davidgkimberley Reviews

Moonrise Kingdom (2012)

Might be my favourite Wes Anderson film

[9/10 · 27 May 2012]

The thing that I enjoy most about Wes Anderson films is that they each feel like a great adventure and in this sense I think Moonrise Kingdom is his best yet. It tells that tale of Sam, an orphan on scout camp, and Suzy, a misunderstood girl, as they run away together. At first I found the two actors playing the kids to be kind of limp but after a few minutes I warmed to them and I actually think they were both pretty good overall, particularly Jared Gilman who plays Sam and even more so knowing that it's the first acting he's ever done. The rest of the cast are all pursuing or helping them in some way and there a couple of sub-plots with the island's policeman (played by Bruce Willis) and the parents of Suzy (Bill Murray and Frances McDormand).

I thought that the rest of the cast was great. In fairness I am a bit biased because I love Bill Murray, Edward Norton, Bruce Willis and Frances McDormand but even so I have to say that they were all really good, especially Edward Norton who plays the scout master, and Bill Murray. There are also a couple of minor roles for Jason Schwartzman, Harvey Keital and Tilda Swinton who were also a lot of fun. Everyone in the cast fits into their role really well which is obviously exactly what you want, but not only is that the case for the main roles but also for the less important ones, like the scout troupe (especially Sam's 'enemy'), Suzy's three brothers or the oddball narrator.

Cinematography wise I didn't think this movie was particularly spectacular, especially in comparison to other Wes Anderson movies like 'The Life Aquatic' or 'The Royal Tenenbaums'. There were a couple of shots that were cool though, some really long zoom outs (which sounds clichéd but it worked) and the doll house type ones that I love and think are awesome.

I wouldn't expect to wet your pants laughing at any moment in 'Moonrise Kingdom' but it is funny. There are a couple of laugh out loud moments and as a whole the jokes are pretty sharp and intelligently done. The reason I like the humour in this movie is that it's a part of the ambiance and feel of it, it won't make you crack up but it will make you have a smile on your face for pretty much the whole thing and leave you feeling strangely happy.

That kind of ambiance is really why the movie is so good, and is possibly Wes Anderson's best movie. The whole story is this fantastic blend of reality and child-like dreaming and it's wonderful. At times I felt kind of nostalgic and sad that I'm not a kid anymore. On the other hand it feels like a tribute to those myths and dreams of being a child and it works so well. This is the kind of film that I feel I could watch over and over again, each time spotting something new but also feeling good and enjoying the overall purpose.

Definitely go and see it!

The Artist (I) (2011)

Beautiful film and a great experience

[8/10 · 2 February 2012]

Knowing that The Artist was a silent film and having grown up, as we all have, with nothing but those crazy, futuristic talkies, I didn't really know what to expect. The Artist, beginning in 1927 and finishing in 1932, tells the story of George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) an extremely successful silent film actor whose career begins to deteriorate rapidly with the increasing popularity of talking films. Meanwhile, Peppy Miller (Berenice Bejo) is just beginning her career and after she is shown how to 'stand out from the crowd' by Valentin, her career booms. There is therefore a strange link between the pair throughout the film, and whilst Peppy is going up, George is going down - this is effectively the situation that the film spawns from.

I thought the acting in this film was most impressive. I loved the way Dujardin smiled and I thought he really looked the part throughout, I can't imagine anyone else playing that role and I think that's the sign of a good performance. Bejo was also very good, probably not as good as Dujardin but then I don't think she had the same opportunity to perform as he did. What made their performances, for me, so impressive was the fact that they managed to entertain without words. That may sound very silly and obvious, but when you watch Chaplin in a talkie he's so fantastic at both expressing himself with words and as a mute. Whilst Chaplin had never done a talkie before The Great Dictator, I'm guessing no one in this film had done a silent film before and although perhaps one transition is easier than the other, there's no doubting that to make any sort of transition, and to do it so well, is very tricky.

