comment #1

Ray says ...

"In other words, it's tanking. And yet Tintin is doing quite well in Europe and other foreign territories with a projected $239 million haul due to acceptance/awareness of the Tintin brand"

It's the David Hasselhoff of animated movies!

comment #2

Noiresque says ...

Pity poor Daniel Craig. (Leaving aside the fact that he's healthy, white, sexy, English-speaking movie star who is married the most beautiful woman in Britain and gets millions to pretend he's James Bond.) The financial status of his non-007 output wouldn't matter so much if they were not such obviously unessential viewing. He was Roger Michell's erstwhile muse; he ought to line up a few movies with him in the future. Or join the ensemble cast of, say, a Margin Call or two. They won't make any more money than his current string of flops, but they will at least be interesting.

comment #3

Rorark says ...

If Tin Tin does $16 by the end of the holiday weekend that should put it at, what, $45-50 by New Years day? And probably $65-70 in the end? I guess that's pretty lousy by Spielberg standards but given the relative obscurity of the character in America it doesn't seem awful. It'll be more than Hugo winds up with, anyway...

comment #4

Eloi Wrath says ...

It was ridiculous of them to release it in such a crowded marketplace. It was already fighting an uphill battle in terms of name recognition, so they decide to release it among probably the most overstuffed holiday season ever. Boys are covered with Mission Impossible and Sherlock Holmes. Families have We Bought a Zoo and The Chipmunks. Adults have Dragon Tattoo, and then there's still War Horse and god knows what else to come.

What is the logic in this ever-increasing trend of bunching movies together? There are weeks that go buy with no major releases, or perhaps at best some Screen Gems B-movie, and yet they decide to dump all their mega-budgeted blockbusters over about six weekends in summer and winter. Idiocy.

comment #5

richlbii says ...

I still can't figure out who this movie is for in the US market. The animation screams out "kids" but I don't know a child who has any clue who Tintin is. Even most adults don't know. Most I talk to think Tintin is the dog (obviously confusing this with Rin Tin Tin). I think they would have been better with a different title in the US to better "introduce" the character. You know -- "Tintin and the Epic Crusade" or something like that.

comment #6

Eloi Wrath says ...

Yeah, the marketing has been very poor on this one, too. They should have done some sort of character intro trailer, with Tintin's job explained, some wacky hijinks from Snowy, some stuff on Captain Haddock, Thompson & Thomson, etc. Instead they went for a sort of mystery angle which didn't make a lot of sense at all.

comment #7

DavidF says ...

I agree the market's overcrowded etc. but I don't see the point of kids not knowing who Tintin is. They didn't know who Kung Fu Panda was either (nor Woody & Buzz or Lightning McQueen etc. etc. etc.)

Anyway, I dunno where y'all live but around me all the kids are off school for two weeks starting today and I suspect it will fit the matinee bill quite nicely for many.

(I also kind of wonder whether people are getting tired of 3D and paying that premium to take their kids to a movie. Ironic, given that this one was actually shot in the format...)

comment #8

Eloi Wrath says ...

DavidF: I think you have a good point, but perhaps it's because the likes of Kung Fu Panda, Lightning McQueen, etc. fit the post-Pixar animation template more easily. Big eyes, anthropomorphic animal/object, celebrity voice, etc. Tintin's more "realistic" looking design and isn't the most charismatic central character; the appeal is the situations he finds himself in. Harder to sell than "Jack Black is a panda who knows kung fu".

comment #9

THE MovieBob says ...

And yet, financially, it's going to be rated a massive success because of how its doing everywhere else.

Its possible that we're looking at a significant event here: THE most-powerful American filmmaker has essentially made a film that's NOT for American audiences first. We've spent most of the 20th century operating under the premise that U.S. screens were the most important and "foriegn gross" was gravy, at best.

But this is the age of Globalism, and maybe that means we DON'T get to be the last word on what "matters" in the popular culture anymore (next step: someone like Bay or maybe even Cameron shooting something overseas, probably China, in the native language with native stars.) That's kind of exciting.

comment #10

Eloi Wrath says ...

