Support NeoGAF

[_Isaac]

I went with three other people yesterday. Man, I couldn't believe the number of sighs I heard from my group throughout the movie. My cousin actually got mad when he found out it was a cartoon. Anyway, it wasn't much of a success for my group. Afterwards, I asked if it had been almost the same movie, but with real people, would he have liked it. He said yes, but overall, he was upset he had to pay for it.

I thought it was okay. I liked the action scenes and the characters were nice. I also liked the story of the boat, and the way the movie told us that history.

Spoiler

All through out the movie, I kept thinking about what this "secret cargo" might be! I was expecting something amazing along the lines of the arc of the covenant or that Jesus cup, so it was a little disappointing when it turned out to just be treasure. Then I kept thinking it must have something more to it because the Steven Spielberg guy said he wanted to keep Haddock alive. It was also disappointing to find out that this was just because he wanted to remember to get his revenge. That just came off as so silly. Like these people are going to care that much about what their great great great great grandparents did.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

I went with three other people yesterday. Man, I couldn't believe the number of sighs I heard from my group throughout the movie. My cousin actually got mad when he found out it was a cartoon. Anyway, it wasn't much of a success for my group. Afterwards, I asked if it had been almost the same movie, but with real people, would he have liked it. He said yes, but overall, he was upset he had to pay for it.

I thought it was okay. I liked the action scenes and the characters were nice. I also liked the story of the boat, and the way the movie told us that history.

Spoiler

All through out the movie, I kept thinking about what this "secret cargo" might be! I was expecting something amazing along the lines of the arc of the covenant or that Jesus cup, so it was a little disappointing when it turned out to just be treasure. Then I kept thinking it must have something more to it because the Steven Spielberg guy said he wanted to keep Haddock alive. It was also disappointing to find out that this was just because he wanted to remember to get his revenge. That just came off as so silly. Like these people are going to care that much about what their great great great great grandparents did.

Spoiler

He wanted to keep Haddock alive because only a true Haddock would have been able to pick out the misplaced landmass on the map and uncover the treasure.

Sorry to hear that your negative nancy friends sullied your experience.

 

[dofry]

Watched this a few weeks ago in 2D as my friend doesn't like 3D.
I've read and own the comics so I was very excited to see it, but alas. I did not like it.

It certainly looks great, characters are portrayed pretty well from a comic to CG kind of way, and the animation is mostly really lively, but I did not like story, the dialogue or the chase scenes. Haddock was the only character I liked a bit, but I laughed only once during the movie. For me, it was missing its adventure soul.
Few here have an a polar opposite opinion, which I respect, but I couldn't help but feeling of "where is the excitement" during the movie.
Milou was ok-ish, and Dupont and Dupond were not used in their full potential and Tintin was not that likable.

It was kind of like Avatar for me. Looking good with a mediocre story. I do think Tintin is the better movie of the two, but needs to be fleshed out a lot more for a sequel. Felt bland.

 

[cakefoo]

I saw this 3 times in 6 days. My thirst for this film is unquenchable.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

I saw this 3 times in 6 days. My thirst for this film is unquenchable.

Excellent! Seeing it again tomorrow.

 

[jett]

Oh man they are only showing a spanish-dubbed Tintin here, how disgusting. I guess I'll have to wait until the blu release.

 

[cooljeanius]

Saw this Friday with some friends. It was great! Definitely stayed true to the spirit of the books. I like how they played with Tintin's hairstyle

Spoiler

(having it be a shark fin, almost cutting it off with the airplane propeller)

. I also liked how they at least made some references to him being a journalist beyond being an implied ability, whereas in the books it's barely even mentioned. My brother really liked the part at the beginning where Tintin was getting his portrait done and it came out looking just like Herge's artwork. Now I just have to get my Dad to go see it. Anyway, until then, I have a bunch of the Tintin books to re-read.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

It was what I expected: some good, well-filmed (if predictable) actions and a neat little score scenes mixed with a story that one doesn't really give a shit about.