From the directors point of view, I thought that the same was true. Hazanavicious tells a very good story. I thought that there were a couple of really good shots and clever interplay between live action and the little cuts to words being displayed. Also impressive were the shots of films in making and the creation of films in making (maybe I'm being an idiot and they're based on real films? I don't know) that looked very believable. Whether or not he intended to, Hazanavicious creates a really great tribute to film and cinema, as well as telling a really beautiful, classic feeling story. Without having seen it, it is very hard to explain the feeling you get after having seen it, but though I wouldn't say it was my favourite, nor the best film I've ever seen, it was a cinematic experience really quite unlike I had experienced before and that makes it quite special.

Music is also, obviously, a very important part in a silent film. Going back to The Great Dictator, probably one of my favourite scenes of all time, is the one in which Brahm's 5th Hungarian Dance plays because it demonstrates such character and such an entertainer. Whilst I don't think anyone even nearly matches Chaplin in this, I was still really entertained. The music in The Artist is flawless, it is so good, I would imagine music in films is something that seems far easier than it is. It always captured the mood perfectly and without it being so good the film would fail to convey to you the emotion that it does.

I have a couple of tiny trifles with this film. Firstly, there were a couple (and I do mean a couple) of times when the speech almost dragged on, it didn't work very well in silent and we were left with conversation through caption / text (whatever they're called) screens that felt a bit rigid and unpolished, but again I want to reiterate that this only happened twice. Second I think maybe the script or just collectively the film isn't quite there. Right now The Artist has a rating of 8.4 but I don't think it's worthy of being considered one of THE BEST films EVER, because it's just not. Don't get me wrong, I loved the film and really enjoyed it and appreciate that it's almost revolutionary never seen before, but it just lacks something that might have made it worthy, to be called one of the greats.

Overall The Artist is an absolute must see. It's a very intelligent film (which is probably why a lot of people from Liverpool walked out on realising that was silent) and a very enthralling / enjoyable film. Whilst, as I have said already, I don't think it is one of the greats, it is unlike anything you will have seen before and that is what makes it stand out from the crowd so much. Go and see it!

Paths of Glory (1957)

Very near Perfection

[9/10 · 22 January 2012]

What first struck as being most impressive in Paths of Glory, was the way in which trench warfare and life in the trench was shot. Usually I find there's some sort of gloss over the reality of the situation, and whilst here, there weren't mountains dismembered bodies and discarded heads, the emotion of the place was just so brilliantly conveyed. In the shots in which the camera glides through the trenches the emotion of every man is conveyed and felt, its seriously powerful. Though obviously not intentional, the fact that this film was in black and white actually helped it to feel more real somehow. That's probably just a personal opinion and its quite hard to explain but I just don't think the film actually would have been so effective if in full colour, it is far more a film of message and emotion than of beautiful scenery and an array of rainbow like effects.

In terms of directing, Kubrik is really very good. There were three shots used a few times each throughout the film that I really liked. Firstly was the gliding through the trenches that I've already spoken about. Secondly was the following of one person whilst panning the camera behind other people. This was quite exceptional in the shooting scene which is so abrupt, and as its almost from the perspective of the shooter there is almost a feeling of guilt or at least it induces some sort of emotion. Thirdly was the way in which people's faces are shot, I you feel like you see everyone in this film and whilst that might sound strange or pretty stupid its true. Pretty much every character in the film, from the tiniest extra to Kirk Douglas, facial features seem to be shown and it brings in such an incredible array of emotion (I'm sorry for saying emotion so much!), whether it be the nasty general or normal soldiers who we see panning through the trenches.

Acting wise I thought this film was really spot on again. Probably the most impressive element was the one of restraint. So many characters have to hide their real feelings in the face of their superiors whilst simultaneously displaying them to the audience. Kirk Douglas's cracking point was probably the best example of this, even though he does reveal his true feelings to some extent, one still feels he is still holding back some what and that was very very good.

In one of his very rousing speeches Kirk Douglas states; "There are times when I am ashamed to be a member of the human race and this is one such occasion". I think this probably best sums up the whole motif of the film. Although it might be an anti-war piece, the film really has a Kafkaesque feel to it, it seems to be calling into question certain elements of humanity and it does absolutely brilliantly, so that even at the conclusion there is no real certainty, I didn't feel as though anyone had lost or won, just that everything was going to carry on as usual despite the travesties that were occurring so constantly.

