It's not highly likely to win many new converts, but for those who already like the original and want to see more of that world, it more than satisfies. The visuals are a wonderful evolution from Tron and the story of a father and son who have to make up for lost time is very touching. The CGI face they developed for Jeff Bridges is not perfect, but it works very well with just a few exceptions and I feel, for my own tastes, that they have actually bridged the uncanny valley with this one. Still a bit of work to get it perfect, but this one works as it is. Oh, and the score by Daft Punk is beautiful. The first thing my brother and I did after leaving the theater was buy the sound track on the way home. It's very suggestive of the original but with plenty of today's newer sensibilities mixed in.
851 Reviews
Love this movie and it's soundtrack
jtooley-7784029 October 2019
Great great movie always get chills from the music and when he first uses the bike. Love the atmosphere of Sam Flynn's life and how much love he has for his father at the end of the movie. Fantastic message in the movie where we as people think things are important in our life such as work or possessions but nothing is more important then family 👍.
This movie has far deeper themes than people give it credit for
MrGroovilicious14 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
The original movie was generic. While it's far from bad, it's plot was simplistic in terms of the overall focus being on the good vs evil side and less on the thematic element it established of Flynn and all users being gods. It serves as a mythology, however, to a much more insightful legend which unfolds in this movie. But the problem is, due to the somewhat simplistic nature of the predecessor, people failed to give attention to the themes of this film, preferring to focus on the generic side as that's what they'd expect from a Tron movie. But the movie doesn't stay generic, so when viewers find nothing simple to see they assume the movie is empty. It's not, they're minds are just preset to look for simple "turn off your brain and be entertained" values, which simply aren't present in this film.
The whole movie, just like the original, is similar to the idea of a religious mythology. The original featured programs as disciples of the users, enslaved for their belief. But that plays a small role overall. Here, when the Grid is reprogrammed to the image of Kevin Flynn, Flynn is established to the status of "the one true god" at least of this version of the grid, and all the other users who contribute new programs are just angels. But the maker of this world is Flynn, regardless of whether or not he writes the fates of these people. So, much like the original Hebrew form of god, he is not so much a ruler who demands worship or enforce any rules but just a wise and experienced being here to help when he's needed.
And it's not so much an analogy to call Flynn god as it is TRUE. He has successfully created a world, not a platform. A world that's self sustaining and requires no more intervention of the users, as displayed by the ISOs which created themselves and were programmed by no-one.
And this demands many questions! If they'd been allowed to live, would the ISOs have made this world like our own in thousands of years? Does this mean that's how our own god could have created our own world and how we came to be? Questions of such layered nature can't simply be ignored as style over substance.
And then there comes CLU, the best friend of Flynn who he trusted. But as god, I dare say it, may have been somewhat confused in his image he had for the world in his early form, so did Flynn suffer from this same confusion of image for his world. This causes CLU to suffer a similar fate of uncertainty, making him only able to understand that his god is incapable of creating a perfect world since he can't imagine one. Thus, taking matters into his own hands, he abandons his god and does what he sees to be right. But the problem is he expects to get a different result with the same thinking as his flawed god, the only thinking he has been exposed to, and makes even worse mistakes than his god, making Flynn see the errors of his ways. Thus, a most appropriate analogy, CLU becomes the Satan to Flynn's god.
But the ultimate piece of symbolism that outmatches anything else in the movie, is the final attempt of CLU to get Flynn's disc. He realizes Flynn has tricked him, by giving the disc he sought to his son. He discovered that the son of Flynn, and thus the son of a god, has obtained the disc and power he seeks, and thus he must obtain it. There is so much symbolism that flies past viewers in what happens next. When CLU realizes he has been tricked, he raises his disc to derez Flynn and then go get the right one, but only violently places the disc beside Flynn, subtly showing in the end he still considered Flynn his friend and could not bring himself to kill him. CLU runs to obtain this disc from the obstacle stopping him from having the ultimate power, showing the rivalry between the Satan and savior of this world.
Such themes like this show the filmmakers truly put a lot of thought into their creation, not a lack of it, so people need to stop discrediting them and their work.
The whole movie, just like the original, is similar to the idea of a religious mythology. The original featured programs as disciples of the users, enslaved for their belief. But that plays a small role overall. Here, when the Grid is reprogrammed to the image of Kevin Flynn, Flynn is established to the status of "the one true god" at least of this version of the grid, and all the other users who contribute new programs are just angels. But the maker of this world is Flynn, regardless of whether or not he writes the fates of these people. So, much like the original Hebrew form of god, he is not so much a ruler who demands worship or enforce any rules but just a wise and experienced being here to help when he's needed.
And it's not so much an analogy to call Flynn god as it is TRUE. He has successfully created a world, not a platform. A world that's self sustaining and requires no more intervention of the users, as displayed by the ISOs which created themselves and were programmed by no-one.
And this demands many questions! If they'd been allowed to live, would the ISOs have made this world like our own in thousands of years? Does this mean that's how our own god could have created our own world and how we came to be? Questions of such layered nature can't simply be ignored as style over substance.
And then there comes CLU, the best friend of Flynn who he trusted. But as god, I dare say it, may have been somewhat confused in his image he had for the world in his early form, so did Flynn suffer from this same confusion of image for his world. This causes CLU to suffer a similar fate of uncertainty, making him only able to understand that his god is incapable of creating a perfect world since he can't imagine one. Thus, taking matters into his own hands, he abandons his god and does what he sees to be right. But the problem is he expects to get a different result with the same thinking as his flawed god, the only thinking he has been exposed to, and makes even worse mistakes than his god, making Flynn see the errors of his ways. Thus, a most appropriate analogy, CLU becomes the Satan to Flynn's god.
But the ultimate piece of symbolism that outmatches anything else in the movie, is the final attempt of CLU to get Flynn's disc. He realizes Flynn has tricked him, by giving the disc he sought to his son. He discovered that the son of Flynn, and thus the son of a god, has obtained the disc and power he seeks, and thus he must obtain it. There is so much symbolism that flies past viewers in what happens next. When CLU realizes he has been tricked, he raises his disc to derez Flynn and then go get the right one, but only violently places the disc beside Flynn, subtly showing in the end he still considered Flynn his friend and could not bring himself to kill him. CLU runs to obtain this disc from the obstacle stopping him from having the ultimate power, showing the rivalry between the Satan and savior of this world.
Such themes like this show the filmmakers truly put a lot of thought into their creation, not a lack of it, so people need to stop discrediting them and their work.
A spectacular visual experience to be taken with a pinch of salt!
alwaysbwithu5 December 2010
Kevin Flynn (Bridges) is the CEO of Encom and the world's best video game developer. One night he simply vanishes without a trace and leaves his company in chaos and his young son. Fast-forward 20 years, Sam Flynn (Hedlund) is a rebellious 27 year old and a thorn in the side of Richard Mackey (Nordling), a suit trying to take over his father's company with the help of a software designer (an uncredited cameo from Cillian Murphy). Though Sam is the heir, he refuses to play an active role in the decision-making process. Alan Bradley (Boxleitner) meets him one night with the news that he has received a page from Kevin Flynn's arcade - a number that has been disconnected for 20 years. Thus ensues the inevitable investigation into his father's whereabouts and Sam's transportation into the world his father has created and been trapped in for decades.
Where to begin? Tron: Legacy is a visual feast for your eyes and an auditory pleasure thanks to Daft Punk and Joseph Trapanese. The soundtrack feels ethereal almost and fits perfectly with this new world we have been introduced to for the first time (or the 2nd time if you've seen the 1982 original).
3D, for me, is a recent scourge that has been infecting and affecting the movie industry. Yes, maybe it is a more lucrative avenue for the movie industry after the setback of heavy piracy but enough is enough! Joseph Kosinski, however, had a vision (and an architectural degree behind him) to give us a mouth-opening, simply beautiful world with the correct blend of 2D and 3D! It is quite simply worth it just to go for the visuals.
What the movie makes up for in spectacular imagery, it lacks in storyline. Maybe I should have watched the 1982 version as so many people have pointed out to me but even without it, the plot seems a little disjointed. The underlying connections to the real world are numerous such as The Holocaust, God complexes, evil doppelgangers and more. You are left with more questions than answers as it is never revealed just what it is about this world that would "change everything" in the real world.
Jeff Bridges is great as both the villain and hero and his computer animated self is simply amazing although at the same time off-putting (this might be the Uncanny Valley hypothesis at work). The acting overall is not anything to write home about (no Oscar winners here) but Hedlund as Sam Flynn holds his own against a more charismatic Jeff Bridges. Quorra (Wilde) provides a potential love interest and the key to changing our world and a doe-eyed innocent view of life that is endearing.
This is a movie that should be simply taken for what it is, a pandering to the original fan base whilst garnering new ones, one not to be over- analysed but simply to be marvelled at with a group of friends. The actions scenes are just jaw-dropping with light cycles (that I wish I owned!) and deadly Frisbees amongst other things. Disney took a risk to continue a series almost 3 decades later rather than going for the easy option of re-imagining it. A wise move.
Where to begin? Tron: Legacy is a visual feast for your eyes and an auditory pleasure thanks to Daft Punk and Joseph Trapanese. The soundtrack feels ethereal almost and fits perfectly with this new world we have been introduced to for the first time (or the 2nd time if you've seen the 1982 original).
3D, for me, is a recent scourge that has been infecting and affecting the movie industry. Yes, maybe it is a more lucrative avenue for the movie industry after the setback of heavy piracy but enough is enough! Joseph Kosinski, however, had a vision (and an architectural degree behind him) to give us a mouth-opening, simply beautiful world with the correct blend of 2D and 3D! It is quite simply worth it just to go for the visuals.
What the movie makes up for in spectacular imagery, it lacks in storyline. Maybe I should have watched the 1982 version as so many people have pointed out to me but even without it, the plot seems a little disjointed. The underlying connections to the real world are numerous such as The Holocaust, God complexes, evil doppelgangers and more. You are left with more questions than answers as it is never revealed just what it is about this world that would "change everything" in the real world.
Jeff Bridges is great as both the villain and hero and his computer animated self is simply amazing although at the same time off-putting (this might be the Uncanny Valley hypothesis at work). The acting overall is not anything to write home about (no Oscar winners here) but Hedlund as Sam Flynn holds his own against a more charismatic Jeff Bridges. Quorra (Wilde) provides a potential love interest and the key to changing our world and a doe-eyed innocent view of life that is endearing.
This is a movie that should be simply taken for what it is, a pandering to the original fan base whilst garnering new ones, one not to be over- analysed but simply to be marvelled at with a group of friends. The actions scenes are just jaw-dropping with light cycles (that I wish I owned!) and deadly Frisbees amongst other things. Disney took a risk to continue a series almost 3 decades later rather than going for the easy option of re-imagining it. A wise move.
Style over substance
briancham19943 June 2020
This film is the best example of "style over substance", but wow, what substance. It has some of the best production design and soundtrack I have ever witnessed. Visually and aurally speaking, I would even call it a masterpiece. It is like no other techno-futuristic cyberspace I have ever seen depicted. However, it is let down by a dull main actor and an unpolished story that didn't fully convince me.
An Underrated Gem
KingCritic29 October 2019
Everything about this film works. The visuals, writing, acting, everything. There are very few wrong things I can find with Tron, especially the soundtrack which is timeless even almost a decade later. I still remember watching this film in theaters and not regretting it at all. I highly recommend this film for fans of anything quality.
From the pacing to the cinematography this film is astoundingly well made, and truly deserves more recognition. It is timeless in every meaning of the word.
From the pacing to the cinematography this film is astoundingly well made, and truly deserves more recognition. It is timeless in every meaning of the word.
