Month: February 2017

Today’s quick review: Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation. Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise), one of the IMF’s top agents, has spent months tracking the movements of the Syndicate, a shadowy organization believed to be responsible for various acts of terror, weapons trafficking, and political crises around the world. Ethan’s suspicions are confirmed when the Syndicate captures him and tortures him. He escapes with the help of Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), a woman who claims to be an undercover British agent. But his encounter couldn’t have come at a worse time: the IMF has just been disbanded for its reckless tactics, and the remnants have been folded into the CIA under director Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin), who thinks that the Syndicate is a figment of Ethan’s imagination. Now Ethan must avoid being brought in by Hunley long enough to prove the existence of the Syndicate, throw a wrench in its operations, and capture the mysterious man behind it all (Sean Harris). To do so, he will need the help of his friends and teammates, Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg), William Brandt (Jeremy Renner), and Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames).

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation is the fifth installment of the Mission: Impossible series. A high-budget spy action thriller, Rogue Nation follows in the footsteps of its predecessor, Ghost Protocol, in terms of tone, cast, and stunts. Ethan Hunt is again left in the cold by his agency and again must stop a threat to the world with a small team and few resources. Benji Dunn, William Brandt, and Luther Stickell return once more, an unusual amount of overlap with previous movies for a series that defines itself by change. The team dynamic is excellent, though, with Brandt as skeptic, Benji as comic relief, and Luther as faithful friend. The sense of humor developed in Ghost Protocol is also carried over; the steady trickle of funny lines and wry looks from Ethan are a nice contrast to the cataclysmic plots and death-defying stunts of the main plot.

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation is a fun, satisfying action movie. Though it borrows heavily from Ghost Protocol, what it does with the formula proves the formula’s strength. The stunts are impressive and largely done with practical effects. The humor complements the action and brings the colorful cast of IMF agents to life. While the plot is not airtight, it is good by action movie standards and has plenty of twists to keep the tension high. If you are in the mood for a light, action-packed spy thriller, give Rogue Nation a watch. Fans of Ghost Protocol will get a lot out of it, as will anyone who enjoys a good action flick. Those looking for a realistic, gritty take on the spy genre should look elsewhere.

7.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for big stunts, good humor, and a pervasive sense of thrilling fun.

Today’s quick review: Cinema Paradiso. Toto Di Vita (Jacques Perrin), a successful Italian movie director, returns to his hometown for the first time in decades when he hears that his closest childhood friend has died. The journey causes him to reminisce about his youth in rural Italy during the early 20th century. As a boy he was enthralled by the black-and-white movies at the local theater, and he soon made friends with Alfredo (Philippe Noiret), the gruff projectionist who worked there. His friendship with Alfredo and love of cinema guided him through love, loss, and his growth into a man, until finally he left his home to pursue his dream.

Cinema Paradiso is a finely crafted Italian drama from director Giuseppe Tornatore. The film follows Toto through his youth, with friends that come and go, unexpected losses, and golden moments that still burn brightly years later. To say that Cinema Paradiso is a coming of age film would be to sell it short. It reaches deeper to grasp the truest aspects of the human experience. Not every story in life can end well. Fortune changes, love grows old, and friends drift apart. But the memories remain. Giuseppe Tornatore captures this sentiment and uses it as the heart of a deeply moving film. And underscoring its scenes are the beautifully wistful notes of an oboe theme by composer Ennio Morricone.

Watch Cinema Paradiso if you ever get the chance. It is a heavy movie but well worth the emotional investment. Cinema Paradiso realizes the full potential of drama to find the tragic beauty in one person’s life. Many other films have attempted the same task and failed, but Cinema Paradiso’s poignant material and masterful execution set it apart. Go watch it. Those who dislike drama or bittersweet movies are encouraged to try it anyway, as the joy of being proven wrong will far outweigh the disappointment of being proven right.

8.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 9.5 out of 10 for near-perfection and being my personal favorite.

