PDA

View Full Version : Tron Legacy



Smileycat
12-07-2010, 02:30 PM
What do you think of the trailers?

Go here to see seven of 'em: http://movies.yahoo.com/holiday-movies/tron-legacy/1810096458


Personally, I'm excited.

K. Taylor
12-07-2010, 03:01 PM
We have tickets to a midnight showing in IMAX 3D. :D

maestrowork
12-07-2010, 03:14 PM
Probably good entertainment, but don't expect it to be ground breaking like the original. Why are they not reinventing that world, instead of just regurgitating the same concepts?

Noah Body
12-07-2010, 05:12 PM
Because it's less risky and they stand to make a buck by revisiting old terrain? This is not a new paradigm for Hollywood.

maggi90w1
12-07-2010, 05:19 PM
I'm going to watch it because I want to make babies with James Frain (even though he looks pretty goofy in Tron).

Do you think I should watch the original?

Smileycat
12-07-2010, 05:35 PM
Probably good entertainment, but don't expect it to be ground breaking like the original. Why are they not reinventing that world, instead of just regurgitating the same concepts?


I think in this case, the innovation is in the F/X, not the correlation between the computer function and its portrayal onscreen, which was so novel in the first movie. I giggled every time they showed a new element, like the communication towers, master control, etc. Marvelous. I think I was the only person in the audience that knew what everything meant. And that was the downfall of that movie. Few really understood everything. You had to be in the business to really understand the function of each element portrayed in the movie. Limited appeal. So, if they used modern elements in Tron Legacy (which few would recognize), they would be making the same 'mistake.'

Are you into computers, maestro?

Still, I have to say that I found the original TRON a terrifically entertaining movie, computer references or not. Good vs. evil, and all.

Smileycat
12-07-2010, 05:44 PM
I'm going to watch it because I want to make babies with James Frain (even though he looks pretty goofy in Tron).

Do you think I should watch the original?


Hi, Maggi. Yes, if just for the kicks. Do you know anything about how computers worked back then? There was a Master Control program which monitored all the other programs, sub-routines, which were a part of programs that did separate calculations, 'end of the line' is a phrase used to indicate the program had finished and could do no more. Of course, in the movie, it seemed as though all the programs were people (they were portrayed by the real humans who wrote them). I giggled so much as the story unfolded. Maybe you would, too.

Smileycat
12-07-2010, 05:45 PM
We have tickets to a midnight showing in IMAX 3D. :D


Have a great time, K.

katiemac
12-07-2010, 06:38 PM
I saw some footage a couple months ago. People in the theater were pretty excited about it. I haven't seen the original, so I can't say this for certain, but I think they do reinvent the world a little differently ... they go off the grid.

jennontheisland
12-07-2010, 06:45 PM
The Boy and I watched the original last time he was here. He was a little bored with the 80s stylings etc. so I'm not sure I'll be able to convince him to see this one in the theatre. If I can, we'll go.

Toothpaste
12-07-2010, 07:57 PM
I too saw about 20 minutes of footage, it looks like a lot of fun. I haven't seen the original (yet) but I get the impression from a lot of people that it was a movie that was exciting for the technology not the story as much. This film looks really entertaining as well as just cool to look at.

maestrowork
12-07-2010, 09:29 PM
Are you into computers, maestro?


Yes. I found that stuff fascinating, and it was a great concept to humanize (and cosmopolitanize) the technology.

That's why I think they should "update" this movie to reflect on the technology 25 years later. The original was written about "mainframes." Today's computer world is a whole lot different now. So I am kind of curious what they're going to do with it, or they're going to recycle old stuff with better CGI -- I would be very disappointed.

Manuel Royal
12-07-2010, 10:56 PM
That's why I think they should "update" this movie to reflect on the technology 25 years later. The original was written about "mainframes." Today's computer world is a whole lot different now. So I am kind of curious what they're going to do with it, or they're going to recycle old stuff with better CGI -- I would be very disappointed.I had similar thoughts. It's been 28 years; the world of computers has exploded since then.

The original movie always seemed to me like an entertaining exercise that served to: 1) depict a sort of fairy-tale about how computers worked; and 2) show off the state-of-the-art computer imaging of 1982.

In 2010, we're all accustomed to movies using CGI to put onscreen just about anything that can be visualized. So I don't see much point to a sequel unless they come up with a really strong story that expands the concept. Not holding breath.