Surprisingly enjoyable
TheLittleSongbird11 May 2011
I actually wasn't expecting to enjoy TRON:Legacy, but coming from someone who is fond of the original 1982 film, I did. TRON:Legacy isn't a perfect movie though, then again neither was the original movie. The film thematically is deeper than the original, but there are some parts where it comes across as rather formulaic for my tastes. Also while the characters are likable, they aren't given that much depth, and again while the dialogue is intriguing at most some of it is weak and dare I say stilted.
That said, TRON:Legacy has a lot to redeem it. Jeff Bridges is great and Garett Hedlund is likable, but when it comes to the acting the film is stolen by a gleefully enjoyable Michael Sheen and a wonderfully edgy Olivia Wilde. The action sequences and chases are very exciting, and help keep the momentum of the pace and story going, and the soundtrack is just fantastic. But the real revelation is in the film's look. The film looks amazing and one of the most visually stylish films of the year- I just loved the cinematography and editing and the special effects and use of neons are outstanding.
In conclusion, a surprisingly enjoyable film that I wasn't expecting to like. 7/10 Bethany Cox
That said, TRON:Legacy has a lot to redeem it. Jeff Bridges is great and Garett Hedlund is likable, but when it comes to the acting the film is stolen by a gleefully enjoyable Michael Sheen and a wonderfully edgy Olivia Wilde. The action sequences and chases are very exciting, and help keep the momentum of the pace and story going, and the soundtrack is just fantastic. But the real revelation is in the film's look. The film looks amazing and one of the most visually stylish films of the year- I just loved the cinematography and editing and the special effects and use of neons are outstanding.
In conclusion, a surprisingly enjoyable film that I wasn't expecting to like. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Art.
W011y4m517 July 2019
Warning: Spoilers
TRON: Legacy is a literal misunderstood masterpiece & is one of the most intellectual, deepest science-fiction movies I've seen Disney produce - EVER! Let me explain:
Immediately, CLU has strong, deliberate similarities with Hitler - they both wanted to create "the perfect system" & viewed those in their society who were similar to themselves as superior, where individuals are only deemed valuable if they can be used to further implement & reassert the oppressive structures in place.
In TRON, any program deemed useless or unfit for work is sent into "the games", where they're to be slaughtered for the amusement of less "disposable" citizens - disabled / programs unable to be "rectified" are lesser & have no place in this system CLU has created. It's as if those who cannot contribute, may rebel or show resistance cannot be allowed to exist & so only the obedient, functioning rectified ones remain.
This is a symbolic representation of a fascist regime where those ruled under it are controlled by fear & intimidation - "rectified" programs are representative depictions of people who are brainwashed by a system & further explains why those who can't be are sent to their deaths. Any imperfection is prohibited & made an example of - uniformity is essential & total, unquestioning loyalty to the cause is expected. Again, noticeable connotations are made in order to reflect Nazi Germany; CLU commits genocide by wiping out the ISOs who represent / relate to the Jewish population within 'Legacy' & there's a resonant message of defiance throughout the film.
It's also a metaphor for mental health - with CLU depicting the worst of humanity & what it's capable of when a mind is corrupted by power & greed, embodying the darkest side of ourselves. Additionally, on the opposite side, Kevin Flynn is in a state of depression when we first meet him again in the movie - he's been battling his demons & has given up, justifying his lack of action by saying "the only way to win the game is by not playing" but Sam Flynn challenges his problematic ideological attitude & his son visually journeys into the mind of his father (who hasn't been there for him throughout his childhood because he's lost himself inside his own head) in order to regain a relationship he missed out on as he was growing up in order to save him, battling his demons alongside him so he can bring him back out into the real world, teaching him that by resigning himself to what he deemed as inevitable, he only allowed the darkness inside the Grid (a metaphor for his mind) to grow & spread like cancer. These two themes intertwine when Sam goes against his father's wishes by fighting - sparking what would grow to become genuine character progression of Kevin.
Sam meets other members of the resistance & begins to fight back & only when his life is in danger does Kevin realise that not only do his inner demons pose a risk to himself, but those he loves & others around him, so his supposedly harmless inaction is shown to have consequences, forcing his hand & beginning his journey of recovery. Hence - linking back to politics - it also signifies that the only way for a fascist state to thrive is when good people do nothing - they are complicit in the actions of CLU by allowing him to continue without resistance. Fascist states are vulnerable & fragile & when people rise up against them, they crumble. Hence, it reaffirms this point when CLU's plan is immediately jeopardized once people act.
As Kevin & Sam battle corrupted programs & CLU, they head towards their escape - a light that shines brightly through the darkness at the end of a tunnel (another metaphor for depression). It's at this point when Kevin realises that the only way to save his son is by confronting his fears, face to face, coming to terms with who he is & what he's capable of, what kind of person he has the potential to be & makes a choice to embrace the light again instead of resigning himself to the darkness. He sees the danger he poses to those he loves if his darker self isn't stopped & so sacrifices himself, visually embracing his darker side (coming to terms with it) & overwhelming it with light in the ultimate show of love towards the child he never got to see grow up. By doing this, we're led to assume that he dies but he neutralises the threat & redeems himself in the eyes of his son. It's a total act of redemption; a father battling his depression & being trapped inside a prison of his own making for years - how those suffering are able to win if they accept help & don't fight the battles they have to face alone when there are those willing to support surrounding them.
Kevin Flynn starts the story as powerless & concludes as powerful. It's about family & incorporates socio-political themes brilliantly. Even more genius, CLU didn't understand humanity & that's poetically what saves it - he was unable to understand that there is no such thing as "perfection"; it's subjective & thus his system is ironic due to the basic flaw in what is supposed to be perfect. It shows how easy it is to topple such a regime once that flaw is exposed; it's a weakness - not a strength - & individuality is what makes a society strong; CLU's misguided idea about this ultimately leads to his demise. He doesn't understand because he's made himself into less of a reflection of humanity than intended, so can't foresee what his opponent Kevin will do for love as love isn't a concept he considers or acknowledges due to his lack of humanity. He's absolved himself of any trace of it in order to become "perfect" but it's a pathetic fallacy.
The darkest side of humanity acts upon irrational thoughts, sometimes selfish or cowardly & sometimes from an unintentional misinterpretation of unclear information. Once we look at things from an objective point of view, we see the cracks in the logic & only upon self reflection can we change ourselves for the better. We're reminded of that here.
Not to mention, it's worth noting the beautiful direction from Joseph Kosinski (unbelievably, his first ever feature film!?) - who does an astounding job of crafting such a subtextually rich tale - & appreciating the faultless, sleek, stylised visuals - honestly, jaw-droppingly GORGEOUS & effective cinematography from Claudio Miranda - who leaves you in awe of the aesthetic & his meticulous use of light while watching & visually, it's undeniably one of the most iconic, inventive & distinctive movies I've ever seen with groundbreaking visual effects, world building that's phenomenally immersive from the moment you step foot within it - with masterful, artistic hair & make-up, sound & costume design & additionally, production design - as well as the electrifying score by musical legends Daft Punk who craft one of the best soundtracks for any movie in history... TRON: Legacy was a gift to all who've been longing for an original sci-fi franchise & most of y'all slept on it. It's an utter travesty.
In TRON, any program deemed useless or unfit for work is sent into "the games", where they're to be slaughtered for the amusement of less "disposable" citizens - disabled / programs unable to be "rectified" are lesser & have no place in this system CLU has created. It's as if those who cannot contribute, may rebel or show resistance cannot be allowed to exist & so only the obedient, functioning rectified ones remain.
This is a symbolic representation of a fascist regime where those ruled under it are controlled by fear & intimidation - "rectified" programs are representative depictions of people who are brainwashed by a system & further explains why those who can't be are sent to their deaths. Any imperfection is prohibited & made an example of - uniformity is essential & total, unquestioning loyalty to the cause is expected. Again, noticeable connotations are made in order to reflect Nazi Germany; CLU commits genocide by wiping out the ISOs who represent / relate to the Jewish population within 'Legacy' & there's a resonant message of defiance throughout the film.
It's also a metaphor for mental health - with CLU depicting the worst of humanity & what it's capable of when a mind is corrupted by power & greed, embodying the darkest side of ourselves. Additionally, on the opposite side, Kevin Flynn is in a state of depression when we first meet him again in the movie - he's been battling his demons & has given up, justifying his lack of action by saying "the only way to win the game is by not playing" but Sam Flynn challenges his problematic ideological attitude & his son visually journeys into the mind of his father (who hasn't been there for him throughout his childhood because he's lost himself inside his own head) in order to regain a relationship he missed out on as he was growing up in order to save him, battling his demons alongside him so he can bring him back out into the real world, teaching him that by resigning himself to what he deemed as inevitable, he only allowed the darkness inside the Grid (a metaphor for his mind) to grow & spread like cancer. These two themes intertwine when Sam goes against his father's wishes by fighting - sparking what would grow to become genuine character progression of Kevin.
Sam meets other members of the resistance & begins to fight back & only when his life is in danger does Kevin realise that not only do his inner demons pose a risk to himself, but those he loves & others around him, so his supposedly harmless inaction is shown to have consequences, forcing his hand & beginning his journey of recovery. Hence - linking back to politics - it also signifies that the only way for a fascist state to thrive is when good people do nothing - they are complicit in the actions of CLU by allowing him to continue without resistance. Fascist states are vulnerable & fragile & when people rise up against them, they crumble. Hence, it reaffirms this point when CLU's plan is immediately jeopardized once people act.
As Kevin & Sam battle corrupted programs & CLU, they head towards their escape - a light that shines brightly through the darkness at the end of a tunnel (another metaphor for depression). It's at this point when Kevin realises that the only way to save his son is by confronting his fears, face to face, coming to terms with who he is & what he's capable of, what kind of person he has the potential to be & makes a choice to embrace the light again instead of resigning himself to the darkness. He sees the danger he poses to those he loves if his darker self isn't stopped & so sacrifices himself, visually embracing his darker side (coming to terms with it) & overwhelming it with light in the ultimate show of love towards the child he never got to see grow up. By doing this, we're led to assume that he dies but he neutralises the threat & redeems himself in the eyes of his son. It's a total act of redemption; a father battling his depression & being trapped inside a prison of his own making for years - how those suffering are able to win if they accept help & don't fight the battles they have to face alone when there are those willing to support surrounding them.
Kevin Flynn starts the story as powerless & concludes as powerful. It's about family & incorporates socio-political themes brilliantly. Even more genius, CLU didn't understand humanity & that's poetically what saves it - he was unable to understand that there is no such thing as "perfection"; it's subjective & thus his system is ironic due to the basic flaw in what is supposed to be perfect. It shows how easy it is to topple such a regime once that flaw is exposed; it's a weakness - not a strength - & individuality is what makes a society strong; CLU's misguided idea about this ultimately leads to his demise. He doesn't understand because he's made himself into less of a reflection of humanity than intended, so can't foresee what his opponent Kevin will do for love as love isn't a concept he considers or acknowledges due to his lack of humanity. He's absolved himself of any trace of it in order to become "perfect" but it's a pathetic fallacy.
The darkest side of humanity acts upon irrational thoughts, sometimes selfish or cowardly & sometimes from an unintentional misinterpretation of unclear information. Once we look at things from an objective point of view, we see the cracks in the logic & only upon self reflection can we change ourselves for the better. We're reminded of that here.