Today’s quick review: Mortal Kombat. Once per generation, the world’s greatest fighters are summoned to a tournament to fight for the fate of the Earth. Emperor Shao Kahn (Frank Welker) of Outworld is poised to invade the Earth, and he only needs to win one more tournament in order to do so, according to the mystic laws that govern contact between Realms. Running the tournament for him is Shang Tsung (Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa), a soul-sucking sorcerer who ensures that each match is fatal for the loser. Among this year’s recruits from Earth are Liu Kang (Robin Shou), a martial arts expert with a grudge; Sonya Blade (Bridgette Wilson), a police officer on an investigation; and Johnny Cage (Linden Ashby), an action star seeking to revive his flagging career. The trio are guided by the mysterious Rayden (Christopher Lambert), a thunder god who wishes Earth to win the tournament. Their skills are put to the test against the representatives of Outworld: a fearsome lineup of ninjas, cyborgs, and monstrosities that threaten not only the lives of the heroes, but the Earth as well.

Mortal Kombat is an action movie based on the hit fighting game series. As in the games, its plot is mainly an excuse to have a fighting tournament. The rules of the tournament are unclear in places; Shang Tsung appears to be bound by certain rules of hospitality, but this doesn’t stop him from engaging in downright villainous behavior when the opportunity arises. The fights themselves are solid but nothing outstanding. The graphics are somewhat dated, but they do let the movie use Mortal Kombat’s impressive cast of characters. A modern adaptation might be able to put the roster to better use, but as a creative mash-up of martial arts and Eastern-flavored fantasy, Mortal Kombat works well.

What really makes Mortal Kombat enjoyable is its protagonists. While none are standout characters, they all share a nonchalance that contrasts nicely with the mystical, occasionally disturbing atmosphere of the tournament. Their banter is fun to listen to, cut from the same cloth as Big Trouble in Little China and other action films of the 80s and 90s. Sonya is mostly business, Johnny takes nothing seriously, and Liu Kang keeps quiet until he can get a good quip in, usually at Johnny’s expense. The acting and writing vary from passable to downright cheesy, but the three main characters share the load of action protagonist, giving the audience someone to root for without requiring any of the characters to be too deep.

Casual fans of 90s action movies should give Mortal Kombat a shot. Despite cheesy dialogue, rough special effects, and a thin plot, Mortal Kombat manages to be a fun watch for those who are looking to be entertained. Those who take their movies seriously would do well to skip it, as there is nothing outstanding in the film’s artistry, craftsmanship, or writing. Fans of the video games should use their best discretion depending on their standards of quality. As an enjoyable popcorn flick with 90s flavoring, Mortal Kombat is worth a watch.

5.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 for quality and a 7.0 for enjoyability.

Today’s quick review: The Producers. Max Bialystock (Zero Mostel), a washed-up Broadway producer who woos old ladies for their money, gets a second shot at riches when Leo Bloom (Gene Wilder), his accountant, figures out that a failed play could make more money than a successful one. Leo requires some convincing to overcome his scruples, but Max wins him over, and the two set about producing the biggest flop in Broadway history. The script comes from a disturbed Nazi (Kenneth Mars) who wants to show the world the gentler side of Hitler. The director (Christopher Hewitt) is a flamboyant drama queen with a poor professional track record. The lead (Dick Shawn) is a hippie who wandered into the wrong audition. The financiers are Max’s stable of old ladies, each promised 50% or more of the profits. When the play fails, it will make its producers a fortune. But if it succeeds, its producers will go to jail for fraud.

The Producers is a comedy from director and writer Mel Brooks. Zero Mostel plays Max Bialystock, an overbearing producer who laments his faded glory. Gene Wilder plays his opposite, a neurotic accountant prone to fits of hysteria. The duo work well together, but they are more joke characters than sympathetic protagonists. Leo has a fragile innocence that makes him interesting, but this tender nature tends to be overpowered by his screaming fits. For his part, Max has few redeeming qualities. Zero Mostel’s barbed jokes are quite funny, but his character lacks the heart needed to make him pitiable.

Despite a good cast and a creative premise, The Producers does not live up to its potential. Much of its humor comes from the introduction of wild new characters, such as the Nazi playwright or Max’s harem of feisty old ladies. These are one-note scenes that lack any real character interaction, only Max and Leo putting up with their marks’ eccentricities to move forward with the play. The plot is very linear, with no real conflict other than Leo’s early reservations and the outcome of the play. The high points of the movie are Max’s slimy persuasion tactics, Leo’s unabashed joy at discovering there is more to life than accounting, and their monstrosity of a play, Springtime for Hitler.