I think the thing that sort of made me lose interest were the moments where I realized that I was watching a cartoon without real stakes. Two examples pop to mind:

Spoiler

-While they're on Haddock's ship, there's a scene where they hide under some stairs, Snowy barks, and a guard becomes suspicious and turns around and looks back up the stairs, only to get goaded on in his search by another guard. However, the stairs had an open space between them from which the protagonists could see said guard, and all it would have taken was him looking down (or just plain having peripheral vision) for the bad guy to recapture Haddock/kill Tintin. I think watching RedLetterMedia reviews has made me more sensitive to this sort of thing recently, but while it is a small point, it does illustrate the fact that it's a movie relying on the "bad guys are kinda stupid" trope, which makes the movie feel like there's relatively little at stake.

-When they're in Morocco, Haddock shoots a missile at a dam and floods a fuckin' town. This just ends up being a backdrop to an admittedly very fun action scene, but I couldn't get out of my mind the fact that such a scene would economically devastate the town in question! This after I was already left wondering how Tintin and Haddock just walked away from the palace/guards after being fingered as the thieves. Again, these are somewhat minor points, the sort of thing one isn't really meant to think about in an action-filled family movie, but the film disregards the rules of reality to SUCH a degree while simultaneously making the environments look fairly realistic that I thought it somewhat hard to be drawn in to any real extent. Sculli compared the movie to Raiders, but what this movie lacks is that film's sense of grittiness, something brought about not necessarily by the film's use of real props/models but by the limitations imposed on it, logistically. I continue to feel that while CG has a place in the filmmaking world, it has to coexist with the realization that constraints and limitations are where a lot of creativity comes from. The movie is sure good-looking, but I found myself not caring about anything.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

As to your first point Snowy - it was dark under the stairs and as such looking from a brighter light source makes them harder to see.

As for the second point - I think that is getting petty. You could say the same about Indy blowing up trucks in the middle of the marketplace in Raiders. Surely somebody would have come and arrested him? Same sense of disbelief required in some scenes as is required in Temple of Doom when they use the liferaft to land from the aeroplane onto the mountainside. It's Indy all around imo.

So I'm guessing you managed to see Tintin instead of War Horse?

 

[The Librarian]

It was what I expected: some good, well-filmed (if predictable) actions and a neat little score scenes mixed with a story that one doesn't really give a shit about.

I think the thing that sort of made me lose interest were the moments where I realized that I was watching a cartoon without real stakes. Two examples pop to mind:

Spoiler

-While they're on Haddock's ship, there's a scene where they hide under some stairs, Snowy barks, and a guard becomes suspicious and turns around and looks back up the stairs, only to get goaded on in his search by another guard. However, the stairs had an open space between them from which the protagonists could see said guard, and all it would have taken was him looking down (or just plain having peripheral vision) for the bad guy to recapture Haddock/kill Tintin. I think watching RedLetterMedia reviews has made me more sensitive to this sort of thing recently, but while it is a small point, it does illustrate the fact that it's a movie relying on the "bad guys are kinda stupid" trope, which makes the movie feel like there's relatively little at stake.

-When they're in Morocco, Haddock shoots a missile at a dam and floods a fuckin' town. This just ends up being a backdrop to an admittedly very fun action scene, but I couldn't get out of my mind the fact that such a scene would economically devastate the town in question! This after I was already left wondering how Tintin and Haddock just walked away from the palace/guards after being fingered as the thieves. Again, these are somewhat minor points, the sort of thing one isn't really meant to think about in an action-filled family movie, but the film disregards the rules of reality to SUCH a degree while simultaneously making the environments look fairly realistic that I thought it somewhat hard to be drawn in to any real extent. Sculli compared the movie to Raiders, but what this movie lacks is that film's sense of grittiness, something brought about not necessarily by the film's use of real props/models but by the limitations imposed on it, logistically. I continue to feel that while CG has a place in the filmmaking world, it has to coexist with the realization that constraints and limitations are where a lot of creativity comes from. The movie is sure good-looking, but I found myself not caring about anything.

I thought the movie was kind of ridiculous (re: fantastic), and so you gotta just roll with these kinds of things. A higher suspension of belief, if you will.

Of course, why

Spoiler

why Haddock's grandfather, whom I think was the original captain of the Unicorn, simply didn't tell Haddock where the treasure was is beyond me.

 

[Stallion Free]

Dat Morocco shot. Holy shit.

The camera work in the film was on a whole other level. It was really insane what Spielberg managed to do when freed of physical constraints.

