Movie Review: The Adventures of Tintin

When I was a kid, there were few comics that captured my attention as much as Tintin did. Considering how popular the franchise is in… well, virtually every country in the world, barring the U.S., this shouldn’t be much of a surprise. While I didn’t own all the books, I still managed to read all of them (except for Tintin in the Land of the Soviets, but I apparently didn’t miss much) thanks to the school library them all. While I haven’t read them in years, I still remember all the important plot points and crazy characters, and I would say that I overall know the books pretty well (probably helped by the amazing cartoon series from the ’90s). So when I heard that Steven Spielberg, Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, Hot Fuzz), and Peter Jackson were working together to make a Tintin movie, I was excited, to say the least. Admittedly, I was a bit worried when I found out that they would be taking the CGI approach, but the fact that it was going to be an adaptation of The Secret of the Unicorn, one of the best Tintin stories, kept me hoping for the best. Having seen the movie a few days ago, I can safely say that all my worried were completely unfounded.

The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn is not actually a straight adaptation of the original story. It seems to be aimed more at kids who have never read Tintin before, which means that things needed to be changed around, as the ever-popular Captain Haddock (played here by Andy Serkis, aka Gollum and King Kong) was already an established character by this point. Spielberg’s solution? Mix in elements from The Crab with the Golden Claws, where he was originally introduced. Elements of the original Secret of the Unicorn have also been changed, which results in the movie being a fresh take on the material, even after I re-read the original story. Suffice to say that while there aren’t that many overall changes in the plot, what changes there are actually improved the material, though I’m sure there are many who are screaming at Spielberg for daring to alter even the slightest thing.

The acting is pretty solid, with Tintin being played by Jamie Bell (aka Billy Elliott), Dupont and Dupond (or Thompson and Thomson to everyone who didn’t read in the original French) by Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (those two guys from Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz), and the villain being played by Daniel Craig (James Bond and Mikael Blomqvist from The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo). Popular Moroccan Jewish comedian Gad Elmaleh also has a minor role in the movie, but his appearance is so brief that his role feels wasted. The CGI is quite good in the movie, with almost every character looking as though they stepped out of the Tintin books. The only exception is Tintin himself, who has a realistic face, resulting in an uncanny valley effect (though the hair and clothing style is spot-on). The music in the movie is excellent, which is hardly surprising, considering that it was composed by the legendary John Williams.

The movie is very faithful to the books, even resisting the temptation to use the character Professor Calculus / Tournesol, which I grudgingly admit wouldn’t have worked because he only showed up in the follow-up to The Secret of the Unicorn, Red Rackham’s Treasure. (Though I’m still a little annoyed about this, since he was my favourite character). There are tons of little references to the various Tintin adventures scattered throughout the movie, and trying to find them all would probably warrant watching the movie a second time. If you look carefully, you may even spot a cameo by Hergé, the deceased creator of Tintin, at the beginning of the movie.

Overall, this was a great movie, which I feel most people would enjoy, but Tintin fans will especially love it. I’m hoping for more Tintin movies like this in the future (with more Tournesol, ideally). Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to re-read Tintin in Tibet.

Next Time: I finally get around to talking about Fallout 3′s DLC, followed by Fallout: New Vegas.

Movie Review: Contagion

So I just saw Contagion last night. Had to pay more than usual because the only theatre that’s still showing the movie in Montreal only had it playing in IMAX, which was annoying. The question is, was Contagion was worth paying extra to see instead of just waiting to rent it on iTunes or something? I think I can safely say that yes, it definitely was worth paying extra.

The premise of the movie can pretty much be summed up as a disaster movie where the disaster is a global pandemic. What makes the movie work compared to other viral disaster movies like Outbreak (which is still good) is that the way the scenario is presented is entirely realistic, which helps make the entire experience frightening. The fact that the CDC gave scientific advice to the filmmakers is readily apparent, and makes the experience of watching Contagion not only harrowing, but educational as well. I certainly didn’t know what an R-nought was before I went to see the movie.

The disease in the movie (dubbed MEV-1) is definitely chilling: it spreads like the flu, but seems to be so dangerous that virtually everyone shown to be infected in Contagion is guaranteed to die. Steven Soderbergh’s signature style of showing the perspectives of multiple characters at once definitely works here: we have the husband of MEV-1′s first victim, played by Matt Damon, who is forced to deal with the death of his wife (Gwyneth Paltrow) and stepson while trying to make sure that his daughter doesn’t get infected herself. We also have multiple characters working for the CDC, including Laurence Fishburne and Kate Winslet, who are pretty much passing up on sleep in order to try and create a vaccine for MEV-1 while simultaneously trying to keep the general population from panicking and making the situation even worse. Marion Cotillard plays a doctor working for the WHO who is sent to Hong Kong to try and determine how the disease spread. Unfortunately, Cotillard’s character does not play a significant role in the film, and doesn’t get much screentime overall. Jude Law plays a sleazy conspiracy theorist with a blog, and ends up being the closest thing the movie has to a human antagonist. Despite first appearances, he is not the usual intrepid journalist; rather, it’s best to describe him as a greedy egomaniac with an Internet connection. Without spoiling anything, Law’s character manages to become the most unlikable person in the movie, but in a way that is entirely plausible, and should earn him a Best Supporting Actor nomination at the Oscars, if not the award itself.

One of the best parts of the movie is how it shows law and order breaking down due to government attempts to control the spread of MEV-1 by quarantining cities. Most might say that the number of people resorting to looting and mob violence to get vaccine doses is exaggerated, but seeing how people in Montreal are willing to riot over the Canadians winning a hockey game, it seems all too plausible for me. The seriousness of the situation in Contagion is, to me, best summed up by a scene halfway through the movie where the audience is shown a mass grave being filled with the bodies of the infected who have died. One doctor asks another when they ran out of body bags, and the other says that it was two days ago, and they’re waiting for more to come from Canada.

I also enjoyed the short appearance of Elliott Gould as one of the doctors working on figuring out how MEV-1 actually kills its victims. Who knew that Trapper John would go from treating soldiers in the Korean War to working with the CDC?

Overall, this was a great movie, hampered only by some characters having too little screentime. Definitely a must-see, unless you’re a germaphobe, get frightened easily, or happen to be sick.