Smileycat
12-07-2010, 11:36 PM
Yes. I found that stuff fascinating, and it was a great concept to humanize (and cosmopolitanize) the technology.

That's why I think they should "update" this movie to reflect on the technology 25 years later. The original was written about "mainframes." Today's computer world is a whole lot different now. So I am kind of curious what they're going to do with it, or they're going to recycle old stuff with better CGI -- I would be very disappointed.


I get you. I know what you mean. I enjoyed that part of the movie immensely, but it did have a limited appeal.

I hope they do show some of the new technology, too.

Let me know what you think after you see it.

maestrowork
12-07-2010, 11:39 PM
I wonder how they would represent the "web" and social networking...

Smileycat
12-07-2010, 11:52 PM
I wonder how they would represent the "web" and social networking...


Well, they'd have to keep it in context with the storyline - the son finds his father in the computer system and the rescue that ensues. I could probably come up with something (I'd have to think about it), but it will be interesting to see if they do show those elements.

:)

maestrowork
12-08-2010, 12:11 AM
Well, they'd have to keep it in context with the storyline - the son finds his father in the computer system and the rescue that ensues. I could probably come up with something (I'd have to think about it), but it will be interesting to see if they do show those elements.

:)

I think it would be immensely enjoyable if Flynn Jr. finds that there is no longer a master control, but instead, the landscape is vast with billions of networks and conduits, and it would be almost impossible to find his father, until he comes across the avatar (a younger Flynn)... And then the viruses strike.

WCP
12-08-2010, 04:08 AM
Looks cool - but its hard to imagine a big time hollywood film being that satisfying these days

K. Taylor
12-08-2010, 06:34 AM
The original had a bit of that "what if the computers get smarter than us?" AI question, which is something they can still work with.

My dad showed me Tron when it first came out on video. I live in SoCal, so Disneyland was a frequent haunt, and the Tron section of the People Mover was so creepy when I was little.

If you get Tron on DVD, there's a ton of info about how they made the movie and created all the computer rendering. For the FX business, it had a big impact, as they wrote things people hadn't done with computers for films, yet. One of the most fascinating bits is the hours it took to do the slightest thing with the processors available at the time.

Smileycat
12-08-2010, 06:03 PM
I think it would be immensely enjoyable if Flynn Jr. finds that there is no longer a master control, but instead, the landscape is vast with billions of networks and conduits, and it would be almost impossible to find his father, until he comes across the avatar (a younger Flynn)... And then the viruses strike.

Yes, it would be interesting. Your ideas are sound. I'd like to see Malware, showing how a virus replicates, etc. Lots of possibilities.

Smileycat
12-08-2010, 06:04 PM
Looks cool - but its hard to imagine a big time hollywood film being that satisfying these days

You never know. The first one was tres cool.

Smileycat
12-08-2010, 06:07 PM
The original had a bit of that "what if the computers get smarter than us?" AI question, which is something they can still work with.

My dad showed me Tron when it first came out on video. I live in SoCal, so Disneyland was a frequent haunt, and the Tron section of the People Mover was so creepy when I was little.

If you get Tron on DVD, there's a ton of info about how they made the movie and created all the computer rendering. For the FX business, it had a big impact, as they wrote things people hadn't done with computers for films, yet. One of the most fascinating bits is the hours it took to do the slightest thing with the processors available at the time.

I'm much older. I remember it when it came out. I was young, I admit, but somewhat knowledgeable with regard to computers. I knew everything they talked about and showed. They were innovative and were way before their time.

I'm glad you enjoy it. Say 'hi' to your dad for me! :tongue

maestrowork
12-08-2010, 10:27 PM
Yes, it would be interesting. Your ideas are sound. I'd like to see Malware, showing how a virus replicates, etc. Lots of possibilities.

Given some of the stuff I've seen in the trailers (the crowd, the "young Flynn" avatar, etc.) I'm a bit hopefully they would touch on that stuff. They'd be stupid not to, even if they're still kind of fixated on the "gaming" and light cycles.

* I'm going to wonder, what happened to Program RAM? Does he get 10000000x bigger? :) *

* I think the original TRON is a great introductory course for computer novice back then -- you don't know what a CPU or MCP is? Watch TRON)

Smileycat
12-09-2010, 03:02 AM
Given some of the stuff I've seen in the trailers (the crowd, the "young Flynn" avatar, etc.) I'm a bit hopefully they would touch on that stuff. They'd be stupid not to, even if they're still kind of fixated on the "gaming" and light cycles.