The Great Dictator (1940)

The most perfect film I've ever seen

[10/10 · 17 January 2012]

Though I am ashamed to admit it, this is in fact the only Chaplin film I have (so far) seen. This film absolutely stunned me, Chaplin, wrote, directed, produced and played the lead role in 'The Great Dictator' and dear god did he do a good job.

In terms of acting, Chaplin is just unbelievable. There is an incredible combination of silent and spoken performance, and it evokes both extreme laughter and sadness. One can easily the remnants of his silent career in this and his mannerisms, his physical acting is hilarious. The speech at the end of the film is probably the best I've ever seen in any film, his delivery is just incredible, its thought provoking and full of emotion. Chaplin is just the absolute maestro some of the clowns who perform nowadays should most definitely take heed, individually I've never seen a comic performance or dramatic performance that good, but together, its left me speechless, I actually can't convey how good he was in words.

Script wise, its again just fantastic. The characters' names to start with are hilarious (herring and garbage being my favourite) whilst the absolute nonsense he spouts when speaking German is also very good. There is also silliness but with such close attention to detail, most notably, I thought, was checking his tie in the bald man's shining head or the ridiculous moments where he goes into to be sculpted or painted before dashing out again a few seconds later. The speech at the end is legendary. This is quite seriously worthy of some great politician and its deliverance, as I have said, was outstanding.

I can't really think of anything else to say and I actually feel as though I haven't even nearly done justice to this piece of cinema. It must go down as one of the greatest films ever made.

The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)

Wes Anderson gets the best out of people

[8/10 · 10 January 2012]

Wes Anderson films are like exceptionally well done home movies. Its always the same actors in different costumes playing different roles as if to say; "what shall we do now?". The Royal Tenenbaums is the story of a family of five headed by Royal Tenenbaum (Gene Hackman). The three children in the storm of their parents divorce all become child prodigies of sorts. Chas, played by Ben Still, is a money man making a killing on the housing market. Margot (who is adopted), played by Gwyneth Paltrow, is a playwright and Richie, played by Luke Wilson, is a world champion tennis player. Another character thrown into the midst is Eli Cash, played by Owen Wilson, who is Richie's best friend.

The film begins by portraying the three as children all of whom seem to have massive potential, however, fast forward twenty-two years and the family is in rather a grave state. Chas's wife died in a plane crash and he has become extremely overprotective of his twin boys. Richie has had some sort of nervous breakdown and has been travelling on a boat, going around the globe, for several years. Margot, who has married Raleigh (played by Bill Murray) has not written a play for years and seems to have entered a state of uncertainty in her life. She is also having an affair with Eli, who has become a successful author. Meanwhile Royal, who hasn't seen his wife (they never officially divorced) for seven years and after falling on hard times is kicked out of his hotel.

When Chas comes to stay at the house the three children grew up in, Richi and Margot become jealous and also want to stay. Meanwhile Royal, who supposedly has six weeks to live, also needs somewhere to stay. A strange family reunion is formed and the movie really kicks off from here, with Royal trying to salvage some sort of relationship with his children in his last remaining weeks and the children themselves trying to work out and resolve what exactly has gone wrong in their lives. As a kind of side story that seeps into the main one, Eli has developed a comically performed drug habit.

Acting wise I loved this film. I love the choice of actors as aside from Jason Schwartzman this film seems to encompass all of the usuals. Characters who some people usually find annoying or of poor quality (although I like him, everyone seems to be annoyed by Owen Wilson) do a great job. I thought Ben Stiller, who I usually find very average / type cast, performed exceptionally well, especially on his comedic side. Gene Hackman was fantastic as Royal Tenenbaum, the lovable asshole and the rest of the usuals were good as ever, I especially love Kumar Pallana, who plays Pagoda.