 

[Quick]

Saw this in IMAX 3D. SO GOOD.

Loved everything about this, and the transitions with

Spoiler

the water turning into a puddle with the boat and the handshake turning into a mountain terrain with them riding camels

were awesome.

Spoiler

Hergé cameo was also a nice touch! Loved having all the characters drawn in the background, with Tintin holding up his own picture.

-When they're in Morocco, Haddock shoots a missile at a dam and floods a fuckin' town. This just ends up being a backdrop to an admittedly very fun action scene, but I couldn't get out of my mind the fact that such a scene would economically devastate the town in question! This after I was already left wondering how Tintin and Haddock just walked away from the palace/guards after being fingered as the thieves. Again, these are somewhat minor points, the sort of thing one isn't really meant to think about in an action-filled family movie, but the film disregards the rules of reality to SUCH a degree while simultaneously making the environments look fairly realistic that I thought it somewhat hard to be drawn in to any real extent. Sculli compared the movie to Raiders, but what this movie lacks is that film's sense of grittiness, something brought about not necessarily by the film's use of real props/models but by the limitations imposed on it, logistically. I continue to feel that while CG has a place in the filmmaking world, it has to coexist with the realization that constraints and limitations are where a lot of creativity comes from. The movie is sure good-looking, but I found myself not caring about anything.[/spoiler]

Spoiler

If you noticed the sign early on by the well, there was a water shortage in the city. The dam was blocking water off it. Haddock didn't blow the whole dam open, he shot the mechanism blocking the water from the city. It flows to the sea. The city is safe!

 

[JGS]

Saw the movie today and loved it.

I assume that the visuals would generate mixed feelings but I was sucked in. I am surprised they were able to pull off the look and the film looks way better on screen than in the early shots. Although I think Avatar is better in terms of detail work, the visuals overall with Tintin were on par with that film.

The theater I was at was 3D only and it was functional, neither off putting nor necessary for the story. After seeing Avatar on Blu & now this, I am confident that the technology benefits from providing greater fidelity rather than greater 3D effect (With that said, I loved the Hobbit trailer in 3D).

The biggest problems with the movie are really just ones of recognition. Tintin is just not a well known character in the states, but it was marketed like he was Spiderman rather than a new IP for the states. The movie is also so much like Indiana Jones that Tintin feels out of place in his own movie. He's the straight man who is usually a secondary character in movies but he's the lead. In no way should they change that but at the same time, he's a tough character, for people who have never heard him, to grow attached to.

Snowy & Haddock are great though. All the characters are actually. I'm sure there will be one more sequel.

The action scenes were great. As much as I loved

Spoiler

the hawk chase, I enjoyed the pirate scenes as well

. I thought both of these were directed excellently. My kid and I literally

Spoiler

jumped at the plane crash too

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Quick - if that's true, then point retracted. However,]spoiler] they also cause considerable damage to the London harbor, so unless Interpol has deep pockets, I hold that my point stands.[/spoiler]

Sculli -

Spoiler

while I freely admit that, on some level, such criticisms are petty when taken on their own, I found enough of those types of moments for me to feel that the whole thing was sufficiently cartoony and ridiculous. That's not a bad thing unto itself, but in this particular instance, given that its animation style's not THAT cartoony or abstracted from reality (especially in some of the environments), I found that it just eliminated a lot of my investment in the movie, as well as lowered the stakes considerably since it seemed to follow the "main character's a crack shot, evil guys with machine guns can't hit shit" trope.