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't sequels to these types of things much cheaper to produce because all the set-up work has already been done? All the character building and design and all that shit? So they basically just boot up their laptops again and make another one? I'm sure I read that somewhere, or it may just be plainly horseshit.

comment #11

Rashad says ...

Good post Bob.

I did notice there were way more tv spots and ads around town for War Horse than Tintin.

It's a shame to see something like Chipmunks beat out Tintin, but I don't blame the kids. This little boy asked where the theater for "Alivin and Chipmunks Chipwrecked" was because he and his mother couldn't find it, and he was so adorable, and excited, I couldn't be mad at him wanting to see the movie, nor be mad that the movie even exists. If it brings him joy, so be it.

Now, Dragon Tattoo doesn't look too hot either, and that's a shame. (Though the weekend will clear everything up.) It's easily my favorite second Fincher movie.

comment #12

Krillian says ...

Tintin wasn't made for the US market. It was made for overseas box-office first, US second. Mojo had Tintin at $237 mill overseas on 12-18.

comment #13

Rashad says ...

Eloi: By the time Jackson makes his version, the tech will be even better, so I doubt it. Plus the story he'll adapt, will be a different globetrotting adventure, so it will have different locales and set-pieces.

comment #14

Robert Cashill says ...

I think audiences in general are resistant to these motion-capture animated films, for the reasons stated above. Robert Zemeckis essentailly created this kind of movie, in 3D no less, but it never really got off the ground. That said I don't think the Tintin sequel will be going straight to video here.

comment #15

BobbyLupo says ...

Didn't everybody know this was going to be pretty soft in America? For that matter, I'm not sure War Horse will be a huge holiday movie. This isn't gonna be a good year for Spielberg's box office...

comment #16

Jesse Crall says ...

I was concerned about Tintin domestically because growing up, I was one of the only people I knew who read the comic. Awareness is non-existent so it's basically a 200 million dollar spec script stateside, Spielberg or not.

comment #17

LexG says ...

Isn't it kind of bullshit that it has to take away half a day's worth of MI4 IMAX screenings pretty much everywhere? I think they're both the same studio, but five days into its successful IMAX run, the much more popular MI4 gets pushed to nighttime-only IMAX so this unattended oddity can play to empty rooms.

Also can someone tell me which way to see it? IMAX is cool, but if a movie is in 2.35:1, seems like kind of a ripoff to miss out on the PLEASING SCOPE RECTANGLE to watch a too-much-headroom box.

comment #18

Rashad says ...

Lex it depends on the theater. LIncoln Square for instance has Mi4 running exclusively in their IMAX theater.

Robert Zemeckis essentailly created this kind of movie, in 3D no less, but it never really got off the ground

Polar Express and A Christmas Carol did well. Tintin's budget isn't as high as them either. (132 million)

comment #19

The Pope says ...

Just shows what I know. I said it was going to clear the billion worldwide.

Either that, or that movie Jeff doesn't like.

Just shows what I know.

comment #20

Edward Havens says ...

Isn't it amazing that a film from the most successful American filmmaker ever doesn't need America to be considered successful?

As for who the target audience for Tintin is, it's people like my wife, who grew up reading the Tintin books. Imagine, reading.

comment #21

LexG says ...

NOBODY in America has ever heard of TINTIN, ever... and if they did, they were some weird first-gen Dutchboy in a bowl cut and suspenders and yodeling shoes who got his ass kicked every day on the playground by the kids who played with GI Joe or Star Wars or whatever.

TINTIN. Christ, trying to imagine some kid rolling into an elementary school in WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA with Belgian funny books.... that kid would've gotten shanked American Me-style then someone would spike a football onto his head.

BE A MAN.

comment #22

reverent and free says ...

I don't get why it wasn't released in November. What a traffic jam of releases this week and last are.

comment #23

clockwork taxi says ...