Not to mention, it's worth noting the beautiful direction from Joseph Kosinski (unbelievably, his first ever feature film!?) - who does an astounding job of crafting such a subtextually rich tale - & appreciating the faultless, sleek, stylised visuals - honestly, jaw-droppingly GORGEOUS & effective cinematography from Claudio Miranda - who leaves you in awe of the aesthetic & his meticulous use of light while watching & visually, it's undeniably one of the most iconic, inventive & distinctive movies I've ever seen with groundbreaking visual effects, world building that's phenomenally immersive from the moment you step foot within it - with masterful, artistic hair & make-up, sound & costume design & additionally, production design - as well as the electrifying score by musical legends Daft Punk who craft one of the best soundtracks for any movie in history... TRON: Legacy was a gift to all who've been longing for an original sci-fi franchise & most of y'all slept on it. It's an utter travesty.
A dazzling and spectacular special effects extravaganza, despite its flaws.
dvc515916 December 2010
Right off the bat I'm going to say that I didn't see the first film. Obviously I've heard from a lot of people saying that they need to see the first film before watching this one, seeing as this is a direct sequel to a nearly 30 year old cult sci-fi film. But, seeing that I didn't have time, I decided to watch the sequel anyway.
Now keep in mind that Disney took a HUGE risk in making a sequel to a movie that is not very often talked about when it comes to movies as opposed to many blockbusters today. The first TRON had no famous franchise to speak of (apart from the real games inspired by it). Adding to the danger is the film's budget - reportedly between US$ 200 - 300 million. With that kind of money you'll wonder what exactly was Disney hoping for with this film.
Nevermind the fact that the story is a bit unfocused and could be rounded up in a more polished way. Nevermind too that the fantastic world and great ideas aren't expanded upon some more, as well as the fact that the script could use a little bit more originality.
Also, not forgetting some good (in Jeff Bridges' case, great as always as he plays two very different characters with perfect emotional resonance - proving that he still has the chops to carry a big movie) performances by the cast - with Garrett Hedlund showing great leading man potential and Olivia Wilde looking great and cute to boot. Michael Sheen, Beau Garrett and Bruce Boxleitner (apparently returning to his role from the first film, so it seems) all give good support.
No sir-ee, what you pay for - and what you get in spades - are the special/visual effects. Goodness me, this is quite possibly the best special effects I've seen all year, and that's saying something. I have to admit though, the CGI that makes Jeff Bridges young look jarring, but that is overshadowed by the compelling, groundbreaking special/visual effects that really bring you into the cybernetic world. Who doesn't want to take a ride on one of those fantastic, futuristic vehicles? Who doesn't want those awesome light-cycles or one of those dueling/data discs? It is possible that, like "Avatar" a year ago, this film can be a game-changer for special/visual effects alone.
It's a real treat for the eyes, and it's even better in 3D which is splendidly used to flesh out the dimensions and graphics of the cyber world bring you even deeper into the world instead of things merely flying out to you and post-production conversion like in SO many 3D movies (Note that in the 3D version, there's a disclaimer before the film starts, saying that parts of the film are filmed in both natural 2D and 3D as they way they should be. Just so you know, this shows that the filmmakers care for what they want to give you).
Very ambitious architect-and-designer-turned-first-time-filmmaker Joseph Kosinski hit a home run with this film, crafting an extraordinary and spellbinding world of escapism that looks slick, stylish and extremely cool to watch. Kosinski and the production team fill the cyber world with heaps of imagination and the result is what you see on screen. And here I thought Hollywood would recycle certain design patterns (plot patterns still need work though). Kosinski is a truly visionary filmmaker that one really has to keep an eye on.
The production design is on par with the special effects, it is nothing short of spectacular and perfect. The cinematography which is big and wide and best of all NOT shaky allows you to savor every moment of SFX goodness. The superb sound effects serve to complement the visuals and the electronic world, and all for the better. Daft Punk's varying but atmospheric electronic/orchestral score all but suits the film's mood perfectly with its techno beats and soaring string during moments.
Overall, this is perhaps a fine way to end the blockbuster season of 2010, and this is a definite must watch for all looking for an escape. The special effects alone are worth the price of TWO movie tickets, and with that I say, give this one a try, even if you haven't seen the first one. It aims to entertain and to dazzle the audience, and it succeeds brilliantly. Excuse me while I rent the first one now.
Overall rating: 75/100
Now keep in mind that Disney took a HUGE risk in making a sequel to a movie that is not very often talked about when it comes to movies as opposed to many blockbusters today. The first TRON had no famous franchise to speak of (apart from the real games inspired by it). Adding to the danger is the film's budget - reportedly between US$ 200 - 300 million. With that kind of money you'll wonder what exactly was Disney hoping for with this film.
Nevermind the fact that the story is a bit unfocused and could be rounded up in a more polished way. Nevermind too that the fantastic world and great ideas aren't expanded upon some more, as well as the fact that the script could use a little bit more originality.
Also, not forgetting some good (in Jeff Bridges' case, great as always as he plays two very different characters with perfect emotional resonance - proving that he still has the chops to carry a big movie) performances by the cast - with Garrett Hedlund showing great leading man potential and Olivia Wilde looking great and cute to boot. Michael Sheen, Beau Garrett and Bruce Boxleitner (apparently returning to his role from the first film, so it seems) all give good support.
No sir-ee, what you pay for - and what you get in spades - are the special/visual effects. Goodness me, this is quite possibly the best special effects I've seen all year, and that's saying something. I have to admit though, the CGI that makes Jeff Bridges young look jarring, but that is overshadowed by the compelling, groundbreaking special/visual effects that really bring you into the cybernetic world. Who doesn't want to take a ride on one of those fantastic, futuristic vehicles? Who doesn't want those awesome light-cycles or one of those dueling/data discs? It is possible that, like "Avatar" a year ago, this film can be a game-changer for special/visual effects alone.
It's a real treat for the eyes, and it's even better in 3D which is splendidly used to flesh out the dimensions and graphics of the cyber world bring you even deeper into the world instead of things merely flying out to you and post-production conversion like in SO many 3D movies (Note that in the 3D version, there's a disclaimer before the film starts, saying that parts of the film are filmed in both natural 2D and 3D as they way they should be. Just so you know, this shows that the filmmakers care for what they want to give you).
Very ambitious architect-and-designer-turned-first-time-filmmaker Joseph Kosinski hit a home run with this film, crafting an extraordinary and spellbinding world of escapism that looks slick, stylish and extremely cool to watch. Kosinski and the production team fill the cyber world with heaps of imagination and the result is what you see on screen. And here I thought Hollywood would recycle certain design patterns (plot patterns still need work though). Kosinski is a truly visionary filmmaker that one really has to keep an eye on.
The production design is on par with the special effects, it is nothing short of spectacular and perfect. The cinematography which is big and wide and best of all NOT shaky allows you to savor every moment of SFX goodness. The superb sound effects serve to complement the visuals and the electronic world, and all for the better. Daft Punk's varying but atmospheric electronic/orchestral score all but suits the film's mood perfectly with its techno beats and soaring string during moments.
Overall, this is perhaps a fine way to end the blockbuster season of 2010, and this is a definite must watch for all looking for an escape. The special effects alone are worth the price of TWO movie tickets, and with that I say, give this one a try, even if you haven't seen the first one. It aims to entertain and to dazzle the audience, and it succeeds brilliantly. Excuse me while I rent the first one now.
Overall rating: 75/100
Muddled & Disappointing
routier1 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
WARNING: SPOILERS *****************
Visually, a feast, but a leisurely script leads to a muddled climax.
A fan of the original since 1983, I had been looking forward to this for a long time. The trailers & stills looked very promising. Sadly, while it looks good, some questionable decisions have been made, and the film doesn't seem to know what to do or where to go.
Some of the original concepts seem to have been dumbed down for audience acceptance. Programs, formerly living a uniquely digital lifestyle, sipping energy from pools, worshiping users, are now just like regular dudes with funny clothes. They work, sleep, eat, drink, and go to clubs.
Perhaps this dumbing down is why this film poses more questions than it answers.
Why has the digital world taken on analogue characteristics like dust, atmosphere & functionless water?
Why do the digital Recognizers, previously smooth, humming machine menaces, now have exhaust flames & jet engine noise?
Why do light cycles sound like they have gasoline engines?
How can a totalitarian digital society have "homeless" programs (who drink from brown paper bags yet)?
Why do all the programs now leap around and pose exactly like Asian martial artists? Just, why??
How were the Isomorphic algorithms going to change the world?
How was CLU going to conquer the world with a bunch of computer programs who were good at throwing disks?
When young Flynn switched off the server, was the world destroyed? (if so, shouldn't he have waited, since (a) the threat had been stopped, and (b) in case there were still some of those useful ISOs surviving, especially since he (and the audience) have no clue as to how to use them?)
If hours in the digital world were minutes in the real one, and in the real world it's been 20 years, does that mean that old Flynn had been trapped for up to 1200 years? (which might explain why he's channeling The Dude from "The Big Lebowski")
The biggest disappointment for me was the almost complete absence of the title character. By the end of the film, I still wasn't sure where Tron was. I had to read some summaries on the Internet to find out.
I would have preferred it if Tron, in his last act, saved the day. Sadly, when he did (briefly) appear, he was ineffective and pointless.
I was a fan of the original Tron. Original ideas and logic have been dropped for populism & eye candy. The subtle humor & in-jokes are absent. This is a disappointing followup.
Visually, a feast, but a leisurely script leads to a muddled climax.
A fan of the original since 1983, I had been looking forward to this for a long time. The trailers & stills looked very promising. Sadly, while it looks good, some questionable decisions have been made, and the film doesn't seem to know what to do or where to go.
Some of the original concepts seem to have been dumbed down for audience acceptance. Programs, formerly living a uniquely digital lifestyle, sipping energy from pools, worshiping users, are now just like regular dudes with funny clothes. They work, sleep, eat, drink, and go to clubs.
Perhaps this dumbing down is why this film poses more questions than it answers.
Why has the digital world taken on analogue characteristics like dust, atmosphere & functionless water?
Why do the digital Recognizers, previously smooth, humming machine menaces, now have exhaust flames & jet engine noise?
Why do light cycles sound like they have gasoline engines?
How can a totalitarian digital society have "homeless" programs (who drink from brown paper bags yet)?
Why do all the programs now leap around and pose exactly like Asian martial artists? Just, why??
How were the Isomorphic algorithms going to change the world?
How was CLU going to conquer the world with a bunch of computer programs who were good at throwing disks?
When young Flynn switched off the server, was the world destroyed? (if so, shouldn't he have waited, since (a) the threat had been stopped, and (b) in case there were still some of those useful ISOs surviving, especially since he (and the audience) have no clue as to how to use them?)
If hours in the digital world were minutes in the real one, and in the real world it's been 20 years, does that mean that old Flynn had been trapped for up to 1200 years? (which might explain why he's channeling The Dude from "The Big Lebowski")
The biggest disappointment for me was the almost complete absence of the title character. By the end of the film, I still wasn't sure where Tron was. I had to read some summaries on the Internet to find out.
I would have preferred it if Tron, in his last act, saved the day. Sadly, when he did (briefly) appear, he was ineffective and pointless.
I was a fan of the original Tron. Original ideas and logic have been dropped for populism & eye candy. The subtle humor & in-jokes are absent. This is a disappointing followup.
Amazing visuals, okay plot, shallow story
evan_harvey16 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Just got back from Tron. This film looks frickin' amazing. The SFX are incredible. I saw it in 3D, but to be honest I didn't notice it much, so it's hard to say whether it is better than 2D.
Watch out for spoilers! Plot: Not too bad. Pretty standard idea: a bunch of computer generated AI want out.
