Tintinology (formally Tintin Movie .org) is an independent news and analysis service on the Tintin movie and the works of Herge. (c) Chris Tregenza, Tintinology.poosk.com
Tintin, Tintin & Snowy, Captain Haddock, Thomson & Thompson, Professor Calculus and Herge are all trademarks of Moulinsart S.A. The text and images of the 24 Tintin albums (c) Herge / Moulinsart S.A.
Tintin Movie Twitter
- Tintin versus Asterix -- http://t.co/hK6fF5BJ >>
- Rin-Tin-TinTin - http://t.co/9moh3Gh0 >>
- @domjoly I liked the first 1/2 to 2/3rds but last part, i.e. the new material, was weak. >>
- RT @domjoly: Off to see the Tintin movie- incredibly nervous that I'm going to loathe it. >>
- New Tintin TV Spot -- http://t.co/sEwnSN6T >>
- Almost 300 members of @tintinid watched the Tintin Movie together at Blitz Grand Indonesia yesterday #tintinID >>
- Tintin in the Congo defended by the Vatican! -- http://t.co/wKW6ln7E >>
- Tintin continues to triumph in cinemas. -- http://t.co/4KN1JRBH >>
- Nice collection of images from Toronto Draws Tintin -- http://t.co/8TJUL3rE >>
- RT @akajonah The movie is exquisite! Beautiful ! Need to watch it again,2 much to take in! Breathtaking! 3D awesome. Felt like a kid again! >>
- @terryduffelen My pleasure. Enjoy the film. >>
- Toronto Draws Tintin -- http://t.co/qdCie78C >>
- Review – Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn -- After four & half years of waiting, I finally get to see the film -- http://t.co/pZOzsngE >>
- @martylog UK wide from today. >>
- RT @JoeStephenson: Oi! Why is the @TintinMovie soundtrack still not on iTunes?? How am I supposed to run around boats pretending to be T ... >>
”Tintin” Wins The Producers Guild of America Award!
Here’s a quick post to once again celebrate one more award for Tintin! ”The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of The Unicorn” recently won the award the Producers Guild of America for Best Animated Feature!Even if Tintin didn’t do so terribly well as it did in Europe over in the USA, it’s great to see how it’s being recognized as a great movie. Congratulations! Good find, Adesh!
Source:http://www.producersguild.org/news/81677/PRODUCERS-GUILD-OF-AMERICA-ANNOUNCES-2012-PRODUCERS-GUILD-AWARD-WINNERS-.htm
Interesting article with interesting comments on Oscar Academy’s attitude towards tintin’s animation.
http://www.empireonline.com/empireblogs/empire-states/post/p1186
Just wanted to share.
January 27th, 2012 at 1:37 pmI have to say that I mostly agree with the article. Some very interesting points in there.
January 27th, 2012 at 10:16 pmeverything has already been said about that…
animation’s etymology goes back to the latin “animus” which can mean “mind”, or “spirit”. When you draw a movement in a convincing way, to achieve a lifelike being, then you have animated it. The way I see it animation means to successfully pretend that a dead object is a living being, by trying to imitate what you experience in the real world (many animators use actors to understand specific gestures etc). all art is more than simple reproduction; real animation often says something about the characters or their situation, so there’s that.
I don’t hate MoCap or Rotoscoping but I’d say that it shouldn’t be counted as animation because you don’t really imitate movements, you just record them and computerize them. It’s a purely technical process, the acting that is needed before isn’t.
January 27th, 2012 at 11:37 pmI think it should. Yes, it has been acted out, but it can’t really be considered live action, cos it isn’t, it just doesn’t look real enough. Maybe they should make a seperate category for mocap stuff.
January 28th, 2012 at 3:25 amagain, why? doing mocap is just a technical process of copying the movements of some actors to a dead object. it is just simply reproduction. it requires not a lot of knowledge or talent to tweak it a bit. making a single category for it would be like making a category for “most erotic way of turning the camera on”. it’s not animation (see above post…you haven’t read it again), and there’s not much to compete.