It reminds me of when I was at the theater last week. While waiting for my friend, a mother and her two younger daughters sat down next to my table. Looking at the posters, one of the girls said, "I want to see that one." The mother thought she was pointing at TIN TIN. "You want to see Tin Tin honey?" "No the other one, " the girl replied.

The other one was the poster for The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.

comment #24

Gaydos says ...

Moviebob: I actually enjoyed the heck out of "Tintin," but "massive financial success?"

Shall we discuss Movie Economics 101?

I assume that coming in behind virtually every major animated release this year, including hitting about 60% of the lower-budgeted "Smurfs," wasn't the business plan.

You're looking at a production and marketing budget of perhaps $270 million for "Tintin." So it loses maybe $200 million in theatrical?

Might it crawl out of the red ink in ancillary? Is there a "Tintin" toy line upside?

Sure, but that's not a "massive financial success" and in the world of bragging rights, I assume that seeing "Panda" "Smurfs, "Cars2," "Rio" and maybe "Puss" in front of you at the year-end global boxoffice tally, as well as "Hop," "Rango," "Gnomeo" and "The Lion King" reissue at domestic rankings doesn't elicit any highfives.

Oh well, the work lives and I don't think anyone loses their house.

comment #25

CitizenKaned4Life says ...

"(Next step: someone like Bay or maybe even Cameron shooting something overseas, probably China, in the native language with native stars.)"

The former likely wouldn't even vacation in China, let alone shoot one of his fucking Hasbro movies over there. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a Cantonese-language epic from Baywatch. Cameron seems more likely to just make up his own nonsense language a la Lucas.

"Now, Dragon Tattoo doesn't look too hot either, and that's a shame. It's easily my favorite second Fincher movie."

Behind what, exactly? I prefer Alien3, frankly, and probably even some of his Madonna videos.

Tintin packs heat and goes on wild adventures, Lex -- he's like a Belgian Fred Durst; you should love him.

comment #26

Gabe@ThePlaylist says ...

I wasn't in love with the movie, and this was probably their commercial downfall, but the first half hour of Tintin clearly plays like, "You don't know Tintin? You're probably Americans so FUCK YOU."

comment #27

Rashad says ...

Behind Fight Club. It's the first Fincher movie since that actually feels like a movie rather than a reenactment. (And I happen to think Zodiac is great.) It has characters actually doing things while maintaining his signature, but more polished, style. I also really loved Mara's performance, and the tragic romance here was a lot more engaging and sad than it was in Benjamin Button.

I really didn't expect to like it as much as I did, as I wasn't looking forward to it. But it had me from the beginning.

comment #28

Phatang! says ...

Gaydos, rerun your numbers to include the international take. I don't believe SMURFS made over $200 million overseas.

Okay, that's what I wrote, and then decided to check the numbers. SMURFS apparently made OVER $400 MILLION overseas! HOLY SHIT!

comment #29

Krillian says ...

Animation overseas:

Kung Fu Panda 2 - $500 million
Smurfs - $419 million
Cars 2 - $360 million
Rio - $341 million
Adv of Tintin - $237 million
Puss in Boots - $188 million
Rango - $121 million
Gnomeo & Juliet - $94 million
Hop - $75 million
Arthur Christmas - $72 million

comment #30

CitizenKaned4Life says ...

You should check out the Danish version sometimes, Rashad.

It's basically the samefuckingthing.

comment #31

Rashad says ...

Citizen: I saw it, and despised it. That's why I wasn't looking forward to this one. It's so silly (especially in regards to Lisbeth; from appearance to behavior) and cheap in comparison. It's kind of surprising to me that people haven't appreciated the significant improvements (beyond just cinematography and score) Fincher's version has.

comment #32

CitizenKaned4Life says ...

Outside of the credit sequence, there are no improvements beyond the ones you listed (which, admittedly, are fairly significant). It reminds me of the remake of Let Me In last year, which many were praising to high heavens -- it's like, "uhhh, did you ever bother seeing the first one?".

