressed by it, and I explained why.
Just because I'm not impressed by something doesn't mean I'm "opposed" to it.

And sorry, the animation style looks just like A Christmas Carol. It takes cartoony aspects and tries to make them look more realistic. I'm not saying it's aiming for true realism here, just that it flies a little too close to it in that regard, and misses part of what looked so great about the original Tintin artwork to begin with.
Tintin should have dots for eyes, you ask me.
Realistic proportions and some subdued mo-cap would be fine (that would emulate the comic's style greatly), but I personally don't think it should have this "texture" that you keep mentioning. I think it would look better if it were more akin to the cg style used in the movie Tangled, for example. Realistic proportions, but still verifiably cartoony and animated.
And with dots for eyes.

[KiBa]

Granted, I do like the dots for eyes. You're right about that. And yes, I did like the cartoony style of Tangled and UP... Yeah, I see what you mean. Tintin is gonna suck. I'm going to cut myself now.

[OL]

That rascally Kiba.

[Riku Rose]

Never read the book or watched more then 30 seconds of the TV series. The trailer didn't do anything for me and can't see anyone being intrested that isn't already a fan of the series.

Agree that this isn't the best style ever but I think it's a bit silly to just hate on a movie because of it uses this Zemeckis style CG. You could make a film with a story as good as something like Inception with this technology or as bad as anything that Nic Cage is in.

[OL]

^^Everyone has to jump to conclusions.
I wasn't "hating on" the movie because of the animation. I wasn't saying how shit it'll be or anything like that. It's based on Tintin, and Tintin is good, so I don't doubt it'll be a good story. I also don't doubt the Zemeckis films are good fun, too.
I just don't like the animation style, and don't think it fits Tintin properly. That's not an opinion on the movie as a whole.

[Bluecast]

His CG sucks,too many cg films bring back traditional animation or at least have a balance of the two. Yeah I said it' I am hating. So suck my blue steel balls. NYUCK NYUCK!

[Kenny]

This should be stop motion.

[OL]

This should look like Xavier: Renegade Angel.

[Clint]

His CG sucks,too many cg films bring back traditional animation or at least have a balance of the two. Yeah I said it' I am hating. So suck my blue steel balls. NYUCK NYUCK!

CG isn't the problem. It's the films themselves that fucking suck.

It worked for Avatar, and in all its errors and simple dialogues, it was a great film and worthy of the CG praise it received.

Movies don't need be one thing or the other. They just need to be good. And to do that, they have to be designed with the audience in mind. And not just from a business stand point, which is what we're experiencing now with Pirates of the Carribean 5 and Superman 12 and Spiderman 4 all the other shit films we've seen countless times before.

We're restricted to like 2 or 3 good films a year which is just pathetic. Truly pathetic.

[Bluecast]

Avatar was a broing rip off of pocahantas. It's ok to kill time but not a great film just OK.

Too much CG films. The gimmick is old. Not CG IN films but saying CG FILMS. Again be fine if we had all forms Stop motion,Animation AND CG. If Pizza came in one toppping because it was the most popular does not mean it's a good thing. It gets old after a short while.
Be like it gaming went ALL 2D or ALL 3D you need both not just one.

[Kenny]

I would thank that post, Clint, but there are alot of great films being released every year. Just not from Hollywood.

I just looked at a list in my local theater when I was checking for times and there were some really interesting looking films I never even heard of before being showcased. And this is my mainstream theater. Haven't been to the art theater in a very long time cause of budget constraints but good, non-formulatic films are being shown. Its just that they're not being extensively advertised.

If we're talking strictly Hollywood, then yes there hasn't been a string of interesting Hollywood blockbusters for a few years now. And by interesting, I mean no gimmicks. No half-assed narrative. No over-reliance on computerized special effects. The whole sheebang. Back when there were limitations, it seemed to me movies were more risk taking and imaginative. Now that anything's possible, ironically almost everything has mostly just been the same. And i'm probably being picky but even the ones that DO take risks (Source Code) they seem incomplete or completely butchered with Hollywood cliches that end up ruining a film and therefore its rewatch value. I don't mind Hollywood cliches if they work in a movie but if they don't...it destroys it.