Originally Posted By LindsayC Thanks Christi22222 for asking... honestly though I’ll try not to bore you (unlike large swathes of the film did me). Let me start with what I liked - the score, sound and the opening grid action sequences. The "stunning visuals" that most people refer to became tiresome especially during the rip-off of a 1977 film sequence (one film rip-off is fine -sorry I meant to say homage - but there are a few too many, a true sign of lazy writing and easy wins for people who like to be winked at). So that was the good. The poor is all the rest: -no characterization (I couldn’t care less about a single one of them) -no tension, drama or peril because my grandmother is more of a "villain" than Clu was -naturally all of this is due to a dreadful, apparently "weighty" and dour story supported by some of the worst dialogue devoid of wit and included ludicrous references to the world of computing today (1985 - urgh!) -includes Michael Sheen’s embarrassing turn that only an actor’s who career have nose-dived would have put in However I do have a favourite out and out comedy moment - a bookshelf that includes works by Tolstoy, Dostoevsky and (predictably) Verne - I presume that was there for humour and not to add to the gravitas of the story. Apologies for wishing this had been a film that had had couple of extra passes at story and script (and I believe even guys from Pixar tried to save it)- that’s not wanting high art nor Shakespeare, just something to support the gloss. The reliance of style over substance has warn very thin.
Originally Posted By LindsayC Sorry.. should say: -includes Michael Sheen’s embarrassing turn that only an actor who has seen their career in nose-dive would have put in
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I agree with you about Sheen Lindsay. A lot of American fans seem to eat it up, but I thought he was very poor. But overall it had the escapism I am looking for at the moment.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Thanks for the patronizing comments.<< Bear in mind that you and Lindsay have been rather patronizing in your own comments here. So it should be no surprise that you are being answered in kind. No fault in not liking, or even hating a film. But when the criticism is stated in over-the-top terms, it may just engender some impassioned push back.
Originally Posted By leemac <<But when the criticism is stated in over-the-top terms>> Once again you happily dismiss my opinion - as always. I see nothing over-the-top about my comments. I loved the audio, music and visuals in the grid - which I've stated. I hated the story line and the book scenes. Doug - do me a favour and leave me alone and I'll afford you the same luxury. We don't see eye-to-eye on anything.
Originally Posted By LindsayC Oh, so Lee and I are one are we Doug - Lee was referring to Dave’s comment - Dave’s original comment had nothing to do with me whatsoever. I also thought over-the- top was the norm around here.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Sorry.. should say: -includes Michael Sheen’s embarrassing turn that only an actor who has seen their career in nose-dive would have put in<< Actually, should say: Includes Michael Sheen's embarrassing turn that would have been put in only by an actor who has seen his career in nose dive. Don't know that I agree with this one. It looks to me more like Sheen is (wisely) trying to expand his cinematic repertoire. He's best known for two immensely well received "art" films, The Queen and Frost/Nixon. That may be great for cachet with the critics, but it doesn't guarantee a long term career. As for the "nose dive," Sheen did four films this year, including Alice in Wonderland (that was fairly well received, no?), and has five films coming up in 2011. Heck, he even has a role in the works for 2012.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Once again you happily dismiss my opinion - as always.<< No dismissal-- just a comment on the tone. >>Oh, so Lee and I are one are we Doug...<< No, just the tone of the comments, and the resultant replies. That's all.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Basically, just go back and read comments 87 and 90, then understand that people were merely responding in kind. I don't take any of this personally, nor do I intend it to be taken as such.
Originally Posted By LindsayC Sheen is a very successful actor who I enjoy immensely (The Damned United was a great film). This however would be the "performance" of a man whose career has nose-dived and desperate to be recognised again. It was camp, derivative, out-of-place and took me out of the film in an instant making me think about the actor and not the character.
Originally Posted By DlandDug No argument that Castor/Zuse was a very odd character. I appreciate what the filmmakers were trying to do-- and that Sheen decided to throw caution to the winds. But it was decidedly... odd. Since this thread discusses TRON's possible failure-- I will venture that the biggest failing (for me) is in its widely varying tone. The original imposed a sensibility (which itself was uneven), and there were obviously different passes at this story at different times. It needed a good editor to pull all the disparate elements together. For me it all worked, even though I was pretty much always aware of the man (or men) behind the curtain.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>> It was camp, derivative, out-of-place and took me out of the film in an instant making me think about the actor and not the character.<<< Agreed here. Though Jim Broadbent could have been a good Zeus me thinks.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>It needed a good editor to pull all the disparate elements together.<< Would better be: It needed a good SCRIPT editor to pull all the disparate elements together.
Originally Posted By Anatole69 I just saw it, it opened today in Thailand. It is in wide release, at least in Bangkok... the theater I went to was showing it on 4 screens. I went to the 3-D showing, the theater was about 70-80% full, and there were lots of couples. I have a feeling the demographic will be more inclusive of women in the East than the West. The stereotype being that Asian girls take to computers and technology more readily than Western women. True or not, all I can say is the theater was not filled with younger men, like I have been reading from people seeing it with Western audiences. - Anatole
Originally Posted By Anatole69 I felt the opening action scene with the son could have been cut, it kept me from getting into the film. I only think it was there to introduce characters for any later sequel. Once he hit the grid, I become much more involved in the movie and from that point on I enjoyed it a lot. I agree the script is a little weak, but it develops the characters enough and goes into the relationship between the father and son sufficiently to invest the audience in their conflict... so it did what it was supposed to do. There is a good chance I will see it a second time in the theater, and it's fairly rare for me to see a film twice in the theater. - Anatole
Originally Posted By skinnerbox I'm actually surprised at how mediocre the box total is for TRON so far. It's only generated about $18K per theatre since opening last Friday, and that's including the added 3D and IMAX 3D premium ticket prices. Deathly Hallows had generated more than twice that amount, at $38.4K per theatre, only six days after opening. And that's without the added premium of 3D ticket pricing. I knew TRON wasn't going to be the next Avatar, but I really believed it would be doing close to Potter numbers. The fact that most kids are out of school and the film was super hyped for over a year via ComicCon and other fanboi conventions, it should be doing much better than this. Only $62 mil after six days is very disappointing. It might get a nice bump over the weekend, but I'm not really expecting one. I'd love to hear from leemac about how Burbank is reacting to this. Any mouse murmurings about TRON's disappointment yet, Lee?
Originally Posted By emohyuessee Just got back from seeing it. My fourteen year old daughter did NOT want to go, but I made her. I also brought my ten year old son, my wife and my 74 year old mother, and guess what?... We LOVED it!!! I think my daughter loved it the most. She said she wanted to go back to the next showing. To each their own, huh? Thumbs up from my family.