Story: Half-baked. The major flaw is that the story is told in a very shallow fashion. There's interesting things going on like a rebellion, but it's only given a cursory nod. What would have been better is if the protagonists interacted with the underground rebellion. The rebels play only a bit part in a single scene, which is a shame. Jeff Bridges' character also seems to possess some kind of aura/status, but it's underplayed. He appears to have an effect on his surroundings, but it's not given full use. The character of Tron is also largely wasted.
Acting: Nothing too great. Not bad by any means. Jeff Bridges' human character seems to be trying to channel the Dude from The Big Lebowski, and it's ineffective. Maybe that's how people spoke in 1985, but it just sounds silly.
SFX: Unbe-frickin-lievable. This film has style in spades. Even with the slightly rubbish way the story plays out, the visuals make it worthwhile. While a little disappointed in the story, my eyes were glutting themselves on the CGI. Very, very cool.
End result: 9 out of 10 for the visuals. 6 out of 10 for the average storyline. 7 out of 10 final score and well worth the money to see it on the big screen.
Watch out for spoilers! Plot: Not too bad. Pretty standard idea: a bunch of computer generated AI want out.
Story: Half-baked. The major flaw is that the story is told in a very shallow fashion. There's interesting things going on like a rebellion, but it's only given a cursory nod. What would have been better is if the protagonists interacted with the underground rebellion. The rebels play only a bit part in a single scene, which is a shame. Jeff Bridges' character also seems to possess some kind of aura/status, but it's underplayed. He appears to have an effect on his surroundings, but it's not given full use. The character of Tron is also largely wasted.
Acting: Nothing too great. Not bad by any means. Jeff Bridges' human character seems to be trying to channel the Dude from The Big Lebowski, and it's ineffective. Maybe that's how people spoke in 1985, but it just sounds silly.
SFX: Unbe-frickin-lievable. This film has style in spades. Even with the slightly rubbish way the story plays out, the visuals make it worthwhile. While a little disappointed in the story, my eyes were glutting themselves on the CGI. Very, very cool.
End result: 9 out of 10 for the visuals. 6 out of 10 for the average storyline. 7 out of 10 final score and well worth the money to see it on the big screen.
Not too user-friendly
largu17 December 2010
I like the first Tron. Not in an creepy over-obsessed way, but I regard it as a campy, retro glitterfest based on an delightfully silly idea. The basic concept stays the same in Tron Legacy. Computer programs are sentient beings inside the computer grid, probably deriving from the fact that they are created from someone's hope and dreams and therefore inherit some of their creators (or "users")soul.
In the first Tron a "user", Flynn/Jeff Bridges, is whisked away into the computer world (by lasers, no less). In "Legacy" the son of Flynn is looking for his father 20 years after he strangely disappeared without a trace. No price for guessing where, and we also find ourselves in the computer world after a quite glum and outstretched intro. FINALLY.
Turns out the world inside is equally glum. Now, with the way the use of computer have evolved and increased dramatically since the last movie I was expecting to see a grid teeming with all sorts of life and variety. That may be my mistake. I realize that the world in Tron Legacy may in fact be the sole creation of one being (Flynn/Jeff Bridges) with no interaction with the rest of the world, which may be plausible,given the theme of the movie, but still. Flynn copy/paste a lot and is obviously very fond of the "dark-gritty-stone-tool".
All that aside, there been notables upgrades in the Tron world. Most technology looks, well, cooler. It is stunning visually, especially in 3d. My biggest gripe with the movie though is how clunky everything is. This should be a rendition of the world inside a computer, but stuff hisses, creaks and spew exhaustion. When did the digital world turn so analogue? Sure, from a scientific point of view the digital is indistinguishable from the analogue if it is complex enough, but why does it feels like a step backwards? The world in the older movie actually feels like a much more accurate rendition of a computer world than this. The new one is more like reality with fancy neon. Flynn turns his personal abode into a reality shrine, and eating what I guess is a virtually crafted pig, but that is him emulating reality. The motor of the first movie was that we could see games and programs run "as if it was in real life". With todays graphics that is already happening on-screen so the movie might have outlived its gimmick. If so there are more than enough other features from the digital world worthy of being represented in Tron. Why just demote the whole world then?
I realise I haven't said anything about the acting. Well, there is none. Bridges tries his best to put some personality into Flynn. Not an easy task. Most of the time he just seems awkward. Our protagonist, whats-his-face, Sam is the sulky and estranged techno-wizz-kid we have all seen so many times before, only a bit older this time (27). The Tron from the title is there naturally, and he does... nothing. Boxlietner is in the cast, why not let him give old Tron a line at least? In the male world of computers there are as many as two female actor, but they are just the standard blockbuster version of the madonna/whore, aka spunky and bitchy. That boils down to sourpuss, hippie, spunky, bitchy, a creepy game-character and oh, there is also a Bowie, although not thee Bowie. Hello Disney, NEXT TIME YOU SHOULD CONSIDER ADDING SOME DIMENSIONS TO YOUR CHARACTERS, AND I DO NOT MEAN 3D, OK?
Frankly, I'm thoroughly annoyed, and though not expecting much also surprisingly disappointed. Ah, well. The 4/10 is for looks, sounds and effort. It do look nice and the soundtrack is marvellous at times. I'm convinced that the musicians Daft Punk would make a better version of Tron themselves AND with more heart.
In the first Tron a "user", Flynn/Jeff Bridges, is whisked away into the computer world (by lasers, no less). In "Legacy" the son of Flynn is looking for his father 20 years after he strangely disappeared without a trace. No price for guessing where, and we also find ourselves in the computer world after a quite glum and outstretched intro. FINALLY.
Turns out the world inside is equally glum. Now, with the way the use of computer have evolved and increased dramatically since the last movie I was expecting to see a grid teeming with all sorts of life and variety. That may be my mistake. I realize that the world in Tron Legacy may in fact be the sole creation of one being (Flynn/Jeff Bridges) with no interaction with the rest of the world, which may be plausible,given the theme of the movie, but still. Flynn copy/paste a lot and is obviously very fond of the "dark-gritty-stone-tool".
All that aside, there been notables upgrades in the Tron world. Most technology looks, well, cooler. It is stunning visually, especially in 3d. My biggest gripe with the movie though is how clunky everything is. This should be a rendition of the world inside a computer, but stuff hisses, creaks and spew exhaustion. When did the digital world turn so analogue? Sure, from a scientific point of view the digital is indistinguishable from the analogue if it is complex enough, but why does it feels like a step backwards? The world in the older movie actually feels like a much more accurate rendition of a computer world than this. The new one is more like reality with fancy neon. Flynn turns his personal abode into a reality shrine, and eating what I guess is a virtually crafted pig, but that is him emulating reality. The motor of the first movie was that we could see games and programs run "as if it was in real life". With todays graphics that is already happening on-screen so the movie might have outlived its gimmick. If so there are more than enough other features from the digital world worthy of being represented in Tron. Why just demote the whole world then?
I realise I haven't said anything about the acting. Well, there is none. Bridges tries his best to put some personality into Flynn. Not an easy task. Most of the time he just seems awkward. Our protagonist, whats-his-face, Sam is the sulky and estranged techno-wizz-kid we have all seen so many times before, only a bit older this time (27). The Tron from the title is there naturally, and he does... nothing. Boxlietner is in the cast, why not let him give old Tron a line at least? In the male world of computers there are as many as two female actor, but they are just the standard blockbuster version of the madonna/whore, aka spunky and bitchy. That boils down to sourpuss, hippie, spunky, bitchy, a creepy game-character and oh, there is also a Bowie, although not thee Bowie. Hello Disney, NEXT TIME YOU SHOULD CONSIDER ADDING SOME DIMENSIONS TO YOUR CHARACTERS, AND I DO NOT MEAN 3D, OK?
Frankly, I'm thoroughly annoyed, and though not expecting much also surprisingly disappointed. Ah, well. The 4/10 is for looks, sounds and effort. It do look nice and the soundtrack is marvellous at times. I'm convinced that the musicians Daft Punk would make a better version of Tron themselves AND with more heart.
Effects heavy style that works as such despite having a basic plot and nothing really in terms of characters
bob the moo1 May 2011
The sequel to Tron took the right approach to the marketing and went into effect a good year before the film came out. Recognising that many people (apart from real fans) will only have a hazy recollection of the film and will probably vaguely remember it as "good" but really only remember the iconic bikers and design of it all, the marketing focused on the updated design, bikes etc that make up this world. In every interview there was always a smattering of talk about father/son and comments made on the power and omnipresent nature of computers and networks but really it was the visual aspects of the film that were pushed to the front. So it was with the marketing, so it is with the film where we join the rebellious son of Flynn as he gets sucked into the grid and discovers that his father's dream has been corrupted by a clone programme of himself.
It is advisable to start with the world that has been created within this film because ultimately this is its main selling point. It looks great – faithful to the original creation but never feels dated by an old view of computing, it is a vibrant place and even some forced "places" (like a nightclub that makes it feel a little Cool World) don't hurt it beyond the bigger idea and feel. I saw it in 2D but the looming ships and bikes and such all worked well and looked great. The effects that produce a young Jeff Bridges are technically impressive and mostly they work well – it is only the very small movements of skin and face that don't convince but it is so good that, rather than "not working" it just looks like something is a little freaky with him. Although I'm not a massive Daft Punk fan, their soundtrack does work well and they fit the film well.
The film is mostly moved forward by this style and frequent action sequences; mostly this is enough and I did find it to be entertaining considering that I expected the 2 hour long film to drag once the novelty wore off after 15 minutes. The basic plot (get to the exit before the other guy does) is enough to provide room for action but not for characters. Occasionally we will get attempts at this and they kinda work just for that moment but not to make me care about the people/programmes. Hedlund is likeably athletic and that is what he brings to the role – not much in the way of performance but he fills the lead well enough. Bridges seems to be channelling the Dude for a reason I cannot totally understand and, although he is cool and effective in his roles, it isn't really a performance per se. Sheen hams it up in his brief moments while House's Wilde makes an appealing female programme even if she has nothing in terms of substance to offer.
Overall it is an effects film and in this regard it works very well, getting the style right in an engaging and slick manner that is all style. The substance is not really there to match it but if I'm being honest I didn't really miss it; mainly this was due to the style and action making up enough of the time and engaging me enough to not worry too much about not caring about anyone in the film. A hollow film then in many regards but it will be good looking enough to win over viewers despite this empty core.
It is advisable to start with the world that has been created within this film because ultimately this is its main selling point. It looks great – faithful to the original creation but never feels dated by an old view of computing, it is a vibrant place and even some forced "places" (like a nightclub that makes it feel a little Cool World) don't hurt it beyond the bigger idea and feel. I saw it in 2D but the looming ships and bikes and such all worked well and looked great. The effects that produce a young Jeff Bridges are technically impressive and mostly they work well – it is only the very small movements of skin and face that don't convince but it is so good that, rather than "not working" it just looks like something is a little freaky with him. Although I'm not a massive Daft Punk fan, their soundtrack does work well and they fit the film well.
The film is mostly moved forward by this style and frequent action sequences; mostly this is enough and I did find it to be entertaining considering that I expected the 2 hour long film to drag once the novelty wore off after 15 minutes. The basic plot (get to the exit before the other guy does) is enough to provide room for action but not for characters. Occasionally we will get attempts at this and they kinda work just for that moment but not to make me care about the people/programmes. Hedlund is likeably athletic and that is what he brings to the role – not much in the way of performance but he fills the lead well enough. Bridges seems to be channelling the Dude for a reason I cannot totally understand and, although he is cool and effective in his roles, it isn't really a performance per se. Sheen hams it up in his brief moments while House's Wilde makes an appealing female programme even if she has nothing in terms of substance to offer.