The acting that is recorded for mocap IS live action. Mocap is nothing but a technical process. Just because it’s not live action you can say it’s animation. Following that logic, you could also claim that it’s a banana.
January 28th, 2012 at 9:36 amPeter, please don’t accuse people of not reading your comments. You know what that caused, and we don’t want to go through that again.
January 28th, 2012 at 3:04 pmYou, Mike, probably still haven’t read what I replied to your comment about opinions and facts, or you haven’t understood it.
http://tintinology.poosk.com/2011/12/24/the-adventures-of-tintin-movie-review/#comment-3866
I never ‘accuse’ people of not having read my comments and I don’t care if they don’t, as long as they don’t reply to something I haven’t said, which is what you and Trix are doing.
I commented those “interesting points”, and gave about 4 reasons why mocap shouldn’t be regarded as art but as a technical process.
Trix replies that I’m wrong, because it was live action. Remember that I just used exactly that argument to say that performance capture shouldn’t get ‘special treatment’, because live action isn’t the same as animation? Obviously not:
“It’s not live action because it isn’t”
I then tried to make my first comment even easier to understand, and also replied to the other bit, explaining why mocap is in the same category as live action, and by no means animation.
and finally, why can’t you stop speaking for yourself by using plural? There wouldn’t be a problem if you were less obsessed with people who didn’t like the film. Whenever you’re trying to overlord yourself like that (same for this childish “I’m done with you/you’re not worth it” fuss), the accusation that I was accusing people is extremely ironic.
January 28th, 2012 at 6:32 pmalso, note that I’ve talked about your post in that comment I linked, so if there’s anything that I took seriously, it’s you and your attitude – not the film. you should be glad as long as anyone takes you seriously like that, because I’m getting tired when I feel as if I was nearly only one here (with the exception of Stephen) who’s trying to justify every single opinion accurately.
January 28th, 2012 at 6:37 pmI’m sorry, Peter.
January 28th, 2012 at 7:33 pmI don’t really say that you’re wrong, I don’t know how to put this really. It’s neither, yet it’s a bit of both. If you know what I mean.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:06 amActually, what I meant is that I am trying not to say you’re wrong, I think I am just saying that you’re half right, that it is live action as well, as animated. They did fully animate some of the stunts, you know.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:07 amNope, I am saying this all wrong. I hope you know what I mean. And don’t get offended by it.
January 29th, 2012 at 1:09 amI’m not offended by it, otherwise I wouldn’t have commented.
January 29th, 2012 at 9:31 amTintin is definitely a hybrid between two more traditonal forms. If you define an animated movie as a movie that was created entirely from scratch, giving life to or ”animating” drawings, than Tintin isn’t an animated movie because they did draw on live actors. But the camels, snowy and the falcon were completely animated. Everything that moved in the movie that didn’t come from a face, every drop of water and vehicle, was all ”brought to life” in a sense. While not all of it, a good majority of it definitely fits the definition of ” the rapid display of a sequence of images of 2-D or 3-D artwork or model positions in order to create an illusion of movement.” So I guess it depends on how you define your terms. So while it won’t win an oscar because of how they set their rules, it did win a Golden Globe and this PGA award.
January 29th, 2012 at 6:30 pmMy point is that if Tintin competes with ‘normal’ animation films to get awarded for its animation, the result should be based on these things you described, not on the mocap, because mocap isn’t animation, or art.
You can also award the acting that was used for the mocap, but not mocap itself, because it’s not art.
from my understanding a hybrid would be “Who framed Roger Rabbit” or “Tron”, but not Tintin, because the movie doesn’t take itself seriously as a work of art whereas the other two don’t use the technology just for the sake of it. There’s live action, and yeah, there’s also some ‘animation’, but it just tries to imitate the real world and adds nothing idiosyncratic, nothing original to the movie. it’s not conceptualized and the only way to watch the movie is the most obvious one. And the tempo is so rash that it’s almost impossible to process all this visual phantasmagoria. Good animation uses time to make movements convincing or characterize something, not to confuse the viewer.