In terms of directing Wes Anderson is on point as usual. He has a real life doll house and whilst, annoyingly, he couldn't open it up to pan down the innards, the shots the scroll down the windows were wonderful. I also love the way he follows people, particularly in chase type scenes, because though showing you the action perfectly you also get to see everybody else's reactions whilst he simultaneously shows off the house / set that he's working in for all its weirdly wonderful characteristics. The soundtrack, as for all Anderson films, is really superb. Everything comes on and disappears at the right moment, and the music always matches the action.

The writing is possibly the best bit. The story is very enticing, and within the film there are several different stories, secrets held by characters etc. that come together and manifest themselves in a perfect ending. The film is also very funny, there is a mixture of deadpan and just very silly humour that will make you laugh out loud and smile your way through this picture.

Overall I think this may be Wes Anderson's best movie (apart from maybe Bottlerocket). Its very clever and you definitely won't have seen anything like it before. I would say that this would definitely have been Oscar worthy, its just that its probably not really serious enough for the expletives at the academy, though perhaps not for any acting (still, maybe Ben Stiller should have got best supporting?). Anyways this is a must watch, definitely go and see it!

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)

Excellent, but not a classic in my opinion

[9/10 · 8 January 2012]

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind tells the story of a collapsed relationship. After Joel (Jim Carrey) and Clementine (Kate Winslet) have an argument they break up and Joel soon discovers that Clementine has had her memory of him wiped. In a fit of rage Joel decides to go through the same procedure but whilst his memories of her begin to fade Joel realises how much he loves / likes Clementine and tries, in his strange unconsciousness to stop to the operation from taking effect.

In terms of directing, the film is amazing, I loved the way it was shot - it was very clever and I thought quite beautiful at times. Script wise the same is true, the way in which Joel's memories are woven together is brilliant. On the surface what seems a very simple idea is actually incredibly well put together. The music, from Jon Brion, was also great and very apt. The way in which these three are put together is phenomenal, you'll want to laugh or cry and many times I couldn't help but break out a strange, very satisfied smile just because I was enjoying it so much.

What I think maybe let this film down for me personally, was the kind of average acting. I thought Jim Carrey was good, but not amazing, I was just pleased he wasn't in his usual very slapstick type role. The same was true for Kate Winslet and the other characters in the film, they were all good but not amazing. I think a classic film should have characters that feel irreplaceable, for example I can't imagine anyone else but John Goodman and Jeff Bridges in The Big Lebowski, Russell Crowe in Gladiator or Clint Eastwood and co. in The Good, The Bad and The ugly. Admittedly there isn't a huge amount of drama in this film but there is some and its just done averagely.

There were also two bits that bothered me. Firstly, Joel lies about the manner in which he met Clementine and then in his memory its as he described, not as it happened. Its probably me just being stupid and missing something but that didn't really make sense. Secondly I didn't think the ending was that wonderful, and I'm talking literally the last minute. This is my opinion though and I can see why people might thought that it actually made for a fitting end, it just wasn't my cup of tea.

I didn't love this film and given its seriously high rating on this website, and what I'd heard from other people I was a tiny bit let down. I can see why people do think its so fantastic and that it might be a classic for some, it just wasn't for me. Nevertheless, I think I've probably just been nit picking a great deal, I'm sorry if I've taken away something from this film because it is amazing. I've not seen anything like it before and you should definitely go and see it!

Bottle Rocket (1996)

A new favourite for me

[8/10 · 7 January 2012]

I find it really hard to explain to people why I think Wes Anderson movies are so great. There's an air about them that's so wonderful and I always feel really great after I've watched them. When I tried to explain my friend said, "a bit like the Big Lebowski?" and I think that's the closest you can come to describing Bottle Rocket and Wes Anderson movies as a whole they're that sort of brand of movie.

Bottle Rocket is the story of three guys who live in the suburbs who are trying to become criminals and not making a very good job of it. The film starts with Anthony (Luke Wilson) coming out of a voluntary rehab type place and instantly joining his friend Dignan in his very poor attempts to become some sort of criminal. They are joined by their friend Bob, because he has a car, and start by robbing a library. The film really emerges from that moment and takes you on this up beat, weird (but wonderful) adventure.