* I'm going to wonder, what happened to Program RAM? Does he get 10000000x bigger? :) *

* I think the original TRON is a great introductory course for computer novice back then -- you don't know what a CPU or MCP is? Watch TRON)

I think they should at least touch on the new technology. I looked up the cast for the original TRON and the actor (Dan Shor) who played RAM isn't in TRON Legacy. :cry: So sad. But, that doesn't mean RAM doesn't make an appearance. "My friends, my fellow conscripts, we have scored. I feel so much better." He could make a comeback. :tongue

I know what CPU and MCP stand for and what they do, of course. I was in heaven when this movie came out.

maestrowork
12-09-2010, 03:08 AM
I think Tera Byte would be a hottie...

BenPanced
12-09-2010, 03:34 AM
Probably good entertainment, but don't expect it to be ground breaking like the original. Why are they not reinventing that world, instead of just regurgitating the same concepts?
They're selling it to the built-in market: the people who saw the original when it first came out who are going to geek out and see it, no matter what the story is (*raises hand*).

maestrowork
12-09-2010, 04:37 AM
I admit the life cycles are great (and what a GREAT NAME). I just hope they have more of that stuff and concepts that wow us again.

I wonder what HTML5 looks like in the movie. <G>

Zoombie
12-09-2010, 12:51 PM
I had similar thoughts. It's been 28 years; the world of computers has exploded since then.

The original movie always seemed to me like an entertaining exercise that served to: 1) depict a sort of fairy-tale about how computers worked; and 2) show off the state-of-the-art computer imaging of 1982.

In 2010, we're all accustomed to movies using CGI to put onscreen just about anything that can be visualized. So I don't see much point to a sequel unless they come up with a really strong story that expands the concept. Not holding breath.

Now...

Put on the way back time machine brain.

THE YEAR WAS 2003 and they had made this video game called Tron 2.0.

And I can tell you, already, that Tron 2.0 blows Tron Legacy out of the water in almost every single way.

For one thing, despite the movie being...you know...a movie, it is nowhere NEAR as pretty as the video game, which remembered that Tron was vibrant and colorful. That's the thing that bugs me about these trailers: WHERE IS THE COLOR!?

Or...colour!

Whatever!

Secondly, the video game had a really neat plot, about an evil corporation - natch - stealing the digitization technology to take over the world (of course!). My favorite bit, though, is when you go into an old computer to retrieve Tron legacy code and have to fight Resource Hogs...old programs that want to steal your processing power!

Hehe.

Manuel Royal
12-09-2010, 03:31 PM
Dang, Zoombie, I'd never heard of Tron 2.0. But now that I look at the Wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_2.0), I kinda want to play it, even though I gave up video games years ago as a waste of time.

maestrowork
12-09-2010, 03:46 PM
I love the Resource Hog.

Would they have Defrag?

K. Taylor
12-09-2010, 03:59 PM
A little featurette about Bridges playing 2 characters: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=23266906

katiemac
12-09-2010, 07:31 PM
A little featurette about Bridges playing 2 characters: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=23266906

Disney is positioning Jeff Bridges for a Best Supporting Actor nomination, but for playing Clu specifically.

maestrowork
12-09-2010, 09:38 PM
They could try, as Avatar did with Zoe Saldana. But given Bridges already won best actor last year, I think the chance for him to be nominated for TRON Legacy is slim.

katiemac
12-09-2010, 09:41 PM
They could try, as Avatar did with Zoe Saldana. But given Bridges already won best actor last year, I think the chance for him to be nominated for TRON Legacy is slim.

They're going for Supporting since Bridges will very likely be nominated in the Best Actor category again.

Smileycat
12-09-2010, 11:58 PM
I think Tera Byte would be a hottie...

They should show her as a digital image that has problems. :Hammer:

Smileycat
12-09-2010, 11:59 PM
Now...

Put on the way back time machine brain.

THE YEAR WAS 2003 and they had made this video game called Tron 2.0.

And I can tell you, already, that Tron 2.0 blows Tron Legacy out of the water in almost every single way.

For one thing, despite the movie being...you know...a movie, it is nowhere NEAR as pretty as the video game, which remembered that Tron was vibrant and colorful. That's the thing that bugs me about these trailers: WHERE IS THE COLOR!?

Or...colour!

Whatever!