Overall it is an effects film and in this regard it works very well, getting the style right in an engaging and slick manner that is all style. The substance is not really there to match it but if I'm being honest I didn't really miss it; mainly this was due to the style and action making up enough of the time and engaging me enough to not worry too much about not caring about anyone in the film. A hollow film then in many regards but it will be good looking enough to win over viewers despite this empty core.
Fails to capture that special something TRON had
fjhuerta-227 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I wouldn't call myself a TRON hardcore fan - I couldn't even crack a single message from their website during their "Flynn lives" viral campaign. Still, I know the movie perfectly well - I watched it on a movie theater when I was 8 years old, and I simply could never get out of my head the Recognizers and Lightcycles. I did master the Intellivision Tron Deadly Discs game, and the movie jump-started my love for all things computer related. I've watched the 20th Anniversary DVD and all the extras far more times than I can care to count. Guess I'm a TRON hardcore fan after all.
I had mixed feelings about this movie. On one hand, a sequel to TRON made all the sense in the world - the original movie correctly predicted plenty of concepts that we now take as granted (the importance of a network, transports, I/O ports, security, etc.), so a sequel could do something similar. The script could basically write itself; back then, writers had one very difficult time trying to convey the inner workings of a computer network to an audience that was not as computer saavy as today (I'd say they sort of failed - TRON's weakest part was its story). Also, Disney couldn't just hire everyone; they weren't the powerhouse they are now, so they had to do with a scrappy team of visionary but amateurish people. Now, with $300 million dollars at their disposal, any actor they could ever want, all the technology they could ever need, Pixar and their creative team, how could Disney make Tron a failure?
If you want an answer to this question, just go watch Tron: Legacy. It IS a failure.
Why? I believe that TRON, as näive and silly as it sometimes is, has its heart in the right place - it always strives to tell a story, and uses technology as both a backdrop and a principal character. It's not technology for its own sake, either - the Lightcycles, tanks, recognizers, and the complete universe of Tron really made you feel as if you were somewhere else. It was completely unlike anything you had ever seen before. The art depicted on the movie was so striking I think it'll be remembered for years to come just because of it. And, as I said before, it correctly guessed at the future of computing. I wouldn't hesitate to call it a landmark movie, even considering all of its problems.
Tron: Legacy is just another product Disney marketing decided to sell. It has no soul whatsoever. It's not innovative or inventive - most of the things you'll see come from other, more successful movies. Examples? The aerial pursuit near the end of the movie is lifted directly from Star Wars. The bar scene is a near perfect copy of the one on Matrix: Reloaded. The attack scenes are also lifted from the Matrix. Jeff Bridges is The Dude in a cybercostume. The rebel kid hacking computers seems like a copy of Terminator 2. At no time did I think to myself "this is something I had never seen in my life", as I did with Tron.
Furthermore, there's no story of any importance whatsoever behind all the CGI. The original TRON dealt with issues we face nowadays in any computer network (well, at least if you are a geek and work with computers). Tron Legacy doesn't even make any effort to predict the future, or to point out at any risks technology poses to people in the XXIst century. It's a completely disposable product, which is sort of enjoyable when you watch it, but can't bear to think about it afterwards. Because it really makes no sense and it doesn't make any important points.
I cannot believe Disney couldn't get someone - anyone - capable of writing a good script, hiring decent actors (Sam Flynn was TERRIBLE) and getting a director with at least a couple of good movies under his belt. The only reason why I give this movie a 7 is because, even though you've seen everything before, it does look great on the big screen. I especially liked CLU - I never noticed I was looking at CGI. Awesome technology.
I'm completely positive this sequel will go down in history as others, such as Blues Brothers 2000, the Star Wars prequels, and Matrix: Revolutions as one of the worst ever made. Sad. It had so much potential it's incredible they actually blew it.
I had mixed feelings about this movie. On one hand, a sequel to TRON made all the sense in the world - the original movie correctly predicted plenty of concepts that we now take as granted (the importance of a network, transports, I/O ports, security, etc.), so a sequel could do something similar. The script could basically write itself; back then, writers had one very difficult time trying to convey the inner workings of a computer network to an audience that was not as computer saavy as today (I'd say they sort of failed - TRON's weakest part was its story). Also, Disney couldn't just hire everyone; they weren't the powerhouse they are now, so they had to do with a scrappy team of visionary but amateurish people. Now, with $300 million dollars at their disposal, any actor they could ever want, all the technology they could ever need, Pixar and their creative team, how could Disney make Tron a failure?
If you want an answer to this question, just go watch Tron: Legacy. It IS a failure.
Why? I believe that TRON, as näive and silly as it sometimes is, has its heart in the right place - it always strives to tell a story, and uses technology as both a backdrop and a principal character. It's not technology for its own sake, either - the Lightcycles, tanks, recognizers, and the complete universe of Tron really made you feel as if you were somewhere else. It was completely unlike anything you had ever seen before. The art depicted on the movie was so striking I think it'll be remembered for years to come just because of it. And, as I said before, it correctly guessed at the future of computing. I wouldn't hesitate to call it a landmark movie, even considering all of its problems.
Tron: Legacy is just another product Disney marketing decided to sell. It has no soul whatsoever. It's not innovative or inventive - most of the things you'll see come from other, more successful movies. Examples? The aerial pursuit near the end of the movie is lifted directly from Star Wars. The bar scene is a near perfect copy of the one on Matrix: Reloaded. The attack scenes are also lifted from the Matrix. Jeff Bridges is The Dude in a cybercostume. The rebel kid hacking computers seems like a copy of Terminator 2. At no time did I think to myself "this is something I had never seen in my life", as I did with Tron.
Furthermore, there's no story of any importance whatsoever behind all the CGI. The original TRON dealt with issues we face nowadays in any computer network (well, at least if you are a geek and work with computers). Tron Legacy doesn't even make any effort to predict the future, or to point out at any risks technology poses to people in the XXIst century. It's a completely disposable product, which is sort of enjoyable when you watch it, but can't bear to think about it afterwards. Because it really makes no sense and it doesn't make any important points.
I cannot believe Disney couldn't get someone - anyone - capable of writing a good script, hiring decent actors (Sam Flynn was TERRIBLE) and getting a director with at least a couple of good movies under his belt. The only reason why I give this movie a 7 is because, even though you've seen everything before, it does look great on the big screen. I especially liked CLU - I never noticed I was looking at CGI. Awesome technology.
I'm completely positive this sequel will go down in history as others, such as Blues Brothers 2000, the Star Wars prequels, and Matrix: Revolutions as one of the worst ever made. Sad. It had so much potential it's incredible they actually blew it.
Tron what have you become?
EddyOne13 December 2010
Actually the headline of this review is an actual quote from TRON LEGACY, it's the only time I had to laugh in the movie, because it was exactly the same question I was asking myself.
After watching the movie I can at least answer this question: A heartless and confusing movie that lacks a good script and tries to compensate with state of the art special effects.
I can't complain about the visual effects. They're right on. But everything else isn't. And I'm not even a die hard Tron-Fan to begin with. It's not your usual "boohoo what have they done with one of my favorite movies" reviews. Although I expect Tron-Fans to be disappointed, as there is nothing of the old spirit left in this one.
No the movie seems like a commercial for the video game. You don't connect to the characters, you don't really understand or care about the story. It has in no way that oppressive feeling, that you felt with the original. Instead it's just a bunch of random action sequences following each other, lots of cgi and slow-motion (seriously, it's almost 2011, how many more slow-mo-projectile-evasion do we need? if scary movie made fun of it, don't do it in your movie and still expect it to be somewhat cool). there are like dozens of scenes that will remind you of other flicks, like "the fifth element", "matrix" or "star wars". but while copying styles and plots of other movies, TRON LEGACY fails to deliver something own, something unique. And that's basically the exact opposite of what TRON once was. Tron what have you become? Considering the costs of this movie you have to wonder: Tron what could you have become, if someone would have been able to pen a good script and give this flick it's missing soul?!
After watching the movie I can at least answer this question: A heartless and confusing movie that lacks a good script and tries to compensate with state of the art special effects.
I can't complain about the visual effects. They're right on. But everything else isn't. And I'm not even a die hard Tron-Fan to begin with. It's not your usual "boohoo what have they done with one of my favorite movies" reviews. Although I expect Tron-Fans to be disappointed, as there is nothing of the old spirit left in this one.
No the movie seems like a commercial for the video game. You don't connect to the characters, you don't really understand or care about the story. It has in no way that oppressive feeling, that you felt with the original. Instead it's just a bunch of random action sequences following each other, lots of cgi and slow-motion (seriously, it's almost 2011, how many more slow-mo-projectile-evasion do we need? if scary movie made fun of it, don't do it in your movie and still expect it to be somewhat cool). there are like dozens of scenes that will remind you of other flicks, like "the fifth element", "matrix" or "star wars". but while copying styles and plots of other movies, TRON LEGACY fails to deliver something own, something unique. And that's basically the exact opposite of what TRON once was. Tron what have you become? Considering the costs of this movie you have to wonder: Tron what could you have become, if someone would have been able to pen a good script and give this flick it's missing soul?!
I've been waiting 28 years for that....
DigitalWitch17 December 2010
And it was worth it.
I was 9 years old when I saw TRON in a dingy cinema in Fareham, I was hooked then, and I always dreamed they would make a sequel.
I was seriously worried though, I mean, Escape from New York was another of my favourite movies and I got all excited about the sequel to that... and left the cinema mortified...
Not this time.
This was like an old friend coming home.
There are a lot of comments about this movie having a poor story, personally, I disagree. It was a father and son story, any more on top of the other sub plots going on would have been too much.
It's a hell of an experience for the sences... when those Recognizers flew overhead the cinema shook... immersive, entertaining... everything a good movie should be.
Roll on Number 3.
I was 9 years old when I saw TRON in a dingy cinema in Fareham, I was hooked then, and I always dreamed they would make a sequel.
I was seriously worried though, I mean, Escape from New York was another of my favourite movies and I got all excited about the sequel to that... and left the cinema mortified...
Not this time.
This was like an old friend coming home.
There are a lot of comments about this movie having a poor story, personally, I disagree. It was a father and son story, any more on top of the other sub plots going on would have been too much.
It's a hell of an experience for the sences... when those Recognizers flew overhead the cinema shook... immersive, entertaining... everything a good movie should be.
Roll on Number 3.
Not the Legacy I was hoping to see
Malok18 December 2010
I was able to re-watch the original right before we left so it colored my perception heavily. Also, I wanted to love this movie very badly; it's a cherished childhood memory.
The movie had either too much, or too little depth. The original had very little depth but I thought it worked very well. I could have used more action and less exposition or just a better fleshed out story. This movie falls squarely in the middle. The character Sam fluctuates between bad-ass and inept seemingly at will. I wish we could have picked one and stuck with it throughout the film. Jeff Bridges seems very much like "The Dude" and nothing like K. Flynn. I had only a few moments where the character seemed to say something I would've expected Flynn to say. Was this the fault of the director, the script, Jeff Bridges or a combination? Personally, I very much disliked the character of Zeus; I thought he didn't fit the world in any way. The fate of Tron left a very bad taste in my mouth. Bruce was underused considering how integral to the original story he was. They should have departed from the original completely, or had more ties with the original. I felt as though the script needed a bit more work before they filmed it. Was this pushed out by Disney instead of taking enough time to polish it? I really liked a lot of the updates. The world looked good; the new suits and discs were great. The gaming area was great; I really liked the new lightcycles; I wanted to see more of them. I thought Olivia Wilde nailed her performance. Hers was the best performance in this reviewer's opinion. The vehicles were all spectacular, and I think the visuals are the redeeming factor for this movie overall. I can also appreciate what they were trying to do in terms of story. Another thing that I appreciated was that there was nothing "Matrix-y" about this film.