Stakes are another thing that qualitatively separate something like this from something like Raiders. In Raiders, Indy's fighting for something that could very well be the end of life as we know it; though his presence is eventually proved to be ultimately unnecessary, since the Ark would have melted the Nazis' faces regardless of his presence (an actually pretty clever reversal of typical narrative structure), it gives a feeling of weight to the moment-to-moment action of the movie. In Tintin, you've got a rich and powerful man seeking money and revenge, but nothing he does is ever any real threat to the larger fabric of the outside world. I'm not advocating the Star Trek TNG "Have to end up with something that threatens the mortal safety of the entire ship"-style of narrative construction, but there's just never anything to really invest one in the goings-on except for the kind-of-fun action scenes. Plus, it lacks the deadpan sort of wit that makes something like Raiders so much fun. That's not to suggest that the film has to be like Raiders, just in response to Sculli saying that it reminded him of Raiders. I just don't think that it has as much soul, however ineffable and subjectively a quality as that may be; it lacks the youthful passion and iconic spark that have given Raiders such staying power 30 years later. When you think of Raiders, you can instantly remember the opening scene, the sun rooms, Indy on the hill with the bazooka, the opening of the Ark, and that final shot, not to mention other fun little bits throughout the movie connecting all of the iconic imagery together. What, in Tintin, has that sort of staying power? It's only a few hours later, and nothing in the film sticks out in my mind as prominently as those images that I haven't even seen in probably a year and a half.

That's really what I mean: the movie is fun when the action scenes hit, but there's nothing much to sustain it beyond that initial viewing.

 

[_Isaac]

The action scenes were great. As much as I loved

Spoiler

the hawk chase, I enjoyed the pirate scenes as well

. I thought both of these were directed excellently. My kid and I literally

Spoiler

jumped at the plane crash too

I loved the action scenes, although I do have to say that

Spoiler

the final conflict was a bit underwhelming. It was a bit anticlimactic, and I'm talking about the duel between Haddock and Saccharine.

I also didn't get to enjoy the ending that much because the people I was with kinda wanted to leave, and I was hoping that they'd stay a bit longer to reach the end of the movie. I guess my mind was on them instead of on the movie. I actually

Spoiler

missed how they ended up in those wrecking ball machine things.

 

[Quick]

Quick - if that's true, then point retracted. However,

Spoiler

they also cause considerable damage to the London harbor, so unless Interpol has deep pockets, I hold that my point stands.

Spoiler

Oh yeah, I'm just talking about Morocco. The harbour wasn't completely wrecked. The worst they did was scatter debris everywhere and wrecked the machine completely. Interpol and the FBI are together on the case, so I'd assume the FBI would cover some of it , but I'll give you that point anyway.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

Snowman got a lot of good points, I can't really disagree. Another dude pointed ou the movie could've benefited from some more weirdness or more things to hang it's hat on. Outside of Haddock's whiskey powers, it was fairly straightforward. The film is almost too lean, it could've used some fur around the ears. The only flights of fancy seem to be Thompson & Thompson

Spoiler

catching the wallet stealer.

 

[ZackieChan]

As someone who has only seen a bit of the Tintin cartoon as a kid (on HBO? I forget), I was excited going into this, given the reviews that some of you have been posting here. I came away kind of disappointed. First, the look of the film is just odd. The super realistic rendering of everything just doesn't jive with the cartoonish features of the characters. I don't know why they didn't go with a more cartoony rendering technique. It made the whole look of the film jarring to me. I really enjoyed the action sequences, and I loved that the movie was not afraid to show characters drinking and using guns, as well as killing characters. This is how kid's movies should be, not the usual trash (like that goddamn Madagascar 3 trailer before the movie) that passes for children's entertainment these days. There was some great stuff here, but it just didn't wow me like I had hoped it would.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Just got back from my second viewing. Enjoyed it just as much as the first time. Goddamn is this film beautiful. Its also just so much goddamn fun. Its action is inventive and Spielberg's framing of all the action is out of control.

I am flabbergasted at anybody that can't have fun with the movie.

 

[Lijik]

Saw the film tonight, thought it was amazing. Have to echo the sentiments about the pirate story scene. Just wonderful!
I also really dug the stylish opening credits

Anyways I came home and saw the box office numbers and I am legitimately angered Chipmunks is doing better.

 

[Combichristoffersen]

Anyways I came home and saw the box office numbers and I am legitimately angered Chipmunks is doing better.

:'(

 

[Nappuccino]

Haven't had time to watch this yet... hoping to hit up a theater on tuesday.

 

[Pau]

I really enjoyed the action sequences, and I loved that the movie was not afraid to show characters drinking and using guns, as well as killing characters. This is how kid's movies should be, not the usual trash (like that goddamn Madagascar 3 trailer before the movie) that passes for children's entertainment these days.

Yeah, I noticed this too and thought that was pretty great. Nothing was gratuitous - but where it made sense for characters to die, they died and even more so, the movie didn't shy away from showing it! Nice surprise for a children's film.