Beyond that, there is very little meat on The Producers’ bones. Deeper characters, a more complicated plot, or even musical numbers would have turned it into a great comedy with a strong cast and a unique premise. As it is, The Producers does not live up to its potential. Fans of Mel Brooks’s humor or fans of Broadway comedy may get more out of it. Those who are curious about why it is considered a classic should give it a watch to judge for themselves. The makings of a great movie are there, and they may click for other viewers. But those who only have a passing interest in The Producers should skip it. The Producers is a series of decent gags that do not come together as strongly as they could have.

7.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for missed potential.

Today’s quick review: Moonrise Kingdom. Sam Shakusky (Jared Gilman), a troubled orphan, flees the confines of Camp Ivanhoe, his summer camp, and elopes with Suzy Bishop (Kara Hayward), his sweetheart, across the trails of the small island where they live. Their goal is freedom, however brief, and the chance to pursue their preteen romance. But their disappearance does not go unnoticed. Scout Master Ward (Edward Norton), Sam’s scout master, rallies Troop 55 to hunt for the runaway children, while Mr. and Mrs. Bishop (Bill Murray and Frances McDormand) implore Captain Sharp (Bruce Willis), the local police captain, to find their daughter. The children’s flight eventually draws the attention of Social Services (Tilda Swinton), who threatens to have Sam sent to an orphanage if he is caught.

Moonrise Kingdom is a quirky film from director Wes Anderson. The tone of the movie is odd: not funny enough for a comedy, but too weird for a drama. It is a movie about young love, growing up in an imperfect world, and the overblown perils of life in New England in 1965. Wes Anderson brings his signature style to the film, with symmetrical camera shots, peculiarly detached characters, and a serious, almost mythological, treatment of the mundane. As Sam and Suzy brave the woods of New Penzance Island, they undertake a physical and emotional journey that is given as much weight as any story of higher stakes and wider scope. The young couple’s problems are real to them and therefore to the director and audience as well; their world is a blend of preteen drama and genuine danger, and both are given equal treatment.

The main draw of Moonrise Kingdom is its unusual style. Every shot is visually interesting, the writing pays close attention to minutiae that would never come up in other films, and the characters interact with a deliberate stiffness that is rare to see elsewhere. The setting comes to life through the film’s dedication to details and its curious conceits, such as referring to Social Services only by her title or showing a map of the island whenever characters travel. The lead couple have an odd sort of romance; Sam tries to impress Suzy with his camping skills, while Suzy seems pleased to finally have someone she can open up with. Both have psychological issues that make them social misfits, and they find comfort in each other.

As a story, Moonrise Kingdom has just enough of an arc to make it satisfying. It narrowly avoids being a meaningless slice of life, offering the mere skeleton of a conventional plot for the audience to cling to, but its focus is on tone. Its unusual style and dramatic treatment of low-stakes events give Moonrise Kingdom a false air of comedy; the only joke is the treatment itself, delivered deadpan without winking at the audience. The cast is formidable but underutilized. Familiar faces populate the universe of Moonrise Kingdom, but only Edward Norton seems to be acting himself. The other characters are flat and flawed, a good fit for the movie but not the standout roles the actors are known for.

Watch Moonrise Kingdom if you are a fan of Wes Anderson or stylized cinematography. It is a film of contradictions: a drama with comedic overtones, a stilted romance, a cast of big names doing little things, and characters that under-emote but remain likable. If you delight in such contradictions, you will have plenty to look forward to. But these contradictions come with a price of being unable to follow through. All the drama, all the romance, and all the humor is forced through the same lens, producing a unique film that defies easy categorization. Many viewers will not see the point, and those who prefer straightforward or conventional films should look elsewhere. For everyone else, Moonrise Kingdom is a cute, peculiar movie that makes for a very interesting watch.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it 7.5 to 8.0 for quality and originality; your score will vary with how well Moonrise Kingdom’s odd mixture of elements matches your tastes.

