When signing up to adapt any much-loved literary character, theres a certain amount of risk involved.

As it turns out, we neednt have worried.

Tintins a timely reminder, too, of just how good a motion-captured film can look.

Ad content continues below

First of all, congratulations onTintin.

You must be very proud of it.

It came out okay.

People often mention the dreaded words Uncanny Valley in relation to motion capture.

How did you manage to avoid that in this instance?

By never thinking about it.

Does it look right?

Have we captured all the moments of action on the faces?

I think all those things add up to giving you a proper performance.

But did you feel a weight of expectation, collectively, when adapting books as loved as Herges?

We have a go at make everything as realistic as possible.

So we just had to apply that one step further in trying to figure what that third dimension was.

For the characters, that was a little bit harder, because he was less realistic.

This was especially true with Tintin, because from a drawing perspective, he is the simplest character.

Theres very little detail in the way Herge draws him.

When you look at Tintin when hes drawn, you cant tell if hes got cheekbones or not.

But if youre making a realistic character, you cant make him smile if he doesnt have cheekbones.

So its realistic details like that that we have to start putting in.

But once you start putting cheekbones in, does he still look like Tintin?

Not quite, so why not?

Was that you saying to the audience, What do you think?

Does he look like Tintin?

It should also work at that level.

How has that come along?

Has it evolved a lot since then?

But we still rely heavily on artists to get it right.

Its still a mix of science and art for everything that we do.

What mixture, would you say, is there between art and science?

Thats a very elaborate process of analysis and refiguring information.

So what weve done is developed a learning system.

And we look at it, and if its not right, we add more.

So we build up this whole system of learning, so its all completely artist driven.

What the human face can do is infinite.

And if it doesnt, we go back and start over again.

So from a technical standpoint, the challenges were reversed onTintin, when compared to a live-action blockbuster.

The intimate moments of dialogue were a greater challenge than the action sequences.

What was his learning process like, do you think?

His process was going through that translation.

Understanding what the actors did, working back from that, and seeing how that relates to your characters.

Because youre by definition constraining your characters to not be human.

Do you think mo-cap is actually the way forward for big action movies?

So its a great tool.

But those are more the big action sequences, where youd probably use CG anyway.

And with that, we were sadly out of time.