Well, if anyone has ever seen the original Tron, you would know that there is quite a lot of inventiveness for that time period. That was back in 1980-1982 when they were making the first film. To put some perspective of how inventive TRON was for the time think back and remember that the first Macintosh computer was still just a project back at Apple, video games were mostly those sold on Atari cartridges.
So the visuals at that time were mind-blowing to say the least. And if you watch it now and can understand what it meant at the time, yeah, it's still pretty impressive.
But that was 1982.
Almost 30 years later we have this legacy film. And guess what? It has a lot of the same stuff we saw in the first film. And that is almost a given because people loved the original because of the lightcycles, the grid, etc. So it is almost a given that you have to have them in the film.
Well, if you take this film as a paint by numbers a la Hollywood style, then we have the following: 1.) The obligatory homage of lightcycles, light tanks, light whatever-those-red-flying- things-are-called-with-the-long-arms. 2.) You have the obligatory introduction of the new world. 3.) You have the obligatory sexy chicks. Come on. If you're shaking your head on this, think about it: you still have to appeal to the teenage boys and above. 4.) You have the obligatory guy-girl relationship. 5.) You have the conflict between antagonist and protagonist. Build it within a three act structure where the resolution of the story comes with a struggle between the two main forces leading to a resolution. Check.
Okay, so what's really left then? We top out at a little over two hours I believe. That's just about all you can really do in that much time.
So bearing that, people might ask: why isn't it more innovative? Why is it staying too close to the source material?
Well, there's a good reason: Because TRON was a cult film for certain reasons. You can innovate but you have to be true to the source material which is the core reason for any sort of fan base.
So, overall I thought it was decent. Some of the gladiator stuff I had to say was pretty cool. I liked the hot siren, and (of course) Olivia Wilde. But otherwise it was what I expected. Nothing terribly innovative. But heck, I still got my money's worth.
So the visuals at that time were mind-blowing to say the least. And if you watch it now and can understand what it meant at the time, yeah, it's still pretty impressive.
But that was 1982.
Almost 30 years later we have this legacy film. And guess what? It has a lot of the same stuff we saw in the first film. And that is almost a given because people loved the original because of the lightcycles, the grid, etc. So it is almost a given that you have to have them in the film.
Well, if you take this film as a paint by numbers a la Hollywood style, then we have the following: 1.) The obligatory homage of lightcycles, light tanks, light whatever-those-red-flying- things-are-called-with-the-long-arms. 2.) You have the obligatory introduction of the new world. 3.) You have the obligatory sexy chicks. Come on. If you're shaking your head on this, think about it: you still have to appeal to the teenage boys and above. 4.) You have the obligatory guy-girl relationship. 5.) You have the conflict between antagonist and protagonist. Build it within a three act structure where the resolution of the story comes with a struggle between the two main forces leading to a resolution. Check.
Okay, so what's really left then? We top out at a little over two hours I believe. That's just about all you can really do in that much time.
So bearing that, people might ask: why isn't it more innovative? Why is it staying too close to the source material?
Well, there's a good reason: Because TRON was a cult film for certain reasons. You can innovate but you have to be true to the source material which is the core reason for any sort of fan base.
So, overall I thought it was decent. Some of the gladiator stuff I had to say was pretty cool. I liked the hot siren, and (of course) Olivia Wilde. But otherwise it was what I expected. Nothing terribly innovative. But heck, I still got my money's worth.