Owen and Luke Wilson are really good together, with Owen Wilson probably stealing the show as the completely useless but very endearing Dignan. Bob, played by Robert Musgrave, is also excellent in his role as the lovable loser. The soundtrack is perfect, everything comes and goes at exactly the right moment.

This was probably one of the funniest films i've seen in a while too. If you like the Big Lebowski you will love this film (my favourite is probably "Anthony wake up, Bob's stolen his car"). It also feels a lot longer than it is and whilst that's usually bad, in this case it was fantastic. At 30 minutes I looked to see how long I'd been watching it for and was amazed at how engrossed I was but also how much happens but yet the film manages to feel really slow and relaxed.

Though I've said Dignan was endearing I guess the movie as a whole is endearing, its such a lovely film, I really don't see how you couldn't like it. Some how this just misses out on being a real classic on a level with Big Lebowski, maybe its because not as many people have seen it or something, either way its definitely in my top ten or top five or something. A must see, go and watch it!

The Darjeeling Limited (2007)

How could you not like this film?

[7/10 · 5 January 2012]

Whilst I wouldn't say this is Wes Anderson's best film it is still a good one. Set in India on a train called The Darjeeling Limited (hence the title) the film follows three brothers, played by Owen Wilson, Adrian Brody and Jason Schwartzman, on a journey intended to bring them closer together - they haven't seen each other since their father's funeral a year earlier.

Many people have gone on about how the film is supposed to be very spiritual and quirky and so on. I think that its in a way the complete opposite, at every moment of supposed spirituality something goes wrong in some way and the moments that bring the brothers together are not the spiritual ones but the failure to complete those spiritual tasks, their fighting and their journey.

I didn't think the film was hilarious but then its not supposed to be laugh out loud stuff. Like Wes Anderson's other films this one has, for me anyway, that fun, feel good vibe that means you'll accept all the strange occurrences, like a train going the wrong way or someone stealing a shoe. The acting was good, though on the face of it they have rather simple roles, the chemistry between the three was great (especially considering it was Brody's first time with Anderson). In terms of directing, I'm a massive fan of the doll house type shots that Wes Anderson does, I think they're cool as hell the way you switch between different circumstances. I also think he deserves further kudos, given he was filming in India he could have gone a bit wild with crazy views and strange people but instead it was subtly very beautiful and whilst there was a lot of fun hippy type colouring in parts it was never wild or out of control and that fitted in well with the rest of the film.

This wasn't my favourite Wes film but its still excellent. The thing that lets it down is the script or overall story, a lot of weird "stuff" happens that's hard to explain unless you've seen a Wes Anderson film. That was great and I'll always enjoy that but there was no real resolution here, I smiled at the end at felt happy I guess but usually after watching his films there's a greater level of emotion and message than I felt after this one. Either way this a really fun film, go and watch it but although it is in India, don't go into it expecting some incredible mystical experience.

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004)

I love Wes Anderson

[8/10 · 4 January 2012]

There is an incredible ambiance about Wes Anderson films, some sort of weird, wonderful and this is definitely true for The Life Aquatic. Bill Murray plays Steve Zissou, an renowned oceanographer whose moment of glory seems to have passed. The film starts with Zissou showing his latest film in which his best pal, Esteban, is eaten by what he calls a "jaguar shark". After the showing Zissou meets his long lost son, Ned, (played by Owen Wilson), who gives him the funding to make another documentary in which he intends to kill the so called "jaguar shark".

What follows is an adventure / comedy type film with a fantastically strange, but wonderful, cast, costumes, settings and story. Whilst Bill Murray's deadpan display is most prominent, all the other performances are really good and special kudos to Klaus who I thought was great fun.

Wes Anderson's directing is also on point. The initial "tour" of the boat is really cool and the way the camera moves from room to room (or set to set) is very simple but works very well throughout the film and I reckon a few action directors should take heed. The action sequences themselves and the CGI moments look almost cheap or over the top, out of film school or something, but this actually worked well with the (dare I say it) quirky spirit of the film.