There's nothing "cheap" about the original Tattoo, either, and I'm getting kinda sick of that lazy shot against it. The photography is lush, and the widescreen vistas are enchanting. It's just the sequels that look a little shoddy and low-rent.

Also, Noomi >>> Rooney.

comment #33

clockwork taxi says ...

I personally feel that Fincher's film was much more memorable and enganging. I prefer Rooney -- she brings a vulernability to the role that was lacking with Noomi. I just liked it better. One of my favorites of the year.

I also thought that Let Me In was MUCH better then it's counterpart.

comment #34

clockwork taxi says ...

*engaging

comment #35

Kakihara says ...

TinTin can afford the loss, though, since like Mr. Bean, it's already made its money back. It's Tattoo that's the real loser, just like I said it'd be. But hey, I also said a stupid Cameron blue furry movie would bomb, just like a lot of people, so I must be totally wrong.

comment #36

Kakihara says ...

Oh, yeah, I was mixing up Mr. Bean with Johnny whatever.

comment #37

Rashad says ...

There are no improvements beyond the ones you listed

Blomkvist is an actual character here, with a personality and isn't just Lisbeth's play thing. Craig brings a swagger and charm that makes him likeable. This is probably the best he's been outside of Bond. (I really liked him in Tintin too.) And no one has ever said anything good of Nyqvist's performance, and rightfully so.

Lisbeth's physique here, fits the character far more. It matches her vulnerable personality, and retarded emotional state. She's still emotionally a little kid, who shut herself off from the world. (She even eats Happy Meals still, which I thought was a nice touch.) I bought her look and even when she didn't speak, there was so much going on with Mara. She also displayed a wide variety of her perdsonality and was far more "lived-in" with everything.

Noomi's is a mannish alpha female. I found her too affected and clenching your jaw isn't displaying emotion. (Same shit Keira Knightley does.) And leads up to my main points: the Swedish movie is completely silly with its depiction of male-female interaction.

Subway scene: Mannish physique Noomi is capable of fighting off 3 men, who boorishly throw beer on her and start fighting her just because. Yet she's capable of fighting off all of them and make them run in fear.

Mara on the other hand, has to deal with a thief and she surprises him, but not overpowers him. She's still a woman, not some suped up James Cameron action star. She gets her bag back and runs away quickly. It's more realistic.

The sex scene with Blomkvist is an even better example. Swedish: Noomi rips the sheets off of a sleeping Blomkvist and rides him until she's orgasmed. She has to do this because the movie is continually pushing that militant feminist angle.

Mara meanwhile, checks the entire house, while Craig is panicking after being shot at. She then initiates the sex to calm him down, but doesn't overpower Craig. She even lets him flip and be on top. Same gender role switch, but more tactful and Mara's objective more implicit. Craig and Mara have an actual banter and relationship, where she starts to care for him. And that leads to the beautiful, but sad ending for her.

Everything else, I don't think is debatable. Fincher handles the tension of Craig searching the apartment as deftly and even more intense, than Gyllenhall in the basement in Zodiac. I was even into Craig going around and interviewing people. The hundreds of billion dollar bank heist shit with the wig, is really silly in both no doubt, but at least this movie didn't end with it.

comment #38

Kakihara says ...

Eloi: Actually, I'm really surprised shitpunks 3 is doing as horribly as it is. It'll make its money back, but it's definitely not going to be the same type of hit as the last flick. In a way, I'm kinda glad Cruise is coming back, 'cus douchey Xenu-related comment aside, he seemed like he was taking way too much flack, considering he didn't commit a DUI or slut around. Those rumours of a Top Gun 2 seem kinda unlikely, though, unless Kilmer can drop the beer gut. As for sequels, they're probably gonna have to jettison the bigger names for it to happen. The budget wasn't that high just because of the FX-work.

DavidF: Kung Fu Panda tells you all you need to know in the title.

Moviebob: "Its possible that we're looking at a significant event here: THE most-powerful American filmmaker has essentially made a film that's NOT for American audiences first. "

It actually wouldn't be the first time. A.I. allegedly did better in Japan than America.