Today’s quick review: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman), an awkward, normal British man, narrowly escapes the demolition of Earth by galactic bureaucrats when his friend Ford Prefect (Mos Def), an alien hitchhiker with a zen outlook on life, whisks him away. Their flight takes them to The Heart of Gold, an improbable spaceship piloted by Zaphod Beeblebrox (Sam Rockwell), the vain, erratic president of the galaxy, and Trillian (Zooey Deschanel), a daring Earth woman who has a history with Arthur. Zaphod, pursued by the government for stealing The Heart of Gold and kidnapping himself, leads them on a galaxy-spanning quest to find the answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything. Along the way, they meet a host of colorful robots and aliens, including Marvin, a depressed android (Warwick Davis, voiced by Alan Rickman); Humma Kavula (John Malkovich), Zaphod’s eerie political rival; Deep Thought (Helen Mirren), an enormous supercomputer; and Questular Rontok (Anna Chancellor), Zaphod’s enamored vice-president.

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is a delightfully surreal science fiction comedy about the destruction of Earth, the banality of life, and the secrets at the heart of the universe. Adapted from the best-selling book by Douglas Adams, the movie shuffles the plot and characters quite a bit from the source material while preserving the spirit of the work and many of its jokes. Martin Freeman plays Arthur Dent, a British everyman who is baffled by the illogic of the world around him. His fear of the unknown keeps him from having a successful relationship with Trillian despite their chemistry, and overcoming this fear is a major theme throughout the movie. Mos Def nails the offbeat character of Ford Prefect, a friendly man who is out of place on Earth but right at home in the weirdness of outer space. Sam Rockwell cuts loose as Zaphod Beeblebrox, bringing all the energy and egotism that the fugitive president deserves. Zooey Deschanel rounds out the main cast as Trillian, the sanest member of the crew, whose thirst for adventure takes her out of England and into space. The main story is periodically interrupted by animated excerpts from the eponymous Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, comedic facts about the universe that are narrated by Stephen Fry.

Fans of science fiction and wacky British humor should give The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy a watch. Its jokes capture an absurd outlook on life, where the universe is a fundamentally petty place full of bureaucrats, snafus, and the idiosyncrasies of human life writ large. At the same time, The Hitchhiker’s Guide affirms the science fiction spirit of wonder and adventure. Not every joke lands, but great source material, coupled with enthusiastic actors and unfettered creativity, leads to plenty of silly fun. Douglas Adams fans looking for a direct adaptation of the book may be disappointed. The changes are disorienting, but they do help the movie stand on its own, especially the parts that can be done on the silver screen that cannot be done in the pages of a book. While not as good as the original, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is a funny, enjoyable watch with a great cast and a slew of good jokes.

6.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for quality and a 7.5 for charm.

Today’s quick review: The November Man. Peter Devereaux (Pierce Brosnan), a former CIA agent, returns from retirement to extract Natalia Ulanova (Mediha Musliovic), Devreaux’s lover and a current CIA asset, from an undercover position that has grown too dangerous. Her undercover work has unearthed the name of a woman who holds the key to controlling Arkady Federov (Lazar Ristovski), the future Russian president. Now Devereaux must go up against David Mason (Luke Bracey), Devereaux’s former student, to find the woman before the CIA does.

The November Man is a spy thriller with a complex plot, a bit of action, and high tension throughout. Pierce Brosnan fills the shoes of Peter Devereaux quite well, a jaded ex-spy who practices detachment as much as possible. Luke Bracey plays his hotheaded student, now a seasoned agent who is eager to prove himself against his former teacher. The nature of the film prevents either character from living up to his full potential. Both characters are mostly amoral, and their limits are difficult to anticipate. They lack the sympathy and the charm needed to be engaging protagonists, and their potent rivalry takes back burner to the rest of the plot.

The best and worst parts of The November Man are its plot. On the one hand, The November Man delivers a complex spy plot full of conflicts of interest, twists, and betrayals. These are the components of the best spy dramas, and they make for an interesting, mysterious story in The November Man. On the other hand, The November Man is unable to fully capitalize on any of the conflicts it sets up. The grey morality makes it unclear whether the audience should be rooting for Devereaux or Mason, while the character arcs are hampered by the lack of any clear point for the characters to grow towards. That just leaves the plot itself as a source of payoff, but the frequent twists prevent any specific conflict from gaining momentum. Every time a revelation sends the plot in a new direction, the stakes are reset. Moments that should feel tense and engrossing just fall flat; the new conflict has not had time to escalate.