(whether things like this falcon were really lifelike/appropriate/good animation is a whole different story I’m not going to discuss again)
January 29th, 2012 at 8:14 pmWell, it is art, in a sense. There was a lot of art that went into this movie, anyway, even if you don’t consider the movie as art.
January 30th, 2012 at 6:47 am@Peter,
January 30th, 2012 at 6:48 amuh, well, you kinda did.
not sure what you mean…
here’s what I said (for more detailed argumentation see earlier posts)
1) a movie shouldn’t get an oscar only because there’s mocap in it
because
2) mocap isn’t art because it’s a technical process. animation can be considered art when it follows the definition I gave (regardless if it’s well executed or not).
3) the live acting however, is art (again, no matter if it’s well done or not). If anything can be awarded for being art, it’s this.
4) the movie isn’t original and pretends to have copied Hergé’s world with “paying attention to detail”, defrauding the audience of the fact that these “details” are missing in the albums. Had Hergé wanted to make hyperrealist comics, he could have drawn it. The “art” in it comes from Hergé or is obligatory in the Hollywood industry. Shining cars, realistic rain particles – all this looks nice, but it’s unimportant since it’s not part of the story and there’s nothing to interprete, and it was done in a technical process. (for example, in the case of the cars that would be engineering/reconstructing vehicles according to old blueprints and Hergé’s drawings. maybe a lot of good work, but not art.)
5) While I don’t judge whether the computer models look great or not, I know that it takes far less effort than drawing a good film by hand. Spielberg and Jackson are full of shit when they say how much effort it took to make this movie, because they used the cheapest way possible (for Hollywood blockbusters, that is) and got it finished in 3 years. why else did they need such a big advertising campaign in europe, where people would have watched it anyway?
January 30th, 2012 at 11:42 amWow Peter, you’re really trying deliberately to piss off anyone who liked the film, aren’t you, with that “full of shit” attitude. You’re not in the medium they’re in, so you have no right to call it a lack of effort if you have no real sense of what goes into it. And reading about it is not the same thing as actually doing it, so don’t try that angle.
You’re only behaving like that because you didn’t like the movie. And you know, I didn’t either, but the way you’re going on about it makes people who didn’t like it look like aresholes. Get over yourself.
There are thousands of terrible movies out there. I didn’t think the film lived up to its potential, and I was disappointed with it, but the way you’re carrying on about it being “a travesty” calling people’s hard work “full of shit”, makes you sound like a butt-hurt child who needs to grow up. The way you’re going, you’re making it like the whole damn movie was a conspiracy, and that anyone who likes it are in on it. Whether you mean to do that or not is irrelevant, because that’s the way you’ve been acting lately; to you, everything about the film is a crime, and that’s a very pathetic attitude, far worse than you make Mike out to be.
Yeah, people didn’t like the film, but your childish carry-on as if you’re the fanbase spokesperson for the film is really getting on people’s nerves. Just let the movie go, will you! Let people who liked it, and those who didn’t like it, in peace!
January 30th, 2012 at 2:22 pmInteresting:
Tintin 2: Five Things To Expect | Features | Empire
January 30th, 2012 at 10:08 pmhttp://www.empireonline.com
Great tips Joe Starr. A fun reading. Here’s a direct link:
http://www.empireonline.com/features/tintin-2-five-things-to-expect
Kalli
January 30th, 2012 at 11:57 pmWell, scratch the part about me saying that mocap is art, I probably meant that there was a lot of art that went into the movie. And there is a lot (see The Art of The Adevntures of Tintin).
January 31st, 2012 at 7:08 amit would be art if they wouldn’t permanently claim to have copied Hergé, which they couldn’t
January 31st, 2012 at 8:58 amThe only point I would make here to Peter (the 2d fan) is that I’m guessing you pretty much knew from the trailers etc. that you weren’t going to enjoy this film?
I knew that I would hate it from a very early stage. So I just took the decision not to watch it. Easiest decision I ever made. Feel totally vindicated especially when you hear about tintinophiles wishing that they could UNwatch it.
