TRON Legacy- not as bad as I'd heard

POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Monday, April 18, 2011 23:09
VIEWED: 12531
PAGE 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

CHRISISALL

Sunday, April 10, 2011 2:39 AM

Just watched it- wow, not too bad! I really liked it. Sonisall said it was OK as a stand alone flick, but terrible as a sequel. I agreed to a point. Still, better than the Matrix sequels or the Star Wars prequels IMO. And Jeff... ahh Jeff, what a great actor. Even CGI'd. And what a music score!!! Awesome!!

Thoughts?

The laughing Chrisisall

MOOSE

Sunday, April 10, 2011 4:09 AM

Just finished it myself.

Not great, but better than I'd heard.

I wish I had ignored the reviews and watched it on a big screen, it must of looked incredible.

ETA: the score was incredible.

SINGATE

Sunday, April 10, 2011 7:57 AM

My main gripe with the film is the lack of screentime for the title character. One would expect a movie with name TRON in the title would included a bit more TRON. Kind of disappointing that he only appeared briefly during a flashback. I realize it was Jr.'s story but come on! The original did a much better job establishing the importance of multiple characters.

Moose,

You're absolutely right it was incredible on the big screen. I always make the effort to see visually spectacular movies at the cinema regardless of critical or popular opinion.

_________________________________________________

We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

PHOENIXROSE

Sunday, April 10, 2011 8:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by singate:
Kind of disappointing that he only appeared briefly during a flashback.

I think you missed a couple parts. Tron was there the whole time, he just had a Stig helmet on.
CGI Jeff Bridges? Yeah, creepy. Sorry. It was less creepy when it was supposed to be Clu, since that's a program. But when it was supposed to be the person it was total Uncanny Valley, wigged me out.
Score was awesome. Effects were awesome (the lightjets were especially worth seeing on the big screen.) Story... was alright. There have been worse. I would never have called it unwatchable.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

LWAVES

Sunday, April 10, 2011 8:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by singate:
My main gripe with the film is the lack of screentime for the title character. One would expect a movie with name TRON in the title would included a bit more TRON. Kind of disappointing that he only appeared briefly during a flashback.

EDIT: PR beat me to this answer as I was typing. Bah!!!

Do you realise that Rinzler was/is Tron? Although that may not be the point you are making.
I took it that Clu reprogrammed him and that is what breaks through and causes him to change sides later in the movie. It seemed to me like they were setting him up for the potential sequel as you don't know exactly what happened to him at the end.

As for the movie then I'm kind of on Sonisall's side. Having had the benefit of a second viewing on disc it is better than I first thought, with some great bits, but my main problem is that the course of events is too close to the original. In both movies we had the disc games, light cycles and then the beam rider thingy in the same order. The only thing missing from Legacy was the tank.
My only other real problem wasn't the fault of the actual film but I saw it in 3D at the cinema and it sucked. There was very little there and when it was there it popped out at you and took you out of the movie. The rest of the effects were excellent, especially the light cycle chase and having the 'younger' Jeff Bridges worked great, for the most part, with only a couple of dodgy moments.

Overall it was OK but it needed a better/different plot that could have made a great movie.

"The greatest invention ever is not the wheel. It's the second wheel." - Rich Hall

IMNOTHERE

Sunday, April 10, 2011 9:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by lwaves:
my main problem is that the course of events is too close to the original. In both movies we had the disc games, light cycles and then the beam rider thingy in the same order. The only thing missing from Legacy was the tank.

Me too.

...they should have made up their minds whether they were doing a sequel or a remake.

They needed a new spin on the "computer games come to life" idea that reflected modern technology, rather than taking 1980s ideas like "lightcycles" and tarting them up with 3D graphi... oh, wait

Seriously - it was a novel idea in the 80s when computer games were blob-chasers, but these days we're used to playing in simulated worlds via an avatar.

I dunno, how about an "always ready to fight the next war again" satire with programs going through bootcamp being trained up on light cycles and discs before being shipped off to fight users armed with railguns and rocket launchers...?

...and, yeah, they should have found the budget for digitizing and youngify-ing Bruce Boxleitner, so we could have had a big reveal of Tron's face at the climax. Since Boxleitner 2010 was in the live-action part of the film that would still have been an "aha!" moment for people who hadn't seen the original.

Quote:

My only other real problem wasn't the fault of the actual film but I saw it in 3D at the cinema and it sucked.

Me three.
I hope this current 3D craze fizzles out soon and they put this particular bit of curious, but useless 1950s technology back in the attic for a decade or so. (All this has happened before, and it will happen again). I'll have to re-watch the film sometime, without the stupid sunglasses B-(

PHOENIXROSE

Sunday, April 10, 2011 6:42 PM

I skipped 3D. It made my head pound for hours the first time I saw Avatar, and I didn't find it all that impressive, and the glasses over my own glasses were extremely uncomfortable, so I refuse to shell out for it anymore. Most annoying thing is that pretty much anything that goes to Imax now is in 3D, so I don't get to go to Imax anymore. I'm very annoyed at its prevalence, especially now that I've heard the Hobbit will be shot in 3D. Really? So unnecessary.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

OPPYH

Sunday, April 10, 2011 7:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Just watched it- wow, not too bad! I really liked it. Sonisall said it was OK as a stand alone flick, but terrible as a sequel. I agreed to a point. Still, better than the Matrix sequels or the Star Wars prequels IMO. And Jeff... ahh Jeff, what a great actor. Even CGI'd. And what a music score!!! Awesome!!

Thoughts?

Yeah, I loved the score. As for everything else...It was forgettable at best. I didn't care for Flynn's son, so I really could care less if he got out of the grid. Jeff Bridges is amazing, but in this one he seemed to be pretty bland. CGI Bridges(both Flynn, and Clu) took me out of the film every time I seen them. I hate 3-D, but I thought if any film could make it work it would be this one. I was wrong. If anything the film had a bland/desolate look, and intentional or not it never "grabbed" me.

Bottom line is this: I hold the original Tron as a masterpiece as both concept film, and a sign of the times in its relevance to the world of computers. Legacy did nothing to further the wonderment of the digital domain, and I felt the screenplay was just a rushed piece of garbage.

----------------------------------------------------------------

70's TV FOREVER

CHRISISALL

Sunday, April 10, 2011 7:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:

Bottom line is this: I hold the original Tron as a masterpiece as both concept film, and a sign of the times in its relevance to the world of computers. Legacy did nothing to further the wonderment of the digital domain, and I felt the screenplay was just a rushed piece of garbage.

I mostly agree, yet I'll watch Legacy again for Bridges & the score- I felt they were both THAT good.

The laughing Chrisisall

SINGATE

Monday, April 11, 2011 8:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
Quote:
Originally posted by singate:
Kind of disappointing that he only appeared briefly during a flashback.

I think you missed a couple parts. Tron was there the whole time, he just had a Stig helmet on.

I must come off a lot dumber than I imagine myself to be. Yes, I realize Rinzler was TRON but that isn't the same thing. My point was TRON is the title character yet has almost nothing to do with the story except for saving junior at the end. I'm guessing the writer(s) figured if TRON were on the side of the angels any earlier it wouldn't have been much of a battle.

_________________________________________________

We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE