The only question remains: If they have Spielberg, Jackson and Craig... why not make a real film with good old-fashioned live-action?
A good question, and personally I'd much prefer to see it that way. There's nothing about Tintin that demands impossible special effects that can't be done in live action, any more than say, an Indiana Jones film.
Still, its Tintin, its Craig, its Gareth from The Office, so I'm there.
I think Craig would have been a far more natural choice for Captain Haddock (which Connery would have been superb for back in the day). Same-shaped nose and ears, same strapping physique. Take a look at a photo of Craig with a full beard, imagine the beard a little darker, and perhaps you'll get where I'm coming from.
It's basically a cartoon, though, so Graham Norton could do it and still look exactly like Haddock. Which annoyingly means that for some reason Serkis gets picked again (is he really the only actor who can do body capture?), but he can't spoil it for me- it just sounds too good.
Well basically he's Jackson's mascot, isn't he? In any case, Craig probably didn't want to be tied to another big franchise and ending up jumping back and forth between Bond and Tintin without having room to do a Low Budget Indie, so this way he can just be a part of it and do one (or will he be in two?)
And just for trivia, this seems to cement Craig's reputation as a "great guy to work with", since he's reuniting with not one, or two, but three people he's worked with before - Toby Jones, Jamie Bell, and Steven Spielberg.