So I guess I just wonder why you even bothered watching it?
January 31st, 2012 at 11:45 amAnd it makes it much less upsetting to hear which books Spielberg and co are going to turn their attention to next, knowing that I will never have to watch it.
Try it. Seriously.
January 31st, 2012 at 11:47 amto give the movie a chance perhaps? and i love Tintin, why should I pretend that I’m OK with Spielberg’s travesty?
I didn’t really care about the trailers because they only show a few small bits.
I dont regret that I have watched it, I regret that Spielberg has made such a bad film with such a big budget, and that there’s an audience for it which reacts rather positively, and that it’s a bad Tintin film.
And yeah, I won’t watch the next either. I suppose many people won’t.
January 31st, 2012 at 12:51 pmI love Tintin too – that’s precisely why I didn’t want to see what Spielberg had done with it. Would imagine that I would be much less measured than you if I had seen it (which is to your credit obviously).
There’s always going to be a mass market for this sort of thing – a shame but hardly a surprise.
Just imagine how much better you will feel when they do, say, Tintin in Tibet and you can just totally disengage with the entire process.
January 31st, 2012 at 2:16 pmheh, I’ve posted elsewhere that I doubt they’ll make Tintin in Tibet since it portrays China in such an ambivalent way (beautiful landscape, culture – but communist, inhuman politics) – they need to get these Asian countries to watch the movie.
There is certainly a mass market, but does that mean filmmakers have to rely on a stupid audience that has low expectations, no intelligence and no taste? Do they really have to adhere to every existing Hollywood cliche?
The problem I have with disengaging is simply that if you leave something like this uncommented, many people just use it to affirm their own opinion, arguing that the majority supposedly liked it. (I’ve said this before as well)
Whether the majoriy liked it or not can be important for the producers, but not for myself – because I don’t have to follow the majority’s opinion…not because I try to be rebellious (on an internet site…), but because I truly hate what kind of impotent brainwashing message this movie spreads, and that some people seem to think it was a great movie because of its technology (even better than Tintin albums), and then don’t question the content, which can at best be considered nihilistic.
And what’s worse, they also think the albums were like that (“Oh, there was a book?!”)
I’m not trying to enlighten anyone though, here I just want to make clear that there’s a different opinion, and that there are lots of good reasons for that, while there are so few, pitiful reasons to like this film that I can’t really see how anyone can seriously be happy that it even gets a few awards aside from The Golden Turkey and the likes.
I’m not even arguing that the film should have been politically charged…it’s just big nonsense in every way except the advertising campaign.
So, um, I guess my main reason to write about it is that I’m angry what the movie does with Tintin and the people who watch it. Movies should help the mass get smarter, not dumb them down.
January 31st, 2012 at 4:17 pmI feel I need to say that I and my whole family and all my friends like this movie, just to give it some credit again after being jumped on like this. Many people don’t like the movie for a lot of different reasons, and some like it.
My mother loved this movie, and my mothers friend (who was crazy in Tintin a long time ago, in the 70′s) felt that she just HAD to get all the books again after seeing it, she got so many memories and “nerdiness” back. Now we often sit and discuss Tintin when we don’t have anything else to do. And I’ve gotten two kids here to read the books even before the movie was out. After they saw the movie, they read all the books again, and again, and again. They are five years old, and thanks to the movie they wanted to know more about him and the adventures, and wanted me to read them all the time. That’s proof enough for me that this movie is totally wonderful, for all ages, if you just take it for what it is.
And no one have to write a freaking book about what I just said wrong or that I’m stupid and don’t know anything about the movie/books and so on. Just wanted to share this.