Anyways, saw this today with the family for our traditional Christmas Day movie. We had a lot of fun with it - especially my dad who's a big Tintin fan and came to the theater for the first time in a year for it. I agree that sometimes the humans felt a bit off, but nothing too distracting. The rendering of the environments, clothing, hair, etc, was really good. I don't think I'd watch it again anytime soon, but I do hope they get to make a sequel.

The opening credits had a nice treat for me; didn't know this was scored by John Williams. I didn't pay too much attention to the music though so I'll probably have to listen to it separately.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

Surprised nobody is talking about the opening credits, which are fairly like Catch Me if You Can and also fairly dope.

 

[MrSerrels]

I just felt like this was Spielberg on auto pilot. So many sequences just felt like they had been ripped from earlier, better Spielberg movies.

Loved Serkis as Haddock though. But yeah, weak ending and Spielberg ripping off others ripping him off just sort of left me a bit flat.

 

[akira28]

Fucking. Good. Movie. Awesome production details. That chase in the middle east? Good good shit.

I wish I had a dog like Snowy...

Also, Tintin, the boy reporter who's a crack shot with a pistol and will kick a man's kneecap out like it wasn't a thing? mfwhat? A kid's cartoon? A return to awesome is more like it.

Now lets wait for them to ruin it forever...

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

So the writer of the next film is Anthony Horowitz who - now that I've looked at his imdb seems to be a TV writer. They'll probably get somebody else in for another draft or so (PLEASE NOT KOEPP), but I am liking the source material for the film. That being Prisoner of the Sun and The Seven Crystal Balls.

Will be interesting to see how they introduce Calculus, since I have the feeling it will start with them finishing up at

Spoiler

Rackham's shipwreck.

 

[Nappuccino]

So the writer of the next film is Anthony Horowitz who - now that I've looked at his imdb seems to be a TV writer. They'll probably get somebody else in for another draft or so (PLEASE NOT KOEPP), but I am liking the source material for the film. That being Prisoner of the Sun and The Seven Crystal Balls.

Will be interesting to see how they introduce Calculus, since I have the feeling it will start with them finishing up at

Spoiler

Rackham's shipwreck.

They would be smart to get Edgar Wright back on the script at some point.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

They would be smart to get Edgar Wright back on the script at some point.

Well the script for the next movie is already written. So they have plenty of time for more drafts.

 

[Nappuccino]

Well the script for the next movie is already written. So they have plenty of time for more drafts.

yeah... just hopefully he isn't too busy with the other films he has lined up.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

They had Moffat/Wright/Cornish for this one and the script still stunk.

 

[Jangaroo]

Got back from watching it. Hot damn the 3D in the movie was pretty darn good. Absolutely gorgeous movie too and I really loved some of the transitions they used. Everything was so well shot. Kind of wished they upped the tension a little and the last bits of the movie was kind of anti-climatic but I'd definitely like to see a sequel.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

The script didn't stink. You stink.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

The script didn't stink, but it sure as hell lack most of the personality those 3 writers had. Put those 3 guys in a room and by me you're supposed to have like, the greatest fucking thing I've ever seen. I know Moffat's draft was separate, but damn. The final product didnt have much of any of their fingerprints on it.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

I think maybe just Tintin stinks. The character itself is so damn boring, a boy scout that even Kid Indy wouldn't be caught dead hanging around with, not even all the talented writers in the world can make him interesting.

 

[Qwomo]

I think maybe just Tintin stinks. The character itself is so damn boring, a boy scout that even Kid Indy wouldn't be caught dead hanging around with, not even all the talented writers in the world can make him interesting.

Your opinions are hilarious. Keep these gems coming!

 

[Combichristoffersen]

I think maybe just Tintin stinks. The character itself is so damn boring, a boy scout that even Kid Indy wouldn't be caught dead hanging around with, not even all the talented writers in the world can make him interesting.

I.. I have no words.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

Are you people really going to sit here and tell me Tintin in this movie was an interesting character? Is this the first movie you've ever seen, maybe?

 

[Broder Salsa]

I think maybe just Tintin stinks. The character itself is so damn boring, a boy scout that even Kid Indy wouldn't be caught dead hanging around with, not even all the talented writers in the world can make him interesting.