I felt very sad after leaving and I slept on it before writing a review to make sure my opinion wouldn't change. Maybe the new mini-series' like The Walking Dead are spoiling me as a viewer, but I wanted better character development. I felt as though the story could have been vastly improved with a little better editing and tweaking. I didn't hate it and I would recommend that you watch, but it's not the masterpiece I was hoping to see.
The movie had either too much, or too little depth. The original had very little depth but I thought it worked very well. I could have used more action and less exposition or just a better fleshed out story. This movie falls squarely in the middle. The character Sam fluctuates between bad-ass and inept seemingly at will. I wish we could have picked one and stuck with it throughout the film. Jeff Bridges seems very much like "The Dude" and nothing like K. Flynn. I had only a few moments where the character seemed to say something I would've expected Flynn to say. Was this the fault of the director, the script, Jeff Bridges or a combination? Personally, I very much disliked the character of Zeus; I thought he didn't fit the world in any way. The fate of Tron left a very bad taste in my mouth. Bruce was underused considering how integral to the original story he was. They should have departed from the original completely, or had more ties with the original. I felt as though the script needed a bit more work before they filmed it. Was this pushed out by Disney instead of taking enough time to polish it? I really liked a lot of the updates. The world looked good; the new suits and discs were great. The gaming area was great; I really liked the new lightcycles; I wanted to see more of them. I thought Olivia Wilde nailed her performance. Hers was the best performance in this reviewer's opinion. The vehicles were all spectacular, and I think the visuals are the redeeming factor for this movie overall. I can also appreciate what they were trying to do in terms of story. Another thing that I appreciated was that there was nothing "Matrix-y" about this film.
I felt very sad after leaving and I slept on it before writing a review to make sure my opinion wouldn't change. Maybe the new mini-series' like The Walking Dead are spoiling me as a viewer, but I wanted better character development. I felt as though the story could have been vastly improved with a little better editing and tweaking. I didn't hate it and I would recommend that you watch, but it's not the masterpiece I was hoping to see.
there is more to this then the visuals
dbborroughs9 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Late in the game sequel is probably one of the most under rated film of the year. Blame it on the over whelming spectacle which swamps the wonderfully layered story.
The plot of the film has Flynn (Jeff Bridges) long missing from the real world. His son is tricked into going back to father's arcade where he is sucked into The Grid. There he meets CLU, the program his father created to run the Grid who wants cross over into the real world.
A couple of things off the bat: First Daft Punk's score is probably the best of the year. Its an organic part of the film which is as vital as everything else. The film works as well as it does because of the music. Had it not been a worthy successor to Wendy Carlos' original score the film would have collapsed completely.
Secondly you have to get past the opening bit which, while good, is typical corporate nonsense. However once the film gets into the Grid it goes like gangbusters.
Actually the film is two films. Its the big spectacle with the disc fights, speeders and other sights from the first film. The visuals are amazing, actually to the point where they overwhelm the story. The film feels it has to have a disc fight and speeder chase and all of the required bits which effective stop the film while they play on the updated nostalgia card.
The second film is the one at the heart of the film. Its the film that deals with father son relationships, with the notions of god and the universe,what it means to be alive, the question of Zen in action vs Action and a few other things you'll have to find for yourself. Its a deeply philosophical film, especially when you consider the state of most Hollywood spectacles.
Frankly I love the film a great deal.
However I have to admit that I saw the film on a small screen, the smallest screen possible in my area, with out IMAX or 3D. With out the scope of the truly big screen I was forced to focus on the story and I think I was better for it.
WHile not quite one of the best films of the year, it is one of the more special ones, especially if you can look past the visuals
The plot of the film has Flynn (Jeff Bridges) long missing from the real world. His son is tricked into going back to father's arcade where he is sucked into The Grid. There he meets CLU, the program his father created to run the Grid who wants cross over into the real world.
A couple of things off the bat: First Daft Punk's score is probably the best of the year. Its an organic part of the film which is as vital as everything else. The film works as well as it does because of the music. Had it not been a worthy successor to Wendy Carlos' original score the film would have collapsed completely.
Secondly you have to get past the opening bit which, while good, is typical corporate nonsense. However once the film gets into the Grid it goes like gangbusters.
Actually the film is two films. Its the big spectacle with the disc fights, speeders and other sights from the first film. The visuals are amazing, actually to the point where they overwhelm the story. The film feels it has to have a disc fight and speeder chase and all of the required bits which effective stop the film while they play on the updated nostalgia card.
The second film is the one at the heart of the film. Its the film that deals with father son relationships, with the notions of god and the universe,what it means to be alive, the question of Zen in action vs Action and a few other things you'll have to find for yourself. Its a deeply philosophical film, especially when you consider the state of most Hollywood spectacles.
Frankly I love the film a great deal.
However I have to admit that I saw the film on a small screen, the smallest screen possible in my area, with out IMAX or 3D. With out the scope of the truly big screen I was forced to focus on the story and I think I was better for it.
WHile not quite one of the best films of the year, it is one of the more special ones, especially if you can look past the visuals
Visually Stuning
tiagojbastos14 January 2011
I'm not going to explain much about this movie story/premise, because I assume most viewers were fans of the original Tron.
When I first heard about this movie, I couldn't be more excited: an old movie with brand new technology? Even if the story turned out bad, it was a new Tron, and that alone made it perfect.
I watched the movie last night, in 3D, and it was a very pleasant experience for the most part, but don't think this is a great movie, because it's not.
Flynn (Jeff Bridges) is back, and in two shapes. An older Flynn, and a computer generated younger Flynn. The computer model looks good (for the most part), and it was necessary, otherwise we would have ended up with an old man with a ton of make-up on it's face, just to shave off a couple of years.
The movie starts with Flynn disappearing, and his son entering the Grid world in search of him. It's textbook script, but then again, what could we expect from Tron? It was never about the story, and this movie proves it. The plot is weak, and weakened by poor/unnecessary dialog and very shallow characters.
Luckily, none of that matters once the Grid world is shown to us. Visually it's great, and the action scenes are fun and fast-paced. I even dare saying it's the best 3D movie I saw so far, which also poses a problem: this movie looks great and feels great only in 3D, and in the theaters. I can't imagine myself in a few months buying the movie to watch in my sofa.
Another problem with the movie is that half-way through, it becomes repetitive. Maybe if they kept the action flowing, with little dialog, this movie would have been better, but trying to add depth to such a poor script ends up boring the audience.
The bottom-line is: Tron Legacy if fan-service. It a re-rendered universe with very little story, but very good looking.
7/10 if you watch it in the theaters, in 3D 4/10 anywhere else
When I first heard about this movie, I couldn't be more excited: an old movie with brand new technology? Even if the story turned out bad, it was a new Tron, and that alone made it perfect.
I watched the movie last night, in 3D, and it was a very pleasant experience for the most part, but don't think this is a great movie, because it's not.
Flynn (Jeff Bridges) is back, and in two shapes. An older Flynn, and a computer generated younger Flynn. The computer model looks good (for the most part), and it was necessary, otherwise we would have ended up with an old man with a ton of make-up on it's face, just to shave off a couple of years.
The movie starts with Flynn disappearing, and his son entering the Grid world in search of him. It's textbook script, but then again, what could we expect from Tron? It was never about the story, and this movie proves it. The plot is weak, and weakened by poor/unnecessary dialog and very shallow characters.
Luckily, none of that matters once the Grid world is shown to us. Visually it's great, and the action scenes are fun and fast-paced. I even dare saying it's the best 3D movie I saw so far, which also poses a problem: this movie looks great and feels great only in 3D, and in the theaters. I can't imagine myself in a few months buying the movie to watch in my sofa.
Another problem with the movie is that half-way through, it becomes repetitive. Maybe if they kept the action flowing, with little dialog, this movie would have been better, but trying to add depth to such a poor script ends up boring the audience.
The bottom-line is: Tron Legacy if fan-service. It a re-rendered universe with very little story, but very good looking.
7/10 if you watch it in the theaters, in 3D 4/10 anywhere else
enjoyably stupid
johannes-9422 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Tron is on it's way to become the most over-rated movie of 2010. It's a candy-wrapped insult to intelligence, as well as to the original.
First, the visual effects. Although they look stunning in their all-black-and-neon style, there's not much original about them. It's chases and fights like we've seen a zillion times before. The worst thing is that most original idea from the original Tron is dropped. In the 1982 version, the light bikes were making sharp 90º turns without losing any of their phenomenal speed, really like electrons moving over the grid of a computer chip. It gave them an unpredictable and dangerous feel, and the impression of an eerie universe where normal laws of physics don't apply. In the new Tron, however, everything looks much more realistic. The bikes ride like normal bikes, planes fly like normal planes, and people die like normal people. Except for the fact that they disintegrate into little square pieces... Whoo, surprise! What is supposed to be a world of competing digital programs, is just a dark street with people walking around in funny dresses and plastic umbrellas. Yes, it even rains, and there's bums with (how modern!) plastic bottles. The good guys are white, the bad guys are red. Except for that eccentric (read; gay) disco owner who turns out to be a traitor... No, I can't say I've been visually surprised once.
Then the story. It's the kind of script that does away with reason. Facts are stated in sentences like "My disk is the key!" or "The portal is only open for 8 hours!" or "It will change the world! Science, quantum mechanics, religion, everything!" without explanation. The most ridiculous are the "ISO's", some tribe of digital people who 'just appeared out of nowhere', whose last surviving chick becomes of major importance because daddy says she must -at all costs- become human. All for no apparent reason, other then filling a void script. But our adolescent hero doesn't need reasons or explanations, because all solutions to his problems are handed to him on a silver platter anyhow. When the going gets rough, there's always a car or a train or some pretty girl appearing out of nowhere to take him exactly where he has to go. All he has to do is comply. It's no adventure, it's plain boring.
But sometimes it looks nice. And the abundance of little stupidities in this film, like the paper pig they're having for digital dinner, make it funny. So I guess you could say it provides an enjoyable evening!
First, the visual effects. Although they look stunning in their all-black-and-neon style, there's not much original about them. It's chases and fights like we've seen a zillion times before. The worst thing is that most original idea from the original Tron is dropped. In the 1982 version, the light bikes were making sharp 90º turns without losing any of their phenomenal speed, really like electrons moving over the grid of a computer chip. It gave them an unpredictable and dangerous feel, and the impression of an eerie universe where normal laws of physics don't apply. In the new Tron, however, everything looks much more realistic. The bikes ride like normal bikes, planes fly like normal planes, and people die like normal people. Except for the fact that they disintegrate into little square pieces... Whoo, surprise! What is supposed to be a world of competing digital programs, is just a dark street with people walking around in funny dresses and plastic umbrellas. Yes, it even rains, and there's bums with (how modern!) plastic bottles. The good guys are white, the bad guys are red. Except for that eccentric (read; gay) disco owner who turns out to be a traitor... No, I can't say I've been visually surprised once.
Then the story. It's the kind of script that does away with reason. Facts are stated in sentences like "My disk is the key!" or "The portal is only open for 8 hours!" or "It will change the world! Science, quantum mechanics, religion, everything!" without explanation. The most ridiculous are the "ISO's", some tribe of digital people who 'just appeared out of nowhere', whose last surviving chick becomes of major importance because daddy says she must -at all costs- become human. All for no apparent reason, other then filling a void script. But our adolescent hero doesn't need reasons or explanations, because all solutions to his problems are handed to him on a silver platter anyhow. When the going gets rough, there's always a car or a train or some pretty girl appearing out of nowhere to take him exactly where he has to go. All he has to do is comply. It's no adventure, it's plain boring.
