ANOTHER BETTER SPIELBERG TRAILER! TINTIN TEASES PRETTY SPECTACULAR ACTION

Love the Indy-sounding punches as well!  A little toned down, of course...

Definitely looking better.  Looks like fun.

The character designs are so cartoony that anyone who comes in here harping about the uncanny valley is really just being a jackass. This looks terrific.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

The character designs are so cartoony that anyone who comes in here harping about the uncanny valley is really just being a jackass. This looks terrific.

This was crystal clear ever since the first video was released and still people gave the same spiel. No point in expecting them to stop now.

Anyway, on a more positive note. WOW. This looks exciting as hell.

That doesn't hold up. Most CGI animated characters are cartoons, animated fully by the artistic judgement of animators. These, while obviously stylized, are still animations anchored to the digital artifacts of an actual performance that's been modified. There is a level of automation, even if it's been altered and improved by animators later, that has created a detachment in movies previous. There is a difference, and I don't think it serves the conversation to be willfully oblivious of it. This is 100% the same paradigm that everything from Polar Express to Mars Needs Moms has fallen flat within. Whether it's still a problem in this case is another story, but shit ain't the same as run-of-the-mill, jolly ole animation and the line is drawn at a place that affects the most details aspects of a performance. Kind of a big deal.

All that said, I do believe they've crossed the line into something I can really enjoy. I'm excited about it.

Looks like a blast.   Think I'm looking forward to the Williams score as much as the movie.  

Well said, Renn.  The stylized characters helps with the dead-eye thing, but the thing that often bugs me with mo-capped physical performances is that it often FEELS like someone pantomiming as opposed to actually reacting in the moment.  But this stuff is looking better and better.

Watched the teaser trailer again.  Getting more and more excited!

Kinda left out Gollum, Kong, Avatar, and Ceaser out of that list. They're all humanoid mo-cap performances, and all WETA projects. Not a peep from the dead eye crowd. And yeah, none of them were human, but I think it's an applicable track record to look to, since they were all mo-cap performances where the eyes were singled out as achievements. Point is: WETA's proved time and again that they've got mo-cap down. Since Tintin and Haddock are modeled to look like Tintin and Haddock and not Jamie Bell and Andy Serkis, I'm leaning towards them still having a firm grasp on their horses.

Polar Express, et. al, failed because they were trying to create 100% CG recreations of the actors they were filming. The more they tried to make the conductor look like Tom Hanks or Hrothgar look like Anthony Hopkins, the more they were doomed to Weirdville. This, quite obviously, isn't shooting for the same goal. If anything, I'd give it a closer approximation to Monster House than any of them, in that it's mo-cap'd human performances animated to resemble characters created by the animators, not the actors themselves. For cryin' out loud, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are playing identical twins in this.

I'm not oblivious to the similarities in the techniques; I'm just saying that with clearly different intentions, Tintin more than likely isn't going to have the problems that Zemeckis had, because Zemeckis wanted artificial realism, whereas Spielberg is obviously going for a more Cameron result (effects-wise, not story-wise, hopefully.)

Looks great. I can deal with a slight uncanny valley if the characters are there onscreen (even if it undoubtedly hurts my feelings on the film as a whole). Seeing as how I am confident that is the case with TINTIN, and that this is a fully animated Spielberg film (a first, right?) I couldn't be more excited. The swooping camera movements in the trailer alone are enough to get me into a theater.

That last shot sold me on this. Hoping for the best (I have no prior experience with Tintin, so hopefully this will be a good primer to the character).

I thought this looked just terrific. Moving up on my anticipated list for the year. I'd certainly rather see this than something like Sherlock Holmes 2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 
For cryin' out loud, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are playing identical twins in this.

Wait...what? Really? That's...that's amazing.