January 31st, 2012 at 6:16 pmnobody is going to do that. but perhaps you understand that for me, one of the great things about the albums is that not only five year olds can discover something new there, or that reading them can evoke more than sentimentality after you reached a certain age. And for me, this is missing in the movie.
and forgive me, I find it great that you and your mother like Tintin, and that you’ve introduced them to your children. But I suppose that almost anyone could get his/her children to do something when he/she’s able to talk about it in a fascinating way (like you and your grandmother did). When you’re 5 years old, it’s perfectly OK to read Tintin, just like it’s OK to watch the Simpsons at that age. But as you get older, you’ll obviously comprehend more of it, especially the subtle aspects that are missing in the film.
I’m not saying that children are easy to manipulate. Everyone is influenced by role models, their parents and silblings, friends, other relatives. When you’re young that influence is usually big, and obviously more important than later when you’ve developed more self-reliant thinking and your own taste.
You’re not proving that the movie is wonderful simply by saying that you liked it, just like I’m not a proof for the movie being vacuous. If anything, it only shows that the opinions about it are controversial.
January 31st, 2012 at 7:41 pmI never said I proved anything for everyone, I said it was proof enough for me. And I never said that “this movie is good” or anything to the kids. They watched, they thought, and they have their own opinion.
January 31st, 2012 at 8:10 pmsure they have, but they had an incentive for that – you, the persons of reference. It’s difficult to imagine that they had come in contact with Tintin automatically, and they begged you to go watch the movie with you, and bought the albums themselves/happened to find them in your bookshelves (unless they’re the only books you own, which is very unlikely). three year olds also like the teletubbies, but does that mean they’re great for other ages (e.g. male adults like me who don’t happen to be a caring mother)? certainly not.
January 31st, 2012 at 8:33 pmthink about this: if your children didn’t like the movie, would they want to disappoint you and say it was terrible? it’s unimportant how you say you’d deal with that (no parent would start to cry), what matters is that young children avoid to hurt their parents feelings intentionally (of course that could change during puberty…) and a bad film is a typical example for that.
January 31st, 2012 at 8:42 pmI said before; “No one have to complain or analyze what I said”. I didn’t want to start a discussion, just say that. So I wont even bother reply… Just this;
“think about this: if your children didn’t like the movie, would they want to disappoint you and say it was terrible?”
.. Yes they would? If they don’t like something they say it, they don’t care about what I think.
January 31st, 2012 at 11:05 pmwhenever you say something you have to expect reactions. if you don’t want a discussion better don’t talk at all. it’s as simple as that. and you seem to feel attacked by my post. Well, i wouldn’t reply if I wouldn’t care or if it wasn’t important to me what people do with their children, so there’s that.
you commented here because you disagreed with Jonny P and me, so we have every right to defend our opinion as well.
(and if you’re going to say that your children aren’t my business – my text was concerning children in general)
“.. Yes they would? If they don’t like something they say it, they don’t care about what I think.”
January 31st, 2012 at 11:37 pmI doubt that.
People who refrain from giving reasons for their opinions simply make it look to others as if whatever they say isn’t worth a debate since they’re unable to back it up. Amusingly that’s even ontradicting the ‘message’ of THIS Tintin movie…
January 31st, 2012 at 11:44 pmwhat the hell happened to my C key…
January 31st, 2012 at 11:45 pm“And no one have to write a freaking book about what I just said wrong or that I’m stupid and don’t know anything about the movie/books and so on. Just wanted to share this.”
“nobody is going to do that.”
And yet you go and discuss how my kids can’t say whatever they like and don’t like and that my statement is wrong for everyone except me. I just said that it was proof for me and I’m glad the movie could bring happiness to people around me, and not just me. I never wanted to discuss it. May be mean/stupid to not pick up the discussion when it comes, but if I said from the beginning that “I don’t wanna discuss it”, I hoped you would respect it.
Enough if enough, we are going off topic now.
February 1st, 2012 at 7:49 pmI can only repeat myself…you haven’t read my post, or haven’t understood it
“i wouldn’t reply if I wouldn’t care or if it wasn’t important to me what people do with their children, so there’s that.”
“(and if you’re going to say that your children aren’t my business – my text was concerning children in general)”
I also didn’t say that your children are robots, but I doubt that they aren’t influenced by you in some way. If they weren’t, your family would be pretty chaotic and I’m sure you wouldn’t want that either.