"But this is the age of Globalism, and maybe that means we DON'T get to be the last word on what "matters" in the popular culture anymore"

I dunno. There are plenty of hit international titles already which only amount to cult hits here. Look at the Ghibli stuff. TinTin just happened to be the European Scooby-Doo, that's all.

"(next step: someone like Bay or maybe even Cameron shooting something overseas, probably China, in the native language with native stars.) "

Isn't that what Flowers of War is about?

Gaydos: Yeah, it isn't huge like it could be. This is definitely not Stevie's year, and prospects for his talky Lincoln movie seem even more dire...

comment #39

Gabe@ThePlaylist says ...

Christ, Rashad, your reviews are so literal-minded.

Your preferences of the American version all come down to THIS IS SHINIER!!!

comment #40

CitizenKaned4Life says ...

"The sex scene with Blomkvist is an even better example. Swedish: Noomi rips the sheets off of a sleeping Blomkvist and rides him until she's orgasmed. She has to do this because the movie is continually pushing that militant feminist angle."

It's not pushing any angle there -- that's in the BOOK, that's her CHARACTER.

She's also not a "mannish alpha female" at all -- she's just got a gigantic chip on her shoulder, which can be intimidating to those who aren't mentally strong. That's how she wards off those guys in the subway -- not by "overpowering" them, and certainly not in a James Cameron she-bitch type of way (did you even see this movie?!). That much feels "realistic" to me.

Mara's Salander looks too much like an alien to me -- she looks a little too "art-directed" for my tastes.

Listen, it's not a bad performance -- it's an iconic character, so Rooney has her moments.

I just don't get behind the notion that the Hollywood GWTDT is on all of these top-ten lists when -- beat for beat -- it's nearly identical to the other one.

Yeah, it looks and sounds marginally better, but at nearly 10x the budget of the original -- who fucking cares?

Fincher desperately needs to move on from this series.

comment #41

LexG says ...

ROONEY's Lisbeth = the ultimate female body and the ultimate woman and she is awesome and she is what every guy in the world should want, LOOK AT HER, LOOK AT HER, OH MY GOD ARE YOU SEEING HER?

I liked Rapace okay and TBH at first I thought Rooney was AWESOME but it wasn't until she shows up for revenge with her BLACK MAKEUP ROBIN-ZORRO MASK that I achieved maximum arousal... At this point, I would take Rooney and her PERFECT FEMALE FORM over even Kristen Stewart. She is the sexiest woman in the ENTIRETY OF CINEMA.

Fincher's version is a zillion times better style wise, energy wise and ESPECIALLY Blomkvist wise...

But as I've been ranting about on The Cold Blog, he sure does fuck up the plot points. Hard to be vague without spoiling, but re: his big plot twist change:

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER DO NOT READ IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED:

Eh, good thing nobody swung by the GLASS OFFICE WHERE EVERYBODY KNEW A CERTAIN PERSON WORKED for two decades, eh?

comment #42

Rashad says ...

I really don't care what's in the book honestly, because as is, Rooney fits the description of the character more. (From what I gathered from wiki before.) The book was titled The Men Who Hate Women, and that's obvious as that movie played it out. The book doesn't excuse ham-handed scenes or character interpretations. Fincher's version, like I said, is more tactful in that regard and the sex scene is the prime example. There's more at work there than just the woman being dominant at sex.

Noomi's physique is certainly more masculine and it fits into the larger agenda that movie is playing with.

Gabe: I think Infernal Affairs is better than The Departed (which I don't really get how people like). So there's that.

comment #43

lazarus says ...

"the tragic romance here was a lot more engaging and sad than it was in Benjamin Button."

You've got to be fucking kidding me. While it was nicely handled, there certainly wasn't a lot of depth or development. Two people at least 20 years apart in age have a spontaneous little fling when they're cooped-up together, and continue the sex as the investigation goes on. Then Blomqvist goes back to his affair with the woman his own age.

It's a little sad, but tragic? Give me a break. Their "getting to know each other" consisted of Craig asking her about her past and hearing about the burned father. And...that's it.

Falling in love with someone who's aging backwards, and that person abandons you and your child so you can have a normal life, only to find each other again years later and contemplate the effects of aging on their bodies? A little more tragic. And you're being very unkind to how brilliantly Cate Blanchett plays ALL her scenes as Daisy post-accident. That scene with her exercising in the dance studio while Benjamin looks on unannounced is sadder than the entire Lisbeth/Mikael relationship.

comment #44

Rashad says ...

I didn't mean tragic as in life or death, but I just don't know another word for it. I would define Jackie Brown and Max as a tragic romance as well. I felt sadder for Mara there than either of the leads in BB. I saw and felt how it hurt her, especially given how she had to open up to him. (And it's not just about what was said either.)

In BB, I just didn't care for anyone at the end. Particularly Pitt, who didn't seem to alter any of his blank emotions throughout the film with Daisy as adults. (And not just with her honestly; he showed no genuine enthusiasm over anything)

comment #45

Eloi Wrath says ...

Rashad and Lex are right. Fincher's version is so much better than the original that it's incredible to me that people would argue otherwise. It is an astonishing improvement, and a magnificent film.

Noomi was okay and the highlight of that particular version, but Rooney's range is far greater, and as Rashad says, she has a vulnerability (physically and emotionally) to her that never came across in scowling Noomi. She conveyed a lot of emotion through very subtle glances, and it was an interesting choice to bleach her eyebrows because of how they're so often used as the signifier of emotion on someone's face. Kids draw happy/sad/angry faces primarily with up or down-turned mouths and eyebrows. Mara and Fincher kept them still most of the time, but you could tell exactly what she was thinking. Very subtle and impressive performance that could have been wildly overplayed by some actress looking to act all tough.

"It's not pushing any angle there -- that's in the BOOK, that's her CHARACTER."

The book is a piece of shit, so I'm glad Fincher took it and elevated it. Rashad's right that the Swedish version presented Lisbeth as a tough, intimidating woman who would fuck you up with violence if you crossed her. Blomkvist was a pudgy sadsack. Fincher's version presented Lisbeth as a desperately sad, lonely and lost girl who had been disappointed by all the men in her life but survived through knowing her strengths and using them to her advantage. She was a lot more physically limited than Rapace's Lisbeth, the subway scene being a perfect example, but she used her intellect and cunning to counterbalance that. Craig's Blomkvist was therefore far less emasculated than the original one; he wasn't just some douche hanging around to make Rapace look cool and tough by comparison.

The gender portrayal was far more nuanced than the original. Rashad's right that Rapace's Lisbeth was a sort of Trinity from the Matrix fantasy movie tough-chick, with Blomkvist her bumbling accomplice. Fincher's version presented two flawed but competent protagonists who supported each other and offered each other help despite their differences. The romance angle felt more natural as a result; it wasn't as much of a mismatch.

comment #46

Eloi Wrath says ...

The editing was also superior. It was about 20 minutes longer than the Swedish theatrical cut, yet felt about half an hour shorter because of how Fincher kept things moving. The cuts in the early stages of the investigation were incredibly rapid. Not nearly as many establishing shots; Craig just got shit done in a way that was infinitely more gripping. The Swedish one had a tendency to get bogged down in the less interesting aspects of the mystery. Lots of montages of Blomkvist poring through photographs and newspapers. Lots more of them visiting people and questioning them, like the detectives in Law & Order.

Fincher didn't seem to care nearly as much about the intricacies of the case, perhaps because the actual case itself seems so obvious that it's unbelievable nobody solved it in 40 years. He wisely kept the family unit smaller than in the Swedish version. It didn't feel as much like an game of Clue/Cluedo, with each family member being individually scrutinized and then crossed off a list.