Secondly, the video game had a really neat plot, about an evil corporation - natch - stealing the digitization technology to take over the world (of course!). My favorite bit, though, is when you go into an old computer to retrieve Tron legacy code and have to fight Resource Hogs...old programs that want to steal your processing power!

Hehe.

I never heard of Tron 2.0 either. Sounds like fun. I wonder if the game is till available?

Smileycat
12-10-2010, 12:00 AM
A little featurette about Bridges playing 2 characters: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=23266906

Thanks, K.

Zoombie
12-10-2010, 05:16 AM
I love the Resource Hog.

Would they have Defrag?


When you get hit by Virus weapons, your memory (which is where you store your programs, like your attack disk or light cycle subroutines) gets corrupted and you need to defragment it.

Also, the Light Cycles are actually FUCKING LIGHT CYCLES!

That is, they turn on 90 degree angles.

BECAUSE THAT IS HOW IT WORKS, DAMN IT!


Tron Legacy = not impressing me.

JasonP
12-14-2010, 09:08 PM
Have been trying to rent the original to show the kids before we go see the new one, but it's been rented out every time.

Smileycat
12-17-2010, 02:00 AM
Have been trying to rent the original to show the kids before we go see the new one, but it's been rented out every time.

http://stagevu.com/video/xmyruhwzylrw

K. Taylor
12-17-2010, 02:52 PM
I'm back from the midnight show!
Woo!
Awesome movie, and so many tech tidbits.
Most of it takes place in the virtual world.
Don't know how much to say without spoiling.
Wheeee......go see it!!

katiemac
12-17-2010, 06:19 PM
I'm back from the midnight show!
Woo!
Awesome movie, and so many tech tidbits.
Most of it takes place in the virtual world.
Don't know how much to say without spoiling.
Wheeee......go see it!!

I saw it, too. Thought it was okay, but not overly great. I haven't seen the entire original film, and even the pieces I've seen haven't been in a long time, but there's some stuff that just didn't make sense to me and prevented me from really getting into the movie. I also thought Hedlund had a pretty thankless role as Sam.

It was interesting seeing True Grit earlier this week and then watching TRON. Lots of Jeff Bridges.

K. Taylor, did you stay after the credits? I'm guessing there was an additional scene. I kept waiting for something to happen that never did.

K. Taylor
12-17-2010, 07:26 PM
Really should watch the whole original movie. I can't say how this movie looks to someone that hasn't, as I've seen and discussed the original several times.

Yes we did, and there was no scene after the credits. Our crowd clapped and cheered at several parts and seemed to really love it.

Only thing my S.O. wanted to see more of was Tron kicking butt after he got his will back.

Months ago, I saw talk of sequel plans, so...

Did you have people in costume and bringing discs at your showing? We had a few.

You got to see True Grit in advance? Lucky.

katiemac
12-17-2010, 08:05 PM
I meant to watch the original before this, but didn't get the chance. I also wasn't expecting to sit through it last night. Nobody in costume, but I was there because we ran the show as part of a thing we did for IMAX -- and we brought the people in costumes/discs. So I guess that counts?

Your S.O.'s thoughts were mine - I thought there might have been a scene after the credits with Tron running the game.

I'm kind of surprised that during the light cycles, the never once did an aerial shot of the maze of lights. Isn't that half the point of the game? And whereas digitally restoring Jeff Bridges is cool in theory, I don't know how well it actually worked. It was better when he was just Clu--I can accept some level of the animated look since he's a program--but not when he was Kevin.

Michael Sheen is amazing, though.

K. Taylor
12-17-2010, 08:47 PM
Yeah, Michael Sheen was fab. That character's a little nuts, lol.

The Jeff Bridges filming looked fine for our 3D version. It's really amazing what they can do now. I wasn't really thinking about the look in the memory shots, though...along the lines of memories never being quite like reality anyway. Will have to compare with the 2D screening eventually.

A lot of the shots in the original were done because they had to be that way when they were animating things and they would have loved to do what we can now, so I don't know how much they needed to stick to that in this one....I liked the 3-dimensional race/battle. If you have a current DVD version of Tron, watch some of the making-of feature.......astounding how long it used to take just for a few lines of code here and there.

I was happy to see a young Tron in the flashback...they'd kept doing motion capture on Bruce a secret.

katiemac
12-17-2010, 11:14 PM
I saw it in 3D, too. And IMAX. So there was a lot more of Jeff Bridges to study. I don't think they did a bad job, but we're not really there yet to making this digital actors really perfect.