You also don’t say “only idiots eat pizza but I don’t want to discuss it” and think it’s disrespectful when someone replies to that, do you?
It’s not stupid to be quiet when one has nothing to say, but it’s absurd to feel annoyed after having posted something controversial, not tolerating replies, claiming that it was disrespectful.
February 1st, 2012 at 8:20 pmoh, and I haven’t replied to Ralph yet.
“You’re not in the medium they’re in, so you have no right to call it a lack of effort if you have no real sense of what goes into it. And reading about it is not the same thing as actually doing it, so don’t try that angle.”
How do you know? I happen to know what good movies look like, and I know the Tintin albums. I know how to write, and I know how films work, and yes, I dare to say that I had written a better script if I had been paid less than Moffat.
“You’re only behaving like that because you didn’t like the movie. And you know, I didn’t either, but the way you’re going on about it makes people who didn’t like it look like aresholes. Get over yourself.”
What’s wrong with calling something by its right name? The movie was idiotic, and I, the asshole, can say that as often as I want, just like assholes who liked the movie can do their part and make themselves look like assholes as well. Do you really think it impresses me if I look like an asshole because I don’t like a movie? That doesn’t say anything about me, just about the level of society’s rotting.
Hard work? You must be joking. Do you happen to know how much they earn? Do you know how fast modern computers can render such a movie, or how easy it is to get a smooth 3d model to move, especially when you use motion capture? Do you know Spielberg’s private estate? Don’t tell me it’s hard work, because there are lots of better films that were done with less money, less people, in less time, no such self-adulation. And yeah, I consider stupefaction of the people for profit a crime.
Concerning Mike – I haven’t said anything negative about him, just told him that he’s reading something out of my comments that I haven’t said (which you seem to do here as well).
“Just let the movie go, will you! Let people who liked it, and those who didn’t like it, in peace!”
February 1st, 2012 at 8:43 pmHere’s a better idea. Why don’t you just tolerate both opinions?
No I didn’t fully read your post, simple because I didn’t want to.
February 2nd, 2012 at 12:35 amnot surprised.
February 2nd, 2012 at 12:52 amThis is starting to sound like one of those silly conversations that has gone off track and on for too long. Except it’s an argument. And I’ve lost what we are trying to prove here. Whether the movie is good or bad, or who is right or wrong. It’s just….stupid now. Ridiculous. The movie came out here about 1.5 months ago, and in other places, more like 4. So I reckon we can move on (already!).
(I am not saying that any points or opinions are stupid, only this one big argument, so don’t take any offence against your comments).
February 2nd, 2012 at 8:43 amno, it’s again not about the movie being good or bad, it’s just some people’s discussion behaviour…
February 2nd, 2012 at 10:58 amI feel a little attacked here. I just said a cute thing that I thought was linked to the movie and Tintin (because it is) and you want to start a discussion about it, and I wont. Why does that suddenly make me the bad person? Because I tried to defend my point?
And I also feel it has gotten too far. And as I said before, we are off topic from the subject. If it’s about “some people’s discussion behaviour”, then this isn’t the right place to talk about it.
February 2nd, 2012 at 11:49 amI said you didn’t read my post, and you said you didn’t. How was that an attack then?
I have pointed out that my post wasn’t meant to be offensive or disrespectful, but I don’t think what you said was ‘cute’ (“because it is”? sigh.):
“You also don’t say ‘only idiots eat pizza but I don’t want to discuss it’ and think it’s disrespectful when someone replies to that, do you?”
I also haven’t said anywhwere that you’re a bad person – I don’t know why you and others keep thinking they’re insulted whenever someone questions their beliefs.
And you also haven’t defended your point anywhere. You just said you don’t want to discuss it/didn’t want to read my post.
and no, we aren’t off topic because this isn’t a forum, and most of the comments were about this so i guess it’s appropriate if we argue it out so it doesn’t have to be said later.