But sometimes it looks nice. And the abundance of little stupidities in this film, like the paper pig they're having for digital dinner, make it funny. So I guess you could say it provides an enjoyable evening!
Late sequel with rousing images and fantastic computer generator scenarios
ma-cortes5 September 2011
This belated follow-up deals with Sam Flynn ( a brave young man well played by Garrett Hedlund ) , a rebellious 27-year-old , is haunted by the mysterious disappearance of his father , a computer genius named Kevin Flynn ( the old creator whiz who was flapped inside a computer game , being stunningly performed by veteran Jeff Bridges ) , a man once known as the world's leading video-game developer . When Sam investigates a strange signal sent from the old Flynn's Arcade -- a signal that could only come from his father-- he finds himself pulled into a digital world where Kevin has been trapped for 20 years . During his investigation Sam is zapped into another dimension and finds himself a player in a giant gladiatorial video-game competition . As he is sucked inside a powerful computer where he must fight for his life but with the help of the fearless warrior Quorra ( a gorgeous Olivia Wilde ), father and son embark on a life-or-death journey across a cyber universe -- a universe created by Kevin himself that has become far more advanced with vehicles, weapons, landscapes and a ruthless villain ( a computer generated Jeff Bridges who with his charisma keeps afloat the film ) who will stop at nothing to prevent their escape.
It's an agreeable , if somewhat light-headed piece of escapism with state-of-art special effects . Big-budgeted film led to break into the booming Sci-Fi/adventure/fantasy market full of inventiveness and imagination . This exciting movie is full of thrills , action-packed , fights , tension, suspense and overwhelming races , but also several commercial elements , including computer-simulated violence . This is a dynamic, fast-paced and amusing movie . Full of action, it's complemented by spectacular scenes , breathtaking flights and duels with illuminated disks . Stunning action though the story runs out of steam too soon , however the thrilling ending arises the film . The flick relies heavily on the overlong and death-defying races that are incredible and magnificently made by 3D computer generator . The tale moves like a supersonic bullet for most of its running time and the last generation of fantastic computer generator effects steal the show . Contrived beyond belief with spectacular motorcycle races that play like video games , but slickly calculated to please 2010 audiences and children especially . Garrett Hedlund is good as valiant racer , he's an instinctive , stubborn and valiant young man . Olivia Wilde is beautiful as computer-generated young . Michael Sheen stands out as ceremony master in a similar acting to Joel Grey-Cabaret . Colorful cinematography plenty of neon and glittering color by Claudio Miranda . Impressive and groundbreaking production design by Darren Gilford . Stirring and moving musical score by Punk , though composed by means of synthesizer . The motion picture is well directed by Joseph Kosinski . This is a superior sequel , much better that original ¨Tron¨ by Steven Lisberger , now as producer,that proved to be a precursor for the modern cinema and also with the same actors as Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner , though doesn't appears David Warner , the former baddie as corporate executive realizing evil-doings , here replaced by Michael Sheen and Jeff Bridges in double role as good and bad guy . Rating : 6,5 . Good , well worth watching , the movie boasts some impressive C.G. animation , reaching a high level of entertainment and excitement commensurate with its effect budget .
It's an agreeable , if somewhat light-headed piece of escapism with state-of-art special effects . Big-budgeted film led to break into the booming Sci-Fi/adventure/fantasy market full of inventiveness and imagination . This exciting movie is full of thrills , action-packed , fights , tension, suspense and overwhelming races , but also several commercial elements , including computer-simulated violence . This is a dynamic, fast-paced and amusing movie . Full of action, it's complemented by spectacular scenes , breathtaking flights and duels with illuminated disks . Stunning action though the story runs out of steam too soon , however the thrilling ending arises the film . The flick relies heavily on the overlong and death-defying races that are incredible and magnificently made by 3D computer generator . The tale moves like a supersonic bullet for most of its running time and the last generation of fantastic computer generator effects steal the show . Contrived beyond belief with spectacular motorcycle races that play like video games , but slickly calculated to please 2010 audiences and children especially . Garrett Hedlund is good as valiant racer , he's an instinctive , stubborn and valiant young man . Olivia Wilde is beautiful as computer-generated young . Michael Sheen stands out as ceremony master in a similar acting to Joel Grey-Cabaret . Colorful cinematography plenty of neon and glittering color by Claudio Miranda . Impressive and groundbreaking production design by Darren Gilford . Stirring and moving musical score by Punk , though composed by means of synthesizer . The motion picture is well directed by Joseph Kosinski . This is a superior sequel , much better that original ¨Tron¨ by Steven Lisberger , now as producer,that proved to be a precursor for the modern cinema and also with the same actors as Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner , though doesn't appears David Warner , the former baddie as corporate executive realizing evil-doings , here replaced by Michael Sheen and Jeff Bridges in double role as good and bad guy . Rating : 6,5 . Good , well worth watching , the movie boasts some impressive C.G. animation , reaching a high level of entertainment and excitement commensurate with its effect budget .
very VERY disappointed Tron fan...
fredwerner28 December 2010
In the 28 years since the original Tron movie, there have been, oh, a few innovations in the world of computers, networks, electronics, and communications. But somehow, the makers of this sequel seem to have missed inventions such as "The World Wide Web". They passed on a tremendous opportunity to make "Tron Legacy" as innovative and powerful as the original. Instead, they've merely sullied our memories by reducing what was a tremendous and ominous world into the digital equivalent of Smalltown, USA.
In 1982, few people had computers, far fewer had even heard of computer networks, and hardly anyone outside the military had heard of "the internet." The creators of the original movie crafted an entire alternate plane of existence, accessible only to computer programmers, in a time when the words "virtual" and "reality" both still meant "true." Their inspired fantasy gave audiences an entirely new perspective on the nascent digital age.
The original's bold, limitless universe, is limited in the sequel to "The Grid", a small city from which good guys escape from effortlessly, and from which bad guys seem to have no trouble leaving, though you're given the impression it never occurred to them to look beyond the borders of their extremely small town before. And the entire world is wholly disconnected from any computer system used by anyone on Earth. The only link to reality is the exact same machine hidden in a forgotten room. It's as if the film-makers hoped we'd forget that now, 30 years later, almost EVERYONE is on a computer network in one way or another.
The original Tron also created real tension by crafting a plot where what happened inside the system mattered. Even before the original Jeff Bridges character was sucked into the digital netherworld, the audience had a palpable sense of the impending doom to all humanity posed by the growing strength of the computer network. In this sequel, the "real-world" angle is a lame-duck corporation's unapologetically pathetic efforts at keeping market share. Even that side story introduced in the beginning, isn't given any relevance to anything that happens in the rest of the movie. The larger threat of a digital character emerging from "The Grid" into the real world is repeated throughout the film, but never in a credible way. Why should we be scared about him getting out? What would he do here? How would a computer program have any power outside a computer system?
There were endless ways the filmmakers could have used today's globally integrated technologies and on-line mania to make Tron Legacy as relevant as the original. The bad guys could have tried to empower Wii systems to control people instead of the other way around, or to animate an army of Second Life avatars, or to rewrite all of Wikipedia to brainwash every student in America, or to take control of every electronic device on Earth (think Y2K).
Tron Legacy has dazzling visual graphics, but it falls into that disappointing category of films that match astronomically high priced production values with cut-rate B-movie plots, acting, and character development. Saddest of all is that no one bothered to spend a dime of those hundreds of millions of dollars to follow the true legacy of Tron: to inspire us with the possibilities of where the next digital universe might take us.
In 1982, few people had computers, far fewer had even heard of computer networks, and hardly anyone outside the military had heard of "the internet." The creators of the original movie crafted an entire alternate plane of existence, accessible only to computer programmers, in a time when the words "virtual" and "reality" both still meant "true." Their inspired fantasy gave audiences an entirely new perspective on the nascent digital age.
The original's bold, limitless universe, is limited in the sequel to "The Grid", a small city from which good guys escape from effortlessly, and from which bad guys seem to have no trouble leaving, though you're given the impression it never occurred to them to look beyond the borders of their extremely small town before. And the entire world is wholly disconnected from any computer system used by anyone on Earth. The only link to reality is the exact same machine hidden in a forgotten room. It's as if the film-makers hoped we'd forget that now, 30 years later, almost EVERYONE is on a computer network in one way or another.
The original Tron also created real tension by crafting a plot where what happened inside the system mattered. Even before the original Jeff Bridges character was sucked into the digital netherworld, the audience had a palpable sense of the impending doom to all humanity posed by the growing strength of the computer network. In this sequel, the "real-world" angle is a lame-duck corporation's unapologetically pathetic efforts at keeping market share. Even that side story introduced in the beginning, isn't given any relevance to anything that happens in the rest of the movie. The larger threat of a digital character emerging from "The Grid" into the real world is repeated throughout the film, but never in a credible way. Why should we be scared about him getting out? What would he do here? How would a computer program have any power outside a computer system?
There were endless ways the filmmakers could have used today's globally integrated technologies and on-line mania to make Tron Legacy as relevant as the original. The bad guys could have tried to empower Wii systems to control people instead of the other way around, or to animate an army of Second Life avatars, or to rewrite all of Wikipedia to brainwash every student in America, or to take control of every electronic device on Earth (think Y2K).
Tron Legacy has dazzling visual graphics, but it falls into that disappointing category of films that match astronomically high priced production values with cut-rate B-movie plots, acting, and character development. Saddest of all is that no one bothered to spend a dime of those hundreds of millions of dollars to follow the true legacy of Tron: to inspire us with the possibilities of where the next digital universe might take us.
I'd rather watch paint dry than watch this turkey again.
stopcallingmeshirley6 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Wowsers. I picked this up on my VOD service. What a disappointment.
I'm a fan of the original Tron. I loved it when I was a kid and I actually made a point of watching it again about a year ago. The original was certainly not as good as I'd thought when I was a stinky little schoolyard kid, but as an adult I could never say that it wasn't inventive in both story and presentation.
Tron: Legacy is neither. It's horribly clichéd and boring, and tarnishes the, ahem, legacy, of the original. I can't even recommend this for sarcastic laughter viewing, as it takes itself way too seriously and goes on for far too long (over 2 hours).
Much of the cliché has already been covered in other reviews. I'll illuminate other plot elements which I found distracting.
The movie begins with some sort of stock scheme being pursued by Dillinger's son (Dillinger was the 'bad guy' in the original), who is somehow involved at an executive-level with Flynn's software company. Why?? How?? This makes no sense.
During the 'Dillinger scheming meeting', Flynn's son breaks into his dad's software company...or at least I think it's the elder Flynn's company. My confusion comes from the fact that, as the son of Flynn, couldn't Junior just walk in? Come to think of it, I think Junior was on the board of directors or something too. Are you confused? Welcome to Tron: Legacy! After breaking in to a building that he presumably could have entered through the front door, Flynn Jr steals a piece of software and ends up base-jumping off the roof to make his getaway on a Ducati motorcycle. He makes his big getaway by jumping down, on the bike, from a freeway overpass and onto the street below. I must have missed something...since when did they start making concrete freeway guard rails angled?
How do I know it was a Ducati, you ask? Because it was product-placed and mentioned late in the film by name. Thanks Disney!
A phone page sent to Flynn Sr's buddy Allen results in Junior going to his dad's old arcade and finding a secret room hidden behind a machine. He then enters a few commands on a computer whose software-language should be completely foreign to him, and zaps himself with the old man's laser to enter 'the grid'. Did he do this on purpose, or was it an accident?
The 'grid' has apparently become a sort of working city, full of leisure. I don't know how or why, I assumed all of the inhabitants would be working since they are programs written with a specific purpose. Is their purpose to waste time?