Dommo
12-18-2010, 10:43 AM
I liked the digital rendition of the younger bridges for CLU. The "Uncanny Valleyness" of him, made him seem more inhuman, and in a sense reflected the critical flaw that went into his creation. However, I think they should have minimized the use of the effect when Flynn was portrayed in the real world.

GVChamp
12-18-2010, 10:55 AM
As my brother put it, swing and a foul ball. It definitely has some positive aspects, but they put an odd spin so the whole thing blasts out of the field of play.

I enjoyed a lot of the visuals and the sets, but they became boring and repetitive after a while. Didn't really explore the full range of potential living in a digital world. Great way of thinking about this was that "train" scene. On the positive side, Flynn going through the disc and repairing Quorra's broken code, literally taking the strand of damage and flicking it through the air was AWESOME. Visually breath-taking, conceptually exciting. On the other hand, they used the same long shot of the train ten times. And THAT grated my nerves.

Some of the action scenes were good. But I don't think other ones carried the same adrenaline or had a strong sense of emotional engagement, and in part I blame the soundtrack for that. Not an action movie soundtrack. Specifically: The lightcycle race and the bar fight just had no appeal for me. The bar fight redeemed itself when Quorra got her arm cut off and Flynn showed up, because he really changed the tempo of the scene (even the music changed!) with his whole Jesus thing. But unfortunately that lasted all of 20 seconds. Most of that scene was choreographed dancing with Michael Sheen shooting laser bolts randomly. And can I just mention I am SOOOOOO glad Michael Sheen died?

I started out caring about the Father-Son relationship. But for some reason it didn't pan out for me when they started yelling at each other. Someone else will need to explain this to me. Felt like the drama came out of nowhere and was forced on them, which I can logically see is NOT true(they had legitimate reason to be pissed at each other), but the feeling is still there.


Quorra was awesome, to me anyways. The character herself excited me, and the acting was pretty true. I have some grievances, but they aren't terribly important. The Dragon (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheDragon) eventually becomes a drag, and I won't explain why because everyone who sees the movie will know exactly I mean.


But the story seemed logical enough. And the visuals had some very stunning qualities and in no way looked BAD. And the individual tracks on the score were pretty good. And there was legitimate tension. Not exactly my cup of tea, but I can see how other people might like it.

Smileycat
12-18-2010, 12:18 PM
Haven't seen it yet. Probably won't go until next week. Thanks for the feedback!

K. Taylor
12-18-2010, 04:41 PM
Not a train - solar sail. It was in the original, too, just prettier here (with more dimensions inside).

Sam had a lot of reason to be mad at Dad for not coming home until he knew that Dad got trapped and couldn't leave, so I was waiting for him to blow up from the beginning. So, then Dad was trapped, but he'll want to be rescued home, right? But Dad has become much more Zen/defeatist about being there, and Sam's impulsive and headstrong, so he can't understand it. To him, they just need to get to the portal. He lost his last remaining relative at 17, so I don't blame the kid for having a chip on his shoulder......look at how he treats Encom at 27.

With the opening premise of Flynn disappearing and leaving a son behind, that's the main story and what needed to be resolved. We got to see what happened with Flynn and Alan and Encom since 1982. Now that that's out of the way, the sequel can really dive into the tech as a story. (And there is a sequel in the works.)

Smileycat
12-19-2010, 01:13 AM
A sequel? Terrific! Thanks, K.

JamieFord
12-19-2010, 01:26 AM
Loved the visuals. Loved the music/audio. The story, not so much. (Much like the first Tron).

The best/worst part was the younger version of Jeff Bridges. I thought it was really well done. So well done that it probably opens the doors for dead actors to appear in new movies.

maggi90w1
12-19-2010, 01:55 AM
So well done that it probably opens the doors for dead actors to appear in new movies.
I don't think that's going to work.They still need to motion capture the facila movements and facial movements are pretty big part of acting. Just capturing another actor and slapping the face of another one on it probably won't work.

katiemac
12-19-2010, 04:45 AM
I don't think that's going to work.They still need to motion capture the facila movements and facial movements are pretty big part of acting. Just capturing another actor and slapping the face of another one on it probably won't work.

This is how Armie Hammer played both Winklevoss twins in The Social Network. Another actor played the body double but they digitized Hammer's face on him for all the scenes. It's done so well people didn't realize Hammer doesn't have a twin. (But what your staying still holds: Hammer was still doing all the acting, he wasn't CGI'd.)