SPOILERS:
The set piece in the apartment at the end was masterful - from the half-chase to the confrontation, the slow-build of tension and use of sound design (the shutting and opening doors, etc.) was brilliant. And then the killer's lair was very nicely understated. Much less violent yet it felt more graphic; from the bag over his head slowly choking him to the range of power tools slightly out of focus in the background, all scored to that hilarious/creepy Enya track.
END SPOILERS

The score, while not as good as Reznor/Ross' effort last year for The Social Network, was suitably foreboding and added to the tension in many scenes.

The cinematography was typically excellent, and Fincher's framing of shots was clearly the work of a master at the top of his game. I would concede that the Swedish version's cinematography was perhaps its best aspect, so this side of Fincher's version - while excellent - was perhaps the least markedly superior. But still superior.

And the cast was a definite upgrade. Far more memorable performances. Yorick van Whatshisface was suitably repulsive (the way his pot-belly was used to signify doom was quite funny). Plummer was pure class - funny, playful and yet hiding years of sadness underneath. Berkoff, Visnjic, Wright all did well with their small roles. Craig was outstanding and Mara was utterly exceptional.

FINCHER POWER. BOW. Masterpiece.

comment #47

HarryWarden says ...

Ditto on Dragon Tattoo. I enjoyed Fincher's film way more than the original. No need really to reinterate what was already said except that Mara was absolutely superb and it would be a crime if she doesn't get an Oscar nomination. And make two more of these please, Fincher and co? Thanks.

comment #48

THE MovieBob says ...

I agree overall re: Mara vs. Rapace; but I DO think it's kind of "odd" that, out of all the things that could be done to make Salander less of a Mary Sue, it's the oveblown feminist-empowerment stuff that got junked (re: Rapace's Salander and the version from the book is a hard-as-nails ass-kicker who pretty-much uses Blomkvist as a sex toy while Mara's is vulnerable and actually seems to like him) while the equally-overblown "writer's fetish-doll dream-woman" stuff (re: bisexual/motorcyclist/computer-expert/goth-chick) remains wholly-intact.

Also, the big "line change" in the finale (kind of a spoiler) is just plain strange; particularly when you put it next to what may/may not be going on with Fincher and Mara. Just sayin'.

comment #49

Gabe@ThePlaylist says ...

Who didn't think Fincher's version would be better? Of course it's better. It still fucking sucks. Hey, let's get Mark Romanek to remake Manos The Hands Of Fate. I WONDER IF IT WILL HOLD A CANDLE TO THE ORIGINAL.

comment #50

Eloi Wrath says ...

Gabe: We get it. You don't like the source material.

comment #51

Gaydos says ...

Kakihara aka DZ, please explain to me the math you are using when you say "Tintin has already made it's money back."

comment #52

Kakihara says ...

Gaydos: IMDB has its budget at $130 million, and it's made $250 million in Europe, so it should be in the black, no?

comment #53

Bob Violence says ...

$250 million is its worldwide total to date and that isn't even breakeven on the negative cost (given the standard rule that the studio gets about 50% of the gross), never mind negative cost + marketing/distribution

comment #54

Michael Strangeways says ...

Saw "Dragon Tattoo" tonight.

It's the blander version of the two. I like Daniel Craig, but his Blomquist is kinda dumb and not really very interesting.. Rooney Mara does a nice job of making the character her own, but the character isn't supposed to be sweet. The sappy ending was such a crock a shit.

The original had grit and terror and pain in it. This was the Disney Land version.

The cat was the best thing in it.

comment #55

Kakihara says ...

Bob: It did what the average Bay film does in Europe, so I consider it to be a hit. Maybe not a big one, but, Green Lantern aside, they wouldn't be talking about a sequel if they didn't have some satisfaction with their box office.

comment #56

AlexG says ...

I agree with what some of the other commenters have said. Tin Tin was not made for the American market. The character is an icon around the world except the U.S. where he never caught on for some reason. There's even a museum entirely devoted to him in Brusells The Musee Herge.

I remember like 100 years ago when I used to read the comics as a kid and there were only two stores in the entire city that carried Tin Tin comics. (And I;'m talking about Chicago) So some Americans are upset that it wasn't made for them? Sorry, the world does NOT revolve around you