Looks like some pulpy fun. As for the mo cap, you have it spot on; this isn't striving for realism, it's echoing (lovingly it seems) the look and feel of the original comic books. If I noticed the eyes in the trailer, it's because I was trying to notice them look bizarre and dead. Will need more close ups of the characters in motion (and do they blink?) to see how it plays out, but it looks like another win for WETA.

And holy shit, we're getting two Spielberg movies in December? Almost makes up for his lack of movies in the last five years!

So John Williams is scoring Spielberg's Tin Tin.  Who's scoring Jackson's?

I'd be very interested to hear a John Williams score for a Peter Jackson movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

The character designs are so cartoony that anyone who comes in here harping about the uncanny valley is really just being a jackass. This looks terrific.

Actually, I was going to say that it looks more realistic than KOTCS. ;)
 

Well, definitely more fun anyway.

Awesome. I instantly remembered watching the old cartoons and the fun I had with them. Can't wait to see this.

Also, I like the animation, but (not in this trailer but in others) I really don't like the Twins voices. To high pitched

Anyone seen this making of Tintin? 

http://www.itsartmag.com/features/makingoftintin/

No, but I have now.

That was a fun look at a bit of the process.  Thanks!

Was Daniel Craig just stopping by for giggles?

EDIT:  Oh, never mind.  He's in the movie.

The couple of eye shots in the first trailer looked ropey to me but this one completely sold me. I don't know what they changed or even if they changed anything but I'm so fucking DOWN for this movie now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renn Brown 

That doesn't hold up. Most CGI animated characters are cartoons, animated fully by the artistic judgement of animators. These, while obviously stylized, are still animations anchored to the digital artifacts of an actual performance that's been modified. There is a level of automation, even if it's been altered and improved by animators later, that has created a detachment in movies previous. There is a difference, and I don't think it serves the conversation to be willfully oblivious of it. This is 100% the same paradigm that everything from Polar Express to Mars Needs Moms has fallen flat within. Whether it's still a problem in this case is another story, but shit ain't the same as run-of-the-mill, jolly ole animation and the line is drawn at a place that affects the most details aspects of a performance. Kind of a big deal.

 

Basically echoing what Greg said here, but there's nothing you say here that doesn't equally apply to Gollum, Cesar etc. These are concerns that were, for non-human characters, put to rest a decade ago. The only question left when it comes to mo-cap is whether you can make a movie of realistic human characters that doesn't feel unnatural. And if the answer is no, then the question is whether characters like the ones in Tintin are stylised enough to get around the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelios 
This was crystal clear ever since the first video was released and still people gave the same spiel. No point in expecting them to stop now.

 

Anyway, on a more positive note. WOW. This looks exciting as hell.

I do think it was a fair concern and we still have to see the finished product. But it's kind of weird how persistently closed off to this movie a lot of people have been, with the exact same remarks trotted out almost on autopilot - not just about the effects but the idea of the movie itself. Remember when people would parrot "Spielberg and Jackson working on a movie? Then why am I not excited?" sight-unseen, and bark on about no one in america knowing who Tintin is, as if these in themselves are black marks against the movie. I'm not even a Tintin fan but I never got why it took so long for people to grasp why the premise of a young reporter getting into rollicking Boy's Own adventures all over the world might appeal to Spielberg.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

Basically echoing what Greg said here, but there's nothing you say here that doesn't equally apply to Gollum, Cesar etc. These are concerns that were, for non-human characters, put to rest a decade ago. The only question left when it comes to mo-cap is whether you can make a movie of realistic human characters that doesn't feel unnatural. And if the answer is no, then the question is whether characters like the ones in Tintin are stylised enough to get around the problem.

I thought Digital Domain's mocap old-man face in Benjamin Button worked spectacularly well, perhaps even better than the scenes with practical makeup. But then those guys totally failed to convince with the Jeff Bridges head in Tron: Legacy, which was arguably more stylized.

An interesting side-note to the 'dead eyes' topic: Apparently, Zemeckis personally hates highlight reflections, and demanded that portions of Mars Needs Women be re-rendered without them.