That's hilarious. That is coming from someone who didn't think that much of the movie either.

 

[Jangaroo]

Maybe bland, but stink wouldn't be a good word to describe Tintin.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

I don't think Tintin is a terrinly interesting character. He's an accessible character. He's always been the vessel through which the audience would experience events. It has always been the characters that surround Tintin - those that he comes across that are interesting and quirky and join on the adventures. He plays a very straight role. Tintin is driven by the thrill of a fantastic story to be found (ie: adventure) and doesn't have time for bullshit getting in his way. This is why Haddock was so well realized.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

The most interesting thing about Tintin is his hair. It’s a credit to Serkis that the film doesn’t start until Tintin finds Haddock, the only character with any character in the whole film. Tintin is just this guy who likes mysteries and adventures, more Dora the Explorer then Indiana Jones.

And then there's the action sequences. They're all very well-shot and impressive-looking, as expected from a combination of WETA and Spielberg, but where's the danger? Where's the tension? There isn't any; there are no rules to this mo-cap adventure except they aren't any rules, every action scene is bigger and dumber the one that came before, until they are

Spoiler

literally dueling with giant cranes

. And for what? Mystical cities? Religious artifacts? Dragon armies? Aliens!? No; a piece of paper. That they

Spoiler

discover leads to a small amount of gold in a basement of an old mansion, in the denouement of the film, almost as an afterthought

 

[spindashing]

I just saw this movie, in 3D of course, earlier with four other friends. It was one of my friends' idea. At first, I wondered why we were even in there watching this movie. The first few minutes impressed me visually but I didn't like the movie 100%. After awhile I found myself falling in love with the movie. It's brilliant all over: wonderful visually, great voice acting, and a heartwarming story. Well worth it to see this movie and I'll start suggesting it to other people.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

I think maybe just Tintin stinks. The character itself is so damn boring, a boy scout that even Kid Indy wouldn't be caught dead hanging around with, not even all the talented writers in the world can make him interesting.

Huh? Lol.

 

[Krev]

Remember when Avatar was like your 'eyeballs getting fucked'?

The Baghar sequence is the most eyeball fucking sequence in any CG movie, excluding the climax of Speed Racer. So damn fun.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

Can't even imagine all the shit I missed going on in the background watching that the first time.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

The most interesting thing about Tintin is his hair. It’s a credit to Serkis that the film doesn’t start until Tintin finds Haddock, the only character with any character in the whole film. Tintin is just this guy who likes mysteries and adventures, more Dora the Explorer then Indiana Jones.

And then there's the action sequences. They're all very well-shot and impressive-looking, as expected from a combination of WETA and Spielberg, but where's the danger? Where's the tension? There isn't any; there are no rules to this mo-cap adventure except they aren't any rules, every action scene is bigger and dumber the one that came before, until they are

Spoiler

literally dueling with giant cranes

. And for what? Mystical cities? Religious artifacts? Dragon armies? Aliens!? No; a piece of paper. That they

Spoiler

discover leads to a small amount of gold in a basement of an old mansion, in the denouement of the film, almost as an afterthought

I definitely felt a sense of danger when

Spoiler

Tintin was unconscious and heading toward the Plane's propeller. That shit had me fucking screaming inside 'GODDAMMIT HADDOCK HURRY THE FUCK UP!'

I don't know how you can find the action scenes big and dumb. I thought the action scenes were very clever for the most part - and there are a lot of them. The real treasure by the end of it was

Spoiler

Haddock living up to his ancestor, by finding the treasure in the first place. It wasn't them finding gold, it was Haddock being worthy of putting on the hat in finding it.

 

[Duki]

holy shit this movie was gud

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

Tintin is basically Mickey Mouse in personality - neutral. And like Mickey Mouse, Tintin benefits from his large roster of supporting characters with cartoonish and wildly exaggerated personalities that contrast with his more subdued one.

The reason for this is not unlike the reason why some video game characters(like Link or Mario, for instance) have neutral personalities. It "allows readers to mask themselves in a character and safely enter a sensually stimulating world."(quote by Scott McCloud)

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Agreed. Except that Tintin is a badass when he needs to be.