February 2nd, 2012 at 12:25 pmBack to those who mentioned the article ”5 things to expect from Tintin 2”, I’m surprised they let that article out considering the fact that almost every thing in the article assumes the movie will be Prisoners of the Sun, and while Horowitz said it would be originally, Kathleen Kennedy frowned seriously on that idea, saying that was early on but things had changed. I’m honestly not sure why they don’t want to do that one. I haven’t seen the movie myself, but I heard a page once say that ”Apocalypto” has a scene similar to the eclipse scene. Could that be a factor at all?
February 2nd, 2012 at 9:07 pmI seriously wonder whether they chose Horowitz because of his experience writing the espionage related Alex Rider books, in which case you really would think a story like The Calculus Affair could be coming…
doubt they’ll use one of the albums that have been used for one of the old 2d animation films because people like me will compare them
February 2nd, 2012 at 9:14 pmStephen, I did read somewhere that Horowitz was chosen because of Alex Rider books because they wanted to give the prisoners of the sun a sinister feel (that espionage books/movies have) and then probably felt like his skills are better suited for Calculus Affair.
On topic of animation –
I have 2 articles here. One talks about Rango’s so called “animation” .
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/rango-gore-verbinski-johnny-depp-28636
The second one is relatively old article that has seven filmmakers talking animation.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-reporter-animation-roundtable-tintin-275984
February 2nd, 2012 at 9:19 pmI think Horrowitz was chosen because he has a great skill with writing. He hasn’t just written Alex Rider. He’s also the only man permitted by the Conan Doyle estate to write a novel of Sherlock Holmes. From what I heard, the novel was pretty successful too.
February 2nd, 2012 at 11:20 pmWhat I mean when I say “off topic” it’s like one of those silly arguments you have, when you start arguing to see who’s better, then you keep going into the numbers, saying somethings better infinity times infinity or something like that and then you suddenly realise that you don’t even remember what you were arguing about in the first place. And now I am so confused about what exactly the argument is here, that it is like what I’ve said. We go from Tintin, to some random argument, whcih is not Tintin related at all! (Peter, if u read your last few comments, you will find that it isn’t about Tintin, it’s more about the discussion in general).
I reckon Horowitz will do a good script, whatever the movie is. I really want to know what it will be!
February 3rd, 2012 at 7:33 amat the risk of moving the discussing there once again…
I don’t write ‘to see who’s better’ and I’ve said that lots of times now.
Lilla said something about her parenting methods and that her children don’t care about her opinion of the film, which I said I doubt. Then I was told I was attacking her, or making her look bad. She then ‘defended’ her argument saying she doesn’t like to talk about it anymore. Nothing of that was off-topic.
February 3rd, 2012 at 8:32 amAnd I’ve said this before, my sister (9 at the time) went to watch the movie and said it was unrealistic, dumb, and Tintin came across like an idiot (she usually never curses). And that means a lot considering she grew up with Tintin like I did, and expected the movie to be great. Nobody of our family told her that we think the movie could be stupid because we didn’t like to spoil anything – she went there with a schoolfriend.
February 3rd, 2012 at 8:43 amWhen I said “because it is” i meant that it was related to Tintin, you nut. Sorry but you always makes me a bit irritated, I feel that I can’t discuss with you at all, because you are always coming back with things I said wrong, and you are always trying to be the best. I guess you are going to say “I’ve never said that, and you were the one saying anything at all from the beginning” or something like that now, right? …. SIGHT! And that’s why I felt attacked, because whatever I say it feels like you sit there like a professor, shaking his head and saying “oh my she doesn’t know anything at ALL about what she’s talking a bout, I better correct her”.
And first of, they aren’t actually my kids. They just spend a lot of time at my place. And their own parents are TOTALLY uninterested in Tintin, at all. And why wouldn’t they say that they liked it if they didn’t? That makes no sence. I’ve asked them polite about many movies and books and they are always honest with “I didn’t like it”/”it was boring” or “that was fun! Again, again!”. Why in the world would THIS movie be any difference?
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:21 pmAnd just to make it clear; I never told them what I thought of the movie, not until they already said they liked it.
