MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

A More Confident Tintin TV Spot

Be Sociable, Share!

7 Responses to “A More Confident Tintin TV Spot”

  1. JS Partisan says:

    It is more confident but the whole “AUDIENCES AROUND THE WORLD” stinger always comes across as some weird peer pressure like; “The Belgians love it, so how about you AMERICA? YOU GOING TO BE COOL? YOU GOING TO LOVE THE TIN TIN? HUH? HUH?”

  2. Jason says:

    I actually feel a slight wave of revulsion with every new Tintin spot. It is 100% irrational and I cannot articulate why. Zero interest in seeing the film.

    Indicative of nothing – I hate anecdotal evidence – but I asked my 13 year old daughter if she or any of her friends were interested in seeing Tintin. Her response, “What’s a Tintin?” Absolutely no awareness. She’s pretty media/tech savvy and this one is not even close to her radar.

  3. AH says:

    I can’t wait to see this movie. I have been a Tintin fan since I was a kid and I am glad they finally made this movie.

  4. Telemachus says:

    I saw it recently and really enjoyed it, although it’s a trifle that breezes by very quickly. The mo-cap is momentarily disconcerting and then quickly forgotten about, because the world that Spielberg & Jackson created doesn’t really try that hard to be “realistic”, despite the photoreal textures and backgrounds. At times, it freely and enthusiastically embraces the physics of a Tex Avery cartoon. It felt like Spielberg let his inner 12-year-old run amuck — not only are there plenty of little visual references to other Tintin stories, but also other Spielberg and Jackson movies.

    Then again, I’m a big Tintin fan ever since I discovered them as a kid, so I’m biased towards the series anyway.

  5. torpid bunny says:

    I thought this kind of cartoonish motion-cap was discredited by Zemeckis? I say that as someone who like Beowulf but felt Cameron’s far more seemless motion-cap realism in Avatar absolutely crushed. I probably don’t get Tintin so I can’t really judge, but to me I don’t need to see Spielberg’s inner 12 year old. I’ve seen it quite enough.

  6. Proman says:

    It’s confident because it knows that the film is absolutely amazing even no TV spot could ever do it justice (witness Kris Tapley’s recent review). Tintin is a real kinetic stunner.

  7. Ejz says:

    ‘Tintin is a real kinetic stunner.’

    Really?

    After an hour or so I was getting bored because I didn’t care for neither the characters nor the plot.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon