So Tron Legacy Sucks right?

[Guest disparaissant]

holy hell, that's really convincing. really just does look like jeff bridges with some makeup.

[awepittance]

All this talk of a remake? The original was a total pile of shit, absolutely unwatchable unless you're being pathetically nostalgic, in which case it's still a horrible movie.

Cram it down your piehole, back when the original was made kids had this thing called "imagination", and despite the Disney-ripe cheese factor it did speak to people's conceptions/misconceptions of rapidly evolving computer technology at the time.

That hardly refutes the fact that it was a shit movie, even in 1982. Besides, your argument is pretty weak to begin with. I was 7 years old at the time of Tron's release and it was boring as fuck. Blade Runner was released the same year for crying out loud, so even if you weren't allowed to see it because it was rated R, I doubt most kids gave a flying fuck about the "conceptions/misconceptions of rapidly evolving computer technology at the time." If you were an adult, you went to see Blade Runner. So what were the kids left with? A strangely homoerotic, dull, and insufferably long Disney turd.

 

'if you were an adult you went to see bladerunner', I sometimes agree with you Overlook, but this is perhaps the most utterly retarded thing you've actually typed on this forum.

 

I don't really like bladerunner that much, it's ok.

[soundwave]

i don't know why people go to watch films they know they aren't going to like

 

I'm not going to see this film for oscar quality script, character depth or original plot and surprise-surprise I knew this even before I bought the ticket

[Braintree]

i don't know why people go to watch films they know they aren't going to like

 

They don't. They skip the movie and move right along to the review.

 

That aside, I saw it last night and I really enjoyed it. I really liked the symmetry in a lot of the shots and the sets looked great. Personally, I found it very visually pleasing, which was what the first movie mainly did. You shouldn't be watching Tron for the story. It's a kid's movie for christ's sake. Be careful not to fall into any of the plot holes.

 

Legacy isn't quite as campy as the original [which I enjoyed], and I know it's aggravating to see 'more adult' remakes where everyone is dressed in black leather, but I think this sequel really holds its own. My only complaint was that it was too damn long.

 

 

And did we really need like 3 fake-out conclusions?

 

 

Also, I thought the CG Jeff Bridges was pretty convincing at parts.

[BobDobalina]

All this talk of a remake? The original was a total pile of shit, absolutely unwatchable unless you're being pathetically nostalgic, in which case it's still a horrible movie.

Cram it down your piehole, back when the original was made kids had this thing called "imagination", and despite the Disney-ripe cheese factor it did speak to people's conceptions/misconceptions of rapidly evolving computer technology at the time.

That hardly refutes the fact that it was a shit movie, even in 1982. Besides, your argument is pretty weak to begin with. I was 7 years old at the time of Tron's release and it was boring as fuck. Blade Runner was released the same year for crying out loud, so even if you weren't allowed to see it because it was rated R, I doubt most kids gave a flying fuck about the "conceptions/misconceptions of rapidly evolving computer technology at the time." If you were an adult, you went to see Blade Runner. So what were the kids left with? A strangely homoerotic, dull, and insufferably long Disney turd.

No idea what sort of childhood you had but when I was a kid computers and video games were new and cool as were light cycles and light discs. Of people from this generation I think you find yourself in the minority son.

[Mellow U]

Agreeing with Braintree^

[Guest Richy]

It's good! Definitely go and see it. The plot is pretty simple but there's no over sentimental shite and it does look AMAZING. First 3D movie and not convinced it really makes them movie anything extra special. I'd have enjoyed it the same in 2D.

 

Better than Avatar, if you enjoyed the Original Tron you'll like it.

[Guest Mirezzi]

 

'if you were an adult you went to see bladerunner', I sometimes agree with you Overlook, but this is perhaps the most utterly retarded thing you've actually typed on this forum.

 

I don't really like bladerunner that much, it's ok.

I think you misunderstood my post, dumbass. If you were an adult in 1982 and you were struggling with "conceptions/misconceptions" about computers and technology, or you wanted to see a film that explores such themes, you'd be completely fucking retarded to see Disney's TRON to work shit out. I'm not a Blade Runner fanboy and Blade Runner was hardly my point.

 

The only thing I wanted to say is that Tron was fucking terrible in 1982 and it's terrible now.

[Guest analogue wings]

So half of GB has asbergers right?