February 3rd, 2012 at 3:23 pm‘When I said “because it is” i meant that it was related to Tintin’
So you’re saying the movie is great because it’s related to Tintin? If yes, are you sure that this is a good criterion?
‘Sorry but you always makes me a bit irritated, I feel that I can’t discuss with you at all, because you are always coming back with things I said wrong, and you are always trying to be the best.’
Once again:
I wouldn’t post if I wouldn’t care. I don’t post to show that I was better. I’m German so I make a lot more mistakes than others and often misunderstand things. I have absolutely no interest in a popularity contest, otherwise I would avoid every kind of controversy. I put effort in my posts so they make sense.
I correct you whenever you comment something I haven’t said, and I’ll keep doing that, so you can understand it. Example:
“Why in the world would THIS movie be any difference?”
Did I say that? No. Every evaluation you make as a kid depends on what you think your relatives would say. Why is that so difficult to understand? It doesn’t just apply for Tintin but for everything else (and this used to be common knowledge).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id,_ego_and_super-ego#Super-ego
February 3rd, 2012 at 4:50 pmOkay, this is all a clear case of crossed wires. Perhaps it’s better we all stopped talking about it, and start over. After all, it’s not getting any of us anywhere.
We’ve all said things we probably regret, things we might have said that upset others without intent, but I think trying to resolve it all now is clearly not going to work out, so it’s best we all just start again.
–
On another note, a friend of mine has a web show where he reviews animated films, and he is about to do a review on Tintin. In his view, it’s animation, but as that matter is somewhat debatable, we’ll let that one slide, as it’s his own personal view.
The reason I bring it up, is because I did an illustration for him to accompany the video. It is a scene from the film, with several characters, including himself, drawn in the vein of Hergé. Here’s the black and white original illustration here:
http://vgretro.deviantart.com/#/d4oi20m
February 3rd, 2012 at 8:10 pmI have to agree with you Mike on that one.
Wow, nice drawing! Looks very similar to Herge’s, yet quite different and interesting.
February 4th, 2012 at 12:07 amNO! I said that my kids liked the movie, that’s it! And it is related to the movie since we are talking about the freaking movie and it was THIS movie that they liked!
And you don’t know these kids. That’s the same way as saying that your sister or what is was also was lying since YOU didn’t like the movie. You don’t know if my kids lie or don’t, but I know, and I can tell that they liked the movie. They even love some movies that I don’t like, and they hate some movies that I really love. Again, why would this movie be any difference?
Just wanted to say this because I really don’t like hearing a person saying “oh, you don’t know kids, they are just lying to impress you” when I am the person who is in contact with the kids. But I’m agree, this was stupid already many posts ago, so I wont bother talk about this anymore… Again.
___
You have Deviantart? I never knew!
February 6th, 2012 at 3:06 pmThe drawing is awesome! Both the coloured one and the black ‘n white one!
saying this for the third time:
I didn’t talk about YOUR children, but children in general. (and had you read my post you’d see that I even said that BEFORE i began to write about this)
Never said that anyone here is dishonest, but children are influenced by you. and they USUALLY don’t want to disappoint people they like. that’s common sense.
Now to the children you describe:
I never claimed that I know your kids but I find it improbable that they don’t care at all what you think, after all you wrote before about how much you and your mother love the albums. I didn’t say that this is good or bad, it’s simply part of the process they undergo when they shape their opinion, and you seem to think that would be wrong to say because you think I assume their self-reliance was absent. It’s not, but they are children – I don’t underestimate them. All I’m saying is that MAYBE their opinion isn’t as ‘free’ as you think it is. And yes, the same applies for my sister although we didn’t talk about it – perhaps my parents didn’t like the trailers and told her not to be disappointed? Does it matter that much? Does it make her opinion less valid, or does it make the movie worse (in contrast to your children according to which it was a good film)? It simply doesn’t say much about the movie’s quality. I say that children try to be tactful, not just dishonest. big difference.
February 11th, 2012 at 1:28 pm