Fans of the spy thriller genre may want to give The November Man a shot. It has a few good elements that make it a decent watch, but it fails to build on these elements in any meaningful way. Watch it if you have two hours to kill, want a spy thriller, and don’t particularly care about missed potential. Skip it if you’re looking for a film that goes beyond the basics.

6.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for an intricate spy plot that is hurt by lack of a clear destination and ambiguous morality.

Today’s quick review: In the Name of the King. Farmer (Jason Statham), a humble farmer, has his life disrupted when his farm is burned, his son is killed, and his wife is captured by the vicious, orc-like Krug. Aided by his neighbor (Ron Perlman), his brother-in-law (Will Sanderson), and the royal wizard (John Rhys-Davies), Farmer must pursue the Krug, rescue his wife, and save the king (Burt Reynolds) from a villainous sorcerer (Ray Liotta) who seeks to take the kingdom by force.

In the Name of the King is a budget fantasy film with an unusually strong cast, poor writing, and poor direction. The movie is based on the Dungeon Siege video game series and is directed by Uwe Boll, who is infamous for his video game adaptations. In the Name of the King tries for a high fantasy feel, and its plot fits right into the genre: evil sorcerers, razed villages, orc-like enemies, etc. But these classic elements are not put together well. The plot is cliched and predictable, the setting has nothing unique about it, and none of the characters are memorable for any positive reasons. The acting is hammy, but given the caliber of the cast, this appears to be more a product of the writing and the directing than the actors themselves. The sole worthwhile aspect of the movie is its panoramic helicopter shots, and even these are overused in an ill-considered attempt to match The Lord of the Rings for scenery.

Watch In the Name of the King only if you get pleasure from watching low-quality films. Despite an impressive cast and the makings of a passable if generic high fantasy adventure, In the Name of the King only manages to deliver cringe-worthy lines, overacting, and cut-rate fantasy. Skip it if you like Jason Statham, Ray Liotta, or Burt Reynolds, or if you’re looking for the action-packed fantasy epic the movie could have been. Give it a shot when drinking with friends for a few cheap laughs.

3.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 4.0 for quality and a 7.0 for perverse enjoyability.

Today’s quick review: A Shot in the Dark. Peter Sellers returns as Inspector Jacques Clouseau, a bumbling French detective who overestimates his own abilities. This time he is assigned to a murder investigation at the home of the wealthy Benjamin Ballon (George Sanders). The case revolves around Maria Gambrelli (Elke Sommer), a maid who was found holding the gun that killed the victim, Ballon’s chauffeur and Maria’s lover. Though all the evidence points to Miss Gambrelli, Clouseau maintains that she is innocent and merely covering for the true murderer. As Clouseau continues his bungling investigation, the bodies pile up, sending his superior, Chief Inspector Dreyfuss (Herbert Lom), to the verge of a nervous fit.

A Shot in the Dark is a classic detective comedy and the sequel to The Pink Panther. In a convoluted murder case with no firm leads, Inspector Clouseau relies on his gut, which is sure of Gambrelli’s innocence, and the facts, which say otherwise. Much of the humor comes from Clouseau himself. Even the act of getting out of car door becomes an exercise in slapstick, and Clouseau’s mishaps, mispronunciations, and leaps of illogic give A Shot in the Dark a pervasive sort of low-key comedy that contrasts with the nominally serious nature of the investigation. Despite the presence of overt slapstick and deliberate gags, the comedy of A Shot in the Dark manages to be subtle, especially by modern standards. Individual gags may miss their mark, but sooner or later, one will catch the viewer just right, making A Shot in the Dark hilarious in aggregate. Peter Sellers is a comedic genius, and his character Inspector Clouseau is a living example of what can go wrong in everyday actions.

Clouseau’s search for clues takes him to a series of nice restaurants, a nudist colony, and even prison, but few of his leads turn out to be productive. Unlike The Pink Panther, the answer to the case only becomes clear at the end, although by that point it is almost secondary to the mess caused by Clouseau. The plot is as opaque as that of The Pink Panther, but for reasons of mystery rather than competing agendas. As a result, more of the weight rests on Clouseau himself, rather than a myriad of supporting characters. David Niven’s acting talent and the marvelous character of Sir Charles are sorely missed, but the charming Elke Sommer, Clouseau’s sparring partner Kato (Burt Kwouk), and the high-strung Herbert Lom step in to fill the void.