Without having seen it its really hard to explain why one might think the film was so great given how reasonably bog standard it sounds. There just feels like there's more to it than there is on face value and I, personally, always get this good feeling after watching Wes Anderson films that's kind of hard to explain, like you've witnessed something wonderful or achieved something great. Definitely one to watch.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998)

Very good but doesn't quite match the book

[3 January 2012]

I hate to be one those annoying snobs who rains on the parade of a great film by talking out of my arse and saying "ooo weelll the book is better" but that's exactly what I'm going to do. Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas tells the story of Raoul Duke and his attorney, Dr Gonzo, on a mission to find the American Dream. The tale comes from two separate trips Hunter S Thompson made with his real - life attorney, Oscar Acosta in 1971. Raoul Duke is a pseudonym used frequently by Thompson in his books, and a character supposed to represent Thompson himself.

The film has a very loose narrative structure and is effectively a two hour binge of drunken, drug fuelled madness that is very funny and both very well directed and acted out. Johnny Depp, who was a great friend of Thompson, plays Duke outstandingly well and the same is true of Benicio Del Toro for his portrayal of the psychopathic attorney, Dr Gonzo. The chemistry between these two is brilliant and I must say that in this way the film does live up to the nature of the book.

Terry Gilliam did an excellent job directing the film, particularly given the chaotic nature of the film. It would have been very easy for the film to lose its coherence entirely given the constant drug taking and need to perceive its effects, however, he does extremely well to both demonstrate the psychoactive madness of the novel whilst more or less keeping to the story. I think that Gilliam could perhaps have done better though in regard to the ending. Whilst in the film we end with Depp driving off into the sunset, in the book a great deal of the meaning and message of the novel occurs after this point.

This is my main problem with the film, there is a massive emphasis on the humour, madness and chaos of the novel but barely anything on its purpose. I concede that this probably would have been very hard to do but I think Gilliam could have made more of an effort on this front. I watched the film first and whilst you do understand why they are doing what they are doing and its purpose, it is very vague; in fact the only scene in which it is made even a bit clear is the famous "wave" speech. This means that whilst the film is very good, I would imagine a great number of people would come away thinking that it was cool how many drugs they took and laughing rather than getting the point of it all.

I would point out though that this really is my opinion and that you should read the book and watch the film in order to come to your own judgement because there's a great deal of interpretation to be made. Take nothing away from the acting in this film though, it is absolutely top class and whilst I have criticised Gilliam he still did a very good job of a novel that would have been very hard to perfect cinematically, kudos all round.

The Lower Depths (1957)

Powerful stuff

[8/10 · 1 January 2012]

I don't know what the budget of 'The Lower Depths' was but it certainly proves that a great film can made for very little. 'The Lower Depths' tells the story of a group of people living in a one room slum of various different occupations and reasons behind their predicament. I didn't really get when it is supposed to be set but its really irrelevant given the timelessness of the production.

The first 10 - 20 minutes feel a bit like a theatre, rather than a cinema, production given that the set for nearly the entirety of the film is one room. Whether or not this changes is hard to say but I felt something quite strange about this in that, I didn't feel like I was an external being, I really felt like I was in the room with the actors laughing, singing and drinking with them and that was fantastic.

Toshiro Mifune is probably the character that comes closest to a lead role and as always he is fantastic. However, I would say that Isuzu Yamada (who plays Osugi) is also brilliant in a nurse Ratchet like fashion, and the same is true for Bokuzen Hidari (who plays 'grandad'). Whilst those three, for me, were outstanding take nothing away from the rest of the cast they are all very, very good - even if the women's wailings are incessantly annoying.

Whilst I wouldn't say that The Lower Depths is Kurosawa's best film by any means it does provide both entertainment and a message. There are both very amusing and very exciting bits but at the same time there's a constant air of thought provoking meaning that you can take what you want from. This isn't the best film ever but its an excellent one, go and see it!

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989)

A most bodacious film!

