Originally Posted By Kevin Flynn What did you love and hate about both the original TRON movie and the new TRON Legacy? Please be specific. Let's discuss!
Originally Posted By Labuda Honestly, I don't have enough recollection of the original to give love/hate, but the only thing I can pick on with the new one is the animation of Jeff Bridges. It was great, but not great enough for my tastes. Looked too fake.
Originally Posted By John3K Yes, Bridges was fake/creepy. This is one I really wish they'd left on its own-- but Disney does seem to love the sequel. This new one borrowed from everywhere, & left me cold.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox The first film had a more cohesive story. The goals were better stated. And Flynn's interactions with the programs was less somber, more upbeat. Plus, the campy dialogue was a hoot. "Bring in the logic probe!" LOL! The sequel is too dark. Sam isn't as likable as Kevin was in the first film, and has this sense of immaturity about him that Kevin didn't. Kevin was simply inexperienced with his surroundings, but managed to remain an adult in his quest to defeat MCP. Sam does not give me the same level of confidence. He's in his late twenties, but comes off like a petulant teenager most of the time. And that was a major turn off for me. I think the whole ISO story is very thin. We never get to see the ISOs except through flashbacks, which is more of a letdown than satisfactory backstory for Quorra. Same for the army that CLU creates. Lots of bodies gathered for war... but then the war never comes. Letdown again. CLU wanting to break free of the GRID is very hackneyed. It reminds me of a Star Trek: TNG episode where Professor Moriarty wants to explore the universe beyond the Enterprise. He's only a computer simulation in the holodeck, yet he has achieved sentience and desires more than the confines of his artificial environment. CLU is no different. He's just not as elegant and well-mannered as Moriarty. The whole dictator-and-global-conquest thing was already worn out before this sequel was even considered. It's a variation on the original story with MCP, but not as effective. At least MCP remained in the confines of the computer system. I don't have to drastically suspend my disbelief to accept that premise. And don't get me started on the vfx fountain of youth for Jeff Bridges. It does not work. At all. It's too creepy. I hated those scenes. And since the film began with one of those scenes, it was a major distraction, right out of the gate. The assorted acting and plot weaknesses that followed made it difficult to get interested in the story, which was very uneven from beginning to end. This film could have been so much more, given the foundation the first film provided. I would hope the third film would be stronger, but I suspect the story is about to take an even more implausible turn, now that Quorra is out of the GRID. I don't know if enough people will take another chance on this franchise, given the poor reviews for Legacy, and the mediocre box receipts. Disney is taking a huge gamble with another sequel, just like they did with Narnia 2.
Originally Posted By Daannzzz I finally saw this last night and I think Skinnerbox covered the points about it well. For me it just wasn't fun. It was so serious and dark with a few moments of fun and then it went past fun into looney in the bar scene. I thought the production design was great except it could have used more color in it. Acting was all good and i was torn over the odd looking versions of Jeff Bridges. inside the computer it would be okay as it is a digital world but it was so distracting.
Originally Posted By Kevin Flynn So. Not much positive? Nothing? Hummm... I loved it. I thought many of the things you guys see as negative (especially the darkness, seriousness, creepy'ness) were positives. It's far more "in" today than 1983. Have you guys played a video game lately? Halo? World of Warcraft? Call of Duty? Bioshock? Half Life? Portal? Dead Space? etc....? All mega billion dollar hits. No plots. Unclear objectives. Dark. Creepy. Huge action. You guys are just old.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA That's right Kevin Flynn, the old farts in the room 'just don't get' Tron: Legacy.
Originally Posted By Tony C I've only seen Tron Legacy. The effects were great. Sound was great. Loved the soundtrack. But I'm having a hard time remembering the story. Still if there's a rainy afternoon and you're looking for something to view it's not the worst option you could have.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <Still if there's a rainy afternoon and you're looking for something to view it's not the worst option you could have.> True -- option one might be just looking out the window at the rain.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<I thought many of the things you guys see as negative (especially the darkness, seriousness, creepy'ness) were positives.>> But it lacked appropriate context. It was dark simply for the sake of being dark, mostly to be trendy a la video game mentality. Speaking of which... TRON: Evolution bombed at retailers. Propaganda Games is no more. Disney lost their lunch money on that gamble. What a waste of talent. Want a great example of appropriate cinematic darkness? Pan's Labyrinth. OMG. What an imaginative film. Guillermo del Toro tapped into those dark spaces that Kosinski attempted to reach with TRON Legacy but failed. TRON's negatives were simply a style choice with virtually no logical connection to the story being told. The original TRON showed us a similar digital world where programs were being enslaved under MCP, but there was still a modicum of hope underneath the heaviness. Legacy was simply heavy to be "in" as you put it. No rational reason for the consistent downer tone throughout the film. *yawn*
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<True -- option one might be just looking out the window at the rain.>> LOL!
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >TRON's negatives were simply a style choice with virtually no logical connection to the story being told.< Other than the logical connection that there is little hope in the system under the Regime of Clu. >No rational reason for the consistent downer tone throughout the film< Other than the fact that the system has been closed off for over a decade, and the person who gave them hope last time (Flynn, Clu, and Tron) are either bad guys or don't do anything "the only winning move is not to play"
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Sam should be instilling hope in the audience, but he fails. Kevin Flynn was more successful in this regard. The film does not redeem itself at the end like the original did. Kevin and TRON destroyed MCP and we saw the I/O ports light up across the landscape. What exactly did we see at the end of Legacy? Sam and Quorra on a motorbike. Big whoop. There was nothing hopeful about this film. And I agree with Daaanz about the bar scene. That was painful and basically unnecessary. The film is dark to simply be dark. As my partner calls it, Prozac Theatre.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <But it lacked appropriate context. It was dark simply for the sake of being dark, mostly to be trendy a la video game mentality.> Totally agree, skinnerbox. It's all the same flavor. I'm sure I'll get slammed by this, but I felt the same way about 'The Dark Knight.'
Originally Posted By skinnerbox You won't get slammed by me. Dark Knight is one of the Nolan films I don't own, for the reason you give. DK was basically a showcase for Heath. He was amazing. Everyone else phoned in their performances. The story was simply an itinerary for the Joker, to give him some action. Otherwise, nothing else mattered. I watched the film to be enthralled by Ledger. I really didn't care about the rest of it. Which is a shame, truly, because Nolan is much better than this.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Glad to know I'm not alone, skinnerbox. I wrote a review of The Dark Knight <a href="http://www.2adults1child.com/what_we_think/Summer_Movies_2008/Dark_Knight.htm" target="_blank">http://www.2adults1child.com/w...ight.htm</a>