But back to Tron: I think a lot of it comes down to the fact I never felt there was anything really at stake, so I didn't feel any urgency for resolution.

JamieFord
12-19-2010, 07:40 AM
I don't think that's going to work.They still need to motion capture the facila movements and facial movements are pretty big part of acting. Just capturing another actor and slapping the face of another one on it probably won't work.

You'd be surprised. Eventually there will be movie-goers that have never seen what a young Marlon Brando looked like, and may not care.

maestrowork
12-19-2010, 08:28 AM
You do need motion control, but that doesn't mean you can't put another face on it. So I can see how an actor could imitate Marilyn Monroe and then we see her on screen...

Anyway, I saw it. Kind of underwhelmed. The visuals are stunning, of course, but I am disappointed by the story, and the lack of geek-worthy bits. The original is filled with that stuff. Here, it may as well be a dragon and wizard fantasy. The father-son thing doesn't work for me either.

But visually awesome. The action sequences are fun. And the soundtrack is rather good.

maestrowork
12-19-2010, 11:58 PM
But back to Tron: I think a lot of it comes down to the fact I never felt there was anything really at stake, so I didn't feel any urgency for resolution.

I agree. In the original there's an evil corporation to defeat, in addition to trying to get out of the digital world. Here, the father-son is the core, and once Sam found Kevin, the tension is off, and the whole thing is just to get out of there and shut the thing down. It becomes Sam's coming of age, like, okay.

Like someone said, though, hopefully the tie to the original movie is done, now can they do some really wild and fantastic stuff with the sequels.

Manuel Royal
12-20-2010, 12:02 AM
Just saw it. Well, they went in a different direction than I would have. The original movie was like a digital fairy-tale version of how a big mainframe works. I would've just expanded that idea into the Internet.

Also, the evolution of CGI actually works against the concept. In the 1982 movie, you could never forget you were watching images that existed inside a computer -- that was the whole point, that it was supposedly to be literally a world made of software. In the new movie, the top-of-the-line CGI is too realistic sometimes; easy to forget it's not supposed to represent a physical reality.

And, in 1982 I was willing to suspend disbelief, for the sake of an entertaining fable, when we were told that a human being could be magically converted into a digital simulacrum inside a computer grid. But:

The proposition that a computer program can be transformed into a living human being in the physical world

is a lot harder not to swallow, especially when it's presented as an overriding menace.

Still, it's always good to see Jeff Bridges. The off-putting emotional flatness of facial motion capturing (which Robert Zemeckis seems to love for some reason) works perfectly for CLU.

maestrowork
12-20-2010, 08:23 PM
Manuel: I agree about your point in the white-out comment. That's one thing I just won't buy. Sorry. I know Flynn explained it all, but that is just too much for me to suspend my disbelief.

Actually, I agree with everything you said. The original makes it look like a real digital world. The stuff in here is too slick. The light cycle race, for example, as exciting as it is, loses its charm because it's too slick and fluid. I prefer it when they could only move perpendicularly!

Smileycat
12-23-2010, 02:24 AM
Okay, so I saw it today. I hate to admit it, but I was a little bored. There was nothing in the really new category, and there was more they could have done but didn't. I blame the first TRON's box office for influencing the movie makers to reign in the horses this time out. Some of the new characters were cool, but, frankly, I was not enamored of Jeff Bridges 2 characters. The father (Kevin Flynn) was too wishy washy, while Clu (the bad guy) wasn't bad enough. I missed David Warner.

They did tie in the first and second movies, but I felt it lacked a bit of oomph. However, the CGI F/X were great and I'm sure that will be enough to draw in a substantial younger crowd.

TRON 3 anyone? Maybe they can go back to being more innovative if there is a third?

childeroland
12-23-2010, 02:40 AM
I felt a lot bored. The plot was by-the-numbers. The CGI Jeff Bridges was distracting. The hero was a blank (if he's so mad at ENCOM, why doesn't he just take over the company from the beginning, with Alan Bradley's help?). The villain's motives come down to Daddy issues--I think, it's never really clear--that don't really justify his villainy. Michael Sheen was just playing Aro from Twilight. The film LOOKS amazing (except for James Frain's dominatrix outfit), and the score is beautiful, but there was nothing else there.