[8/10 · 27 December 2011]

I find that IMDb's scores out of 10 are usually reasonably sensible and accurate, however, for Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure I couldn't understand why it was so low! The film starts with Bill (Alex Winter) and Ted (Keanu Reeves) on the verge of failure in their history class and flunking out of school. Ted will be forced to go to military school if they do fail and the only thing that can save them is the deliverance of a most bodacious history project the following day. In the midst of their hurried studying a strange, cool looking dude called Rufus gives them a time machine, in the shape of a 1960s phonebox, and tells them to use it to travel back in time and gather various historical figures in order to complete their project for the next day.

What ensues is a film of pure wonder and joy. Various historical characters such as Socrates (or so-crates), Joan of Arc and Genghis Kahn are picked up along the way and throughout the film Reeves and Winter are superb in their enthusiastic portrayal of the very teenage, very boneheaded Bill and Ted. A lot of people seem to damn this film for not being funny but I found it hilarious. There aren't any cheap or childish jokes, in fact quite of a lot of it is extremely well written and very witty.

Chris Matheson and Ed Solomon, the writers of the film, have said that the characters of Bill and Ted came from an idiolised version of their friendship, Chris and Ed = Bill and Ted. Given this you shouldn't go into the film expecting cinematic brilliance but rather a lot of fun, some good laughs and both a mocking and realisation of teenage dreams. Don't expect to have your heart strings pulled,your rage barrier smashed or you're life changed; just let yourself be taken on a most excellent, most bodacious and most unprecedented adventure and have fun!

The Adventures of Tintin (2011)

Spielberg has spoilt Tintin

[5/10 · 26 November 2011]

I went into this film expecting the worst but hoping for the best, as an avid Tintin fan as a kid I always kind of felt, and now feel, that he should be left in his original form and not tampered with. Firstly, a lot of people have complained about really basic things like the voices, cinematography or music. None of that stuff really bothered me, I actually thought the voices were pretty good (apart from perhaps Thomson & Thompson) adaptations, people are always going to have had created their own imaginary voices for the characters but I think this was done well and pleased most people. The cinematography was pretty decent, though it felt very inappropriately Indiana Jones-esc in the last quarter, and the music was absolutely fine - I don't think Tintin really needs an Indie like score, it wouldn't really work.

Several things, however, really REALLY bugged me. Firstly; the film is supposed to be a combination of three books (The Secret of The Unicorn, The Crab With the Golden Claws and Red Rackham's treasure) but I just didn't see the point in that at all. The bits in the film which are good are the bits which are just direct copies of Herge and I just don't see why Spielberg couldn't have just followed exactly a book, or two books, especially given that any of the books is effectively a storyboard and script in itself. All that happens as a result of this is a wobbly first half of the film, which isn't that bad, and then a really really crappy second half, that utterly misses the original books - the Bird Brothers aren't mentioned once and the main 'baddy' is someone, who in the Secret of The Unicorn, plays a very very minor role. There's two action scenes which are both straight out of Indiana Jones but that, at least, for me is the complete opposite of what Tintin is supposed to be - he's supposed to be a very precise, intelligent, cunning character not a loud Hollywood directed moron who blows everything up. There is also an extremely clichéd "never give up, never let anyone tell you blah blah blah blah" type speech from Haddock to Tintin that's just awful; firstly because he could easily have not put it in and more importantly because that, again, is not what Tintin is about and it never happens in any of the books.

All of those things, and other minor details, just make the film feel really unpolished, as though it was a real lacklustre effort that went into making it and at its best its completely average. This actually made me really angry, Tintin is a legendary character who deserves the utmost respect and that just wasn't given to him at all. What is more I just don't get why Spielberg felt the need to warp the story in the way that he did because it ruined it completely. Most importantly though, I fear Tintin could really be mutilated for a new generation of readers, I would bet that most kids going to see this film (and Tintin is, as much as I love it, for kids!) haven't read any of the books and they've been given this completely false image of a really amazing, fun character. Go and see it, because you kind of have to, but prepare to be let down really badly.