What I do know is that there is an 'off-grid' portion where Flynn Sr lives. Off-grid is a scary-looking wasteland with ominous rocky terrain and thunderclouds above. I think there was wind too. Why? How? Isn't the 'grid' supposed to be representative of an electronic circuit and/or software code? How can there be an 'off-grid' area?
It just goes on and on like this. Jr meets evil Flynn, who I thought was actually good Flynn at first until Jr and Sr reunite off-grid. At his off-grid château, Sr gives us a talk about him replicating himself, having that plan somehow turn bad, and getting stuck inside the grid. I believe he's wearing linen while he gives us this talk. How does he eat in the grid? Who's cutting the guy's hair and where'd he buy the threads?
There's a chick with cropped hair hanging out with Sr. Now she's hanging out with Jr and Sr both. She turns out to be the last surviving member of a race that spontaneously arose inside 'the grid'. All others of her ilk were killed off by evil Flynn. Why?? How??
Flynn Sr tells us that the magic exit to the outside world will evaporate in only a few hours. I don't know why, but that's what he said. So now the threesome is hell bent on getting to the magic exit. They fly some sort of spaceship, linearly, to the gate. Why? They're flying, can't they come up with a better plan then just flying straight into the heart of bad-guy-ville? And how is the spaceship flying? Is it aerodynamic, using the air for lift? How does it propel itself? Why don't they just fly at a higher altitude and avoid bad-guy-ville altogether?
They wind up in bad-guy-ville and Flynn Sr's disk weapon / identifier is stolen. I think this prevents Sr from leaving, but I don't know why. There's an spaceship dogfight which occurs, and out of the blue an incognito Tron appears...then dies in some weird martyrdom action. I honestly didn't know this helmeted, latex-ed character was Tron until reading these reviews. I think he was present earlier in the movie too, but I wouldn't know for sure because as I said, he was wearing a helmet and bodysuit like everyone else. How's this: If Tron was there throughout the movie, then I was too. I was the one wearing the helmet and bodysuit. My presence would make about as much sense as anything else happening in this elaborate waste of time.
I forgot to add: Sr has some sort of superpowers. How?? Why?? He used these a couple times, including at the end to prevent evil Flynn from escaping into the outside world. And what would evil Flynn do if he made it to the outside world? Bore me to death? If this is the 'new normal' of Hollywood filmmaking, then I'm never watching another current movie again. It's insulting and a waste of time. Whoever green-lighted this should be ashamed of themselves. How do you look at yourself in the mirror every day, knowing you're responsible for creating this travesty? WHY WAS IT ALLOWED TO LIVE!!??
I'm a fan of the original Tron. I loved it when I was a kid and I actually made a point of watching it again about a year ago. The original was certainly not as good as I'd thought when I was a stinky little schoolyard kid, but as an adult I could never say that it wasn't inventive in both story and presentation.
Tron: Legacy is neither. It's horribly clichéd and boring, and tarnishes the, ahem, legacy, of the original. I can't even recommend this for sarcastic laughter viewing, as it takes itself way too seriously and goes on for far too long (over 2 hours).
Much of the cliché has already been covered in other reviews. I'll illuminate other plot elements which I found distracting.
The movie begins with some sort of stock scheme being pursued by Dillinger's son (Dillinger was the 'bad guy' in the original), who is somehow involved at an executive-level with Flynn's software company. Why?? How?? This makes no sense.
During the 'Dillinger scheming meeting', Flynn's son breaks into his dad's software company...or at least I think it's the elder Flynn's company. My confusion comes from the fact that, as the son of Flynn, couldn't Junior just walk in? Come to think of it, I think Junior was on the board of directors or something too. Are you confused? Welcome to Tron: Legacy! After breaking in to a building that he presumably could have entered through the front door, Flynn Jr steals a piece of software and ends up base-jumping off the roof to make his getaway on a Ducati motorcycle. He makes his big getaway by jumping down, on the bike, from a freeway overpass and onto the street below. I must have missed something...since when did they start making concrete freeway guard rails angled?
How do I know it was a Ducati, you ask? Because it was product-placed and mentioned late in the film by name. Thanks Disney!
A phone page sent to Flynn Sr's buddy Allen results in Junior going to his dad's old arcade and finding a secret room hidden behind a machine. He then enters a few commands on a computer whose software-language should be completely foreign to him, and zaps himself with the old man's laser to enter 'the grid'. Did he do this on purpose, or was it an accident?
The 'grid' has apparently become a sort of working city, full of leisure. I don't know how or why, I assumed all of the inhabitants would be working since they are programs written with a specific purpose. Is their purpose to waste time?
What I do know is that there is an 'off-grid' portion where Flynn Sr lives. Off-grid is a scary-looking wasteland with ominous rocky terrain and thunderclouds above. I think there was wind too. Why? How? Isn't the 'grid' supposed to be representative of an electronic circuit and/or software code? How can there be an 'off-grid' area?
It just goes on and on like this. Jr meets evil Flynn, who I thought was actually good Flynn at first until Jr and Sr reunite off-grid. At his off-grid château, Sr gives us a talk about him replicating himself, having that plan somehow turn bad, and getting stuck inside the grid. I believe he's wearing linen while he gives us this talk. How does he eat in the grid? Who's cutting the guy's hair and where'd he buy the threads?
There's a chick with cropped hair hanging out with Sr. Now she's hanging out with Jr and Sr both. She turns out to be the last surviving member of a race that spontaneously arose inside 'the grid'. All others of her ilk were killed off by evil Flynn. Why?? How??
Flynn Sr tells us that the magic exit to the outside world will evaporate in only a few hours. I don't know why, but that's what he said. So now the threesome is hell bent on getting to the magic exit. They fly some sort of spaceship, linearly, to the gate. Why? They're flying, can't they come up with a better plan then just flying straight into the heart of bad-guy-ville? And how is the spaceship flying? Is it aerodynamic, using the air for lift? How does it propel itself? Why don't they just fly at a higher altitude and avoid bad-guy-ville altogether?
They wind up in bad-guy-ville and Flynn Sr's disk weapon / identifier is stolen. I think this prevents Sr from leaving, but I don't know why. There's an spaceship dogfight which occurs, and out of the blue an incognito Tron appears...then dies in some weird martyrdom action. I honestly didn't know this helmeted, latex-ed character was Tron until reading these reviews. I think he was present earlier in the movie too, but I wouldn't know for sure because as I said, he was wearing a helmet and bodysuit like everyone else. How's this: If Tron was there throughout the movie, then I was too. I was the one wearing the helmet and bodysuit. My presence would make about as much sense as anything else happening in this elaborate waste of time.
I forgot to add: Sr has some sort of superpowers. How?? Why?? He used these a couple times, including at the end to prevent evil Flynn from escaping into the outside world. And what would evil Flynn do if he made it to the outside world? Bore me to death? If this is the 'new normal' of Hollywood filmmaking, then I'm never watching another current movie again. It's insulting and a waste of time. Whoever green-lighted this should be ashamed of themselves. How do you look at yourself in the mirror every day, knowing you're responsible for creating this travesty? WHY WAS IT ALLOWED TO LIVE!!??
Powerful, moving, beautiful, disconcerting... flawed but worthwhile!
david-282923 February 2011
Powerful sounds & special effects, a dystopian computer world and a classic human vs. machine battle for survival. What's not to like!? Well, unfortunately enough that it's not an instant classic, but still a terrific addition to sci-fi cinema! What is so cool about the movie is the upgraded but still retro feeling of the Tron world. The detail is striking and pulls us in and keeps us in a strange land. It is a rather bleak world (why didn't they program in some sunlight?)... so we're thankful for the welcome bits of levity and "human-ness" found in the father-son connections. Quorra also provides smiles and such wonderful soulful eyes we can almost sense things will be okay from her gaze alone.
As unbelievable as it might be for Flynn Jr. (Sam) to survive the light disc battles and the light cycles, etc. it does make wonderful visual popcorn. In fact, I think the light cycles with the new multi-layered tracks is one of the best scenes of the entire movie! Other cool stuff is sprinkled all throughout the movie, from the huge claw-shaped ships, to battle arenas with breakable floor tiles to the streamlined flying ships at the end There are a number of things that knock at the edges of this world allowing reality to creep in. First we have the completely CGI Clu, who although impressive for a computer-generated human still gives off that strange vibe of not being "real". When surrounded by real human actors the effect bothers a little.
Second, it is rather unbelievable for a human (even as physically fit as Sam Flynn) to survive highly trained computer programs with lightning fast reflexes. This action-movie convention has always bothered me... and is worsened by the hyper-speed and quick cuts used in this film.
Third, the story is somewhat confusing and requires a lot of exposition by Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges). I like his Matrix-ish powers, but if he has special abilities like that it should've been no problem for him to escape a long time ago. Overall there are just a lot of plot holes, and the motivation behind Clu and his minions is not well explained. For example, why would Clu need to invade our world instead of just visit it? The programs seem happy, so why take them somewhere else? Seems like there's always SOME megolomaniac building an army! In any case, fans of the 1982 original will find some inside jokes and have that nostalgia factor, but the movie is fresh enough that it should create many new Tron fans as well. I imagine the first Tron movie will see renewed interest... I know I wanted to see it again as soon as the credits rolled on Tron: Legacy.
But I have to ask... after all our heroes go through, they drive off on a motorcycle without helmets! C'mon, that's just asking for a spoof ending...
As unbelievable as it might be for Flynn Jr. (Sam) to survive the light disc battles and the light cycles, etc. it does make wonderful visual popcorn. In fact, I think the light cycles with the new multi-layered tracks is one of the best scenes of the entire movie! Other cool stuff is sprinkled all throughout the movie, from the huge claw-shaped ships, to battle arenas with breakable floor tiles to the streamlined flying ships at the end There are a number of things that knock at the edges of this world allowing reality to creep in. First we have the completely CGI Clu, who although impressive for a computer-generated human still gives off that strange vibe of not being "real". When surrounded by real human actors the effect bothers a little.
Second, it is rather unbelievable for a human (even as physically fit as Sam Flynn) to survive highly trained computer programs with lightning fast reflexes. This action-movie convention has always bothered me... and is worsened by the hyper-speed and quick cuts used in this film.
Third, the story is somewhat confusing and requires a lot of exposition by Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges). I like his Matrix-ish powers, but if he has special abilities like that it should've been no problem for him to escape a long time ago. Overall there are just a lot of plot holes, and the motivation behind Clu and his minions is not well explained. For example, why would Clu need to invade our world instead of just visit it? The programs seem happy, so why take them somewhere else? Seems like there's always SOME megolomaniac building an army! In any case, fans of the 1982 original will find some inside jokes and have that nostalgia factor, but the movie is fresh enough that it should create many new Tron fans as well. I imagine the first Tron movie will see renewed interest... I know I wanted to see it again as soon as the credits rolled on Tron: Legacy.
But I have to ask... after all our heroes go through, they drive off on a motorcycle without helmets! C'mon, that's just asking for a spoof ending...
What the F@#$% Just happened?
CPSUDwight25 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I still don't know what to think... It had Nerd-gasms (the graphics and "game" scenes where beautiful and intense), the end was TOTAL Guy-gasm (I get the girl my bike my millions and now i'm ready to be a man and run the company daddy left for me)... They tried to plant tag-lines (I'm not a program. I'm a User.)... It went from incredibly complex to absurdly corny... It was so disjunct I felt beat up from stuff flying from different directions... I swear at one point I could tell where it changed writers and felt like I was in a different film... It tried to be all things to all genres of men and failed at most... Despite that review I think people SHOULD see it and tell me what you think.... ON DVD!!! (Rented of course)
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