Toothpaste
12-23-2010, 08:25 AM
I guess I'm one of the few who liked it. I thought it was slow at times, but I enjoyed the acting (Michael Sheen utterly delightful as usual - really didn't see him acting ANYTHING like his Twilight character [thank goodness], but I guess that's just taste), and I have a soft spot for Jeff Bridges. The villain's motives seemed crystal clear to me, he was programmed to create the perfect world, and once he felt he'd done it on the grid it was time to come take over ours. I thought that was enough of a threat.

In all I wasn't exactly expecting Shakespeare, and having just seen the original TRON this past weekend I have no emotional attachment to it. Really, it's not much of a movie, there's little plot, but the young Jeff Bridges having fun was a delight.

Anyway, had fun. Liked the aesthetic, enjoyed the acting, and the plot worked fine for me. I always like father son bonding movies though . . .

mario_c
12-23-2010, 08:52 AM
Well, I almost had a good time - I was very impressed by the evil Jeff Bridges looking like he just wrapped on Winter Kills and Cutter And Bone :). His good guy's Dude In Space act is getting old, honestly, though I did love him making like Obiwan and going up against Zeus the club owner weasel. Michael Sheen grabbed that movie like a rugby ball and ran with it, and this had almost as much hot leather action as the Matrix movies.
And seeing it in 3D IMAX was fun but almost too much of a good thing though (and boo to the packed noisy rush-hour crowd. I remember now why I only do late shows :(). The scene where the son hacks his own corporation and then goes skydiving made my palms sweat!

Toothpaste
12-23-2010, 09:41 AM
His good guy's Dude In Space act is getting old

I know what you mean, but he was really just playing the same character from the original, just older, so it would have been odd had he not been playing the Dude in this incarnation. Despite it now being a very Jeff Bridges thing to do . . . he still has to keep continuity with what he did in the first film.

Zoombie
12-24-2010, 04:05 AM
Things I loved: The music, the visuals.

Things I liked: The action.

Things I didn't like so much: Korra. No, I liked the idea of Korra, of recursively improving, sentient programs with the capacity to change the world. It's a great futurist concept, and shows the writers on Tron were reading some Ray Kurzweil.

BUT, she didn't DO anything! She should have been a total BAMF, but she really just kinda sat around and looked pretty.

Grumbles.

Toothpaste
12-24-2010, 07:36 AM
BUT, she didn't DO anything! She should have been a total BAMF, but she really just kinda sat around and looked pretty.



She was a pretty good driver/pilot. But I do know what you mean, a moment where she demonstrated abilities courtesy of being higher on the evolutionary scale would have been cool.

miss marisa
12-24-2010, 08:31 AM
Daft Punk.

That is all.

Zoombie
12-25-2010, 06:33 AM
Also, the movie didn't take advantage of all the amazing new things that have taken place in the internet and in the world.

Like, they didn't show wi-fi, they didn't show how the internet has spread all over the world...

Grumbles.

maestrowork
12-25-2010, 08:34 AM
Also, the movie didn't take advantage of all the amazing new things that have taken place in the internet and in the world.

Like, they didn't show wi-fi, they didn't show how the internet has spread all over the world...

Grumbles.

That's my biggest gripes, since I'm an IT guy. The original was so cool because it actually was the "humanized" version of computers. The whole thing was about mainframe -- and trying to shut down a real-world system. As someone said, it's a digital fairytale.

This one basically ignores all that lovely stuff. I mean, Clu actually sends a PAGE -- I haven't seen anyone use a pager since 2001! OK, they explained it, but still.. all that missed opportunities. Instead, they went with the whole ISO stuff, which is like voodoo to me.

STKlingaman
12-25-2010, 01:00 PM
I'm betting it's eye appealing.
Story wise - not holding my breath.

Like Avatar, visually striking (ooh the colors)
but the story line, well it's been done before,
and before, and before, and before, and better.

So we'll start at 3 stars and go from there,
when I see from netflix.

*note to audience, I haven't been to a movie
theatre since HellBoy

Smileycat
12-27-2010, 01:13 AM
That's my biggest gripes, since I'm an IT guy. The original was so cool because it actually was the "humanized" version of computers. The whole thing was about mainframe -- and trying to shut down a real-world system. As someone said, it's a digital fairytale.

This one basically ignores all that lovely stuff. I mean, Clu actually sends a PAGE -- I haven't seen anyone use a pager since 2001! OK, they explained it, but still.. all that missed opportunities. Instead, they went with the whole ISO stuff, which is like voodoo to me.

Agree totally.