Fans of classic comedy, Peter Sellers, or the original Pink Panther should give A Shot in the Dark a try. Its brand of comedy requires an investment in attetnion, but the payoff is a masterful film with timeless jokes. Fans of mysteries should not expect too much from the movie, as its mysteries are structured along comedic rather than dramatic lines. Likewise, those who prefer the more surreal or outrageous comedies of later decades may be disappointed by a mere bumbling detective in a half-sane world. But those who can follow a plot, understand an unspoken joke, and laugh at slapstick and mistaken conclusions will enjoy A Shot in the Dark.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for great humor worthy of succeeding The Pink Panther.

Today’s quick review: The Adventures of Tintin. Tintin (Jamie Bell), an intrepid, boyish reporter, finds himself in the middle of an adventure when he stumbles across a model ship in a market: The Unicorn, a 17th-century man-of-war that was sunk in the West Indies. The model contains a secret message left by Sir Francis Haddock, the captain of The Unicorn and its sole survivor. But Tintin is not the only one after the secret of The Unicorn. He is pursued by a villainous man named Sakharine (Daniel Craig) who wants Tintin’s model and the message it contains. Aided by Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis), the last remaining descendant of Sir Francis Haddock; Thomson and Thompson (Nick Frost and Simon Pegg), a pair of bumbling Interpol agents; and his faithful dog Snowy, Tintin races to stay one step ahead of Sakharine and decipher the clue left by Sir Francis.

The Adventures of Tintin is an action adventure film based on the beloved Tintin comics by Herge. The adaptation features breathtaking CGI animation, outstanding prodution quality, and all the action and adventure one could hope for. Tintin himself drives the plot through his fearless investigative spirit, ably captured by Jamie Bell. No question can remain unanswered for long once Tintin is on the case, and his resourcefulness sees him out of the dangerous scrapes he finds himself in. Snowy is his constant companion, an intelligent dog who aids Tintin in his investigations. Andy Serkis plays the comical Captain Haddock, a blustering, jovial man who spends most of his time tipsy. The main cast is rounded out by Daniel Craig as Sakharine, a gentlemanly villain whose schemes provide urgency and danger for Tintin’s adventure.

The movie’s animation is a marvel of technology. Every detail is rendered with the kind of fidelity that only the largest productions can afford, and even the most difficult problems of lighting, water effects, reflections, and particles are handled with ease. At the same time, The Adventures of Tintin preserves its cartoonish origins with clean character designs, exaggerated facial features, and energetic action. The combination of hyperrealism with cartoon elements can be difficult to get used to, but the reward is animation that exhibits the best of both worlds, all the gorgeous detail that modern CGI is capable of combined with the color and energy of traditional animation.

The pedigree of the film’s production is impressive as well: Steven Spielberg as director, Peter Jackson as producer, a score by John Williams, and a screenplay by Steven Moffat and Edgar Wright. Spielberg takes full advantage of the freedom afforded him by a virtual camera, using sweeping shots, inventive transitions, and stunts that would be impossible in a live action film. The action sequences are elaborate, fast-paced, and entertaining, and they are linked by charming bits of comedy and adventure. The tone is one of bright-eyed adventure, the story one of mystery and travel, and all the peril of the genre comes across without destroying the movie’s innocence.

Fans of adventure, comedy, and visual spectacle will love The Adventures of Tintin. It captures the adventure genre with a quality and a spirit that few movies can hope to match. The film does have its limitations, however, depending on your cinematic tastes. The Adventures of Tintin subscribes to an unabashedly optimistic view of the world, where bravery is rewarded, setbacks are temporary, and peril is not something to be feared but to be embraced. There is no subversion here, only innocent comedy and excitement. For similar reasons, the plot is somewhat simplistic, though its individual stages are fast-moving and mysterious. The extent to which you can dive into the film’s world will govern how much you enjoy it. Anyone with an intact inner child is encouraged to give The Adventures of Tintin a try.

7.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.5 for gorgeous graphics, a vivid imagination, and a keen sense of adventure.