Well, I will see Tintin, but to tell the truth, I am quite scared.
First of all, I really dislike the motion capture technology being used for it.
Second, I do not think Spielberg is perfect for this. I’m no snobby Spielberg basher, but I don’t think his directing will fit with Tintin. I think he will place too many action scenes in it.
But, that said, I am sure it will be a very enjoyable film, and it won’t ruin the comics in the least.
>>What are peoples expectations for Tintin?<<
I expect I’ll stick with the books & ignore the film.
Plus which that whole motion-capture computer animation almost always just looks creepy.
Spielberg is popularizing Tin Tin to mid-class Americans…..bullshit i say,this is gonna be even worse than Asterix was when first adapted on-screen…..
i have no clue about Interstellar but as far as Lincoln goes,this is bad breath Oscar bait in my humble opinion….
Harry—-I just hate it because it takes away the magic of animation, and it cheapens the actors performances at the same time.
I was thinking the same thing … but even worse it just looks creepy.
Motion capture CGI worked with Gollum (he’s supposed to be creepy) and Kong … but the fullscale stuff like Polar Express … ICK!
I’ve been very curious about his Lincoln project and I’m really excited to see it when it comes out.
I’m just glad Spielberg is taking so long to confirm his next project. The longer the world goes without a Spielberg film, the better.
I am little a worried about the technology. But Steven Spielberg, in my opinion is an intelligent filmmaker, my only hope is that this is more of a Raiders and that he doesn’t go down the evil path of Hook or Always or 1941. I think there will obviously be a good amount of action, but no one has faith in him telling a good story?
I mean I know people bashed him for Indaina Jones 4 (which I liked) but no one has faith in the adaptation?
Here is a very smart guy who knows how handle material the right way, if you think of his logic for justifying his ideas it makes sense in the end, no?
Anyway what about his use of pre-visualization? I think he’ll benifit a lot from it, he certainly did with Minority Report, A.I. and yes Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Wether you like the movie or not you can’t say the car chases were all that bad. I think Miyazaki should have been brought on or the animators of Up they might have given some pretty good ideas, If they don’t already have some.
And does anyone know where I can find the short test footage they made a couple years ago?
Pavel—- I really like Spielberg, but i’m just not sure if he’s right for this. If you look back at the comics, there’s hardly any action in them at all.
By being like Raiders I meant an original adventure film: and weren’t the films largely adventure comics?
About Tin Tin and 3-D I could care less. What really interests me is the Lincoln film. It’s a project that could go either way. Dimitris, in his own charming way, has indicated the Oscar bait possibilities of a biopic about Lincoln. It could go that way. Biopics are quite possibly the worst genre of all time due to their need to mark every important event in the life of their subject. This creates a static narrative that plays like a paint by numbers book. But, Spielberg is a longtime admirer of John Ford, and I wonder if he’ll use Young Mister Lincoln as an inspiration. If Spielberg finds a way to go beyond mere event presentation, Lincoln’s life and character present a host of rich complexities for a film.
Spielberg has shown in the past that he’s capable of tripe and transcendence. We’ll see.
“Biopics are quite possibly the worst genre of all time due to their need to mark every important event in the life of their subject”
no,they’re not..just check Watkin’s film about Munch’s life…when biography turns into REAL ART!
and this is just one of the many examples..fortunately enough,most of Hollywood attempts don’t belong amongst them :)
Thank you for mentioning one film that breaks the biopic drudgery! Yeah, I know there are exceptions to the rule, Dimitris, but they are exceptions.
Pavel: Well, yes, but not explosive action ones.
Lincoln I will probably see, just because I live near Springfield.
there are rarer exceptions to the rule when it comes to romantic comedies,imagine what would happen if Spielberg attempted a screwball comedy (!!!),the Horror,the Horror!
Dimitris – Well, he kind of did with 1941, which, by the way, isn’t nearly as bad as history has made it out to be. It’s actually pretty funny. We’ll have to disagree here, because I’ve seen loads of wonderful romantic comedies, but very few great biopics. Maybe I’m just seeing the wrong films – which is a possibility that I’m willing to accept – but I can only go off of my own experience. My experience tells me that the fruits of the biopic genre are generally tasteless.
And what is Interstellar???
What about Mishima, The Aviator, Shindlers List, Malcolm X? Those were great biographies.
Pavel – Yes, every genre has it’s standout films. But, for every great biopic, there are ten or twenty mediocrities such as The Glenn Miller Story or Flash of Genius or Walk the Line.
Or awfulities like Pursuit Of Happyness
I will tell you why people hate Spielberg, its because Spielberg killed the director being in control the of the film and instead he made it a studio, or budget ran system. It Spielberg didn’t reincarnate this beast to art then we would still be experiencing the golden age of cinema, for christ-sake his names even in the word check yet Houston’s insist.
That’s an interesting idea, John Smith. Spielberg has openly admitted to having great respect and affection for the director-for-hire types during the studio system era. Personally, I doubt that Spielberg can be held solely responsible for the rise of studio system production (if it had ever really fallen).
Spielberg is just too perfect for these projects i dont think anyone other Spielberg can give it a edge it requires specially for interstellar .waiting for centuries for these films ,since i’ve read kip throne theories
@ John Smith, Personally that doesn’t really make sense, most of the projects he takes on he can afford to take on, and they usually reflect a personal vision. Munich, Minority Report or even his earlier films Close Encounters, Saving Private Ryan. I think studios acknowledge him as a director with his own unique style. I wouldn’t say he has stolen that from many other filmmakers at all. I think it is about 50/50 as far as filmmakers in control. And the golden age ended a little before Spielberg, Jaws was big but he wasn’t really a made man till the 80’s which was long after.
Pavel – You might be forgetting that Speilberg made Close Encounters of the Third Kind, which went on to be the biggest moneymaker for Columbia that year. Between that and Jaws, he was given the chance to do whatever he damn well pleased. And with that power he made 1941, a much maligned but rather entertaining WWII spoof.
now we’re talking,1941 IS underrated..
but seriously,Spielberg hasn’t made anything worthwhile after Jurassic Park,and that includes the Munich and Saving Private Ryan simplicities..jeez….
and Spielberg will never make anything good or decent for the most part after Jurassic Park….the Lincoln bio-pic sounds like a joke already just like Scorsese’s Roosevelt bio-pic…two pathetic U.S. figures will get the most of praise out of two washed out directors…end of story…
Dimitris: Ok, I don’t see how Lincoln or Roosevelt are ‘pathetic’. I’ve always found them to be fascinating personalities and I’d be curious to see these ‘jokes’ of biopics just to see these figures portrayed as much as the films are being made by Spielberg or Scorsese. No, I don’t expect anything great but I think it’s ridiculous to trash a film before it’s been released, even before being made.
i’ll take back anything i’ve said if both Spielberg AND Scorsese (in particular) create an avant-garde/highly independent approach on these two figures..
granted,my opposition mostly goes BECAUSE of the real life characters but truth be told…they’re not personas to value,it’s time for someone,either they’re the above directors or not,to show the true “flesh and blood” of these 2 frauds of political history….
and i save a lot of Kennedy trash as well….
Pavel
I think he is perfect for Tintin, he has given so many memorable moments in movies that for him to not do Tintin is just flat out evil. I think that he has also had the longest run of great films being made by a single director with in this decade that is. Even War of the Worlds which in my opinion is his weakest film to date still has some Steven Spielberg wonder that other films could never achieve.
What are peoples expectations for Tintin?
What would they like to see maintained, what would they like to see done better?
What are peoples anxieties?
And the 3D? Personally I don’t see the advancement I get headaches when I see a movie in 3d and my vision gets messed up. There was a HUGE difference when I saw UP twice once in 2d and the other in 3d. I felt the comfortableness was just all together exceptionally different.