 

I bet these people like the new Tron because the number of seconds in the running time is divisible by a prime or because the logo on their beverage cup looked like a boss in Mega Man 26 or something.

[awepittance]

 

'if you were an adult you went to see bladerunner', I sometimes agree with you Overlook, but this is perhaps the most utterly retarded thing you've actually typed on this forum.

 

I don't really like bladerunner that much, it's ok.

I think you misunderstood my post, dumbass. If you were an adult in 1982 and you were struggling with "conceptions/misconceptions" about computers and technology, or you wanted to see a film that explores such themes, you'd be completely fucking retarded to see Disney's TRON to work shit out. I'm not a Blade Runner fanboy and Blade Runner was hardly my point.

 

The only thing I wanted to say is that Tron was fucking terrible in 1982 and it's terrible now.

 

I understood your point perfectly, i just think its a bad one

An odd black and white view of looking at people's enjoyment of either movie. I think the person you are talking about, someone who truly needed to see a half animated film to work anything out, was a very rare person at best

[Guest Mirezzi]

 

'if you were an adult you went to see bladerunner', I sometimes agree with you Overlook, but this is perhaps the most utterly retarded thing you've actually typed on this forum.

 

I don't really like bladerunner that much, it's ok.

I think you misunderstood my post, dumbass. If you were an adult in 1982 and you were struggling with "conceptions/misconceptions" about computers and technology, or you wanted to see a film that explores such themes, you'd be completely fucking retarded to see Disney's TRON to work shit out. I'm not a Blade Runner fanboy and Blade Runner was hardly my point.

 

The only thing I wanted to say is that Tron was fucking terrible in 1982 and it's terrible now.

 

I understood your point perfectly, i just think its a bad one

An odd black and white view of looking at people's enjoyment of either movie. I think the person you are talking about, someone who truly needed to see a half animated film to work anything out, was a very rare person at best

Agreed, and I'm not the one who put that idea into this thread to begin with ffs. Bob Dob was the one who mentioned the relevance of Tron with regards to some imaginary market of people looking to work out their conceptions/misconceptions about computers...

 

Are you skim-reading, mother fucker?!

[vertsk8er419]

oops

[Guest maus]

saw it tonight. wanted to hold out for IMAX, but couldn't wait.

 

i fucking loved it.

 

it's not a life-changing film, but as someone who spent every sick day of my youth watching the original on VHS (in SP mode no less) hundreds of times, i was grinning the whole time.

 

i thought it looked great, it was a perfect balance of reverence to the original, but with new depth and an updated vibe that seemed to fit a world that had been changing for 25-odd years. all sorts of little easter egg surprises for hardcore viewers of the first film.

 

the script had a few goofy and / or overly sentimental moments, but nothing unforgivable.

 

the music was (as i already knew) disappointing... but it served its purpose in context - albeit blandly.

 

it's easy to pick apart, as is anything if you set your mind to it. but i was completely entertained for the whole thing, and will definitely be seeing it again.

[awepittance]

how much does the 3d contribute to the film?

[zazen]

how much does the 3d contribute to the film?

 

1d

[Guest disparaissant]

how much does the 3d contribute to the film?

 

1d

 

i lol'd

[TwiddleBot]

just saw the imax 3d version. the few scenes that 3d added anything to at all were few and far between. the hi def and lack of commercials in the imax are nice though

[Tessier Ashpool]

saw it tonight. wanted to hold out for IMAX, but couldn't wait.

 

i fucking loved it.

 

it's not a life-changing film, but as someone who spent every sick day of my youth watching the original on VHS (in SP mode no less) hundreds of times, i was grinning the whole time.

 

i thought it looked great, it was a perfect balance of reverence to the original, but with new depth and an updated vibe that seemed to fit a world that had been changing for 25-odd years. all sorts of little easter egg surprises for hardcore viewers of the first film.

 

the script had a few goofy and / or overly sentimental moments, but nothing unforgivable.

 

the music was (as i already knew) disappointing... but it served its purpose in context - albeit blandly.

 

it's easy to pick apart, as is anything if you set your mind to it. but i was completely entertained for the whole thing, and will definitely be seeing it again.

 

Saw this Friday and agree with (most) of the above - not a life-changing film, but I still enjoyed the hell out of it. The comments above regarding revering the original (with lots of great nods) but also being something new, updated (and a lot darker and more adult in some ways), are spot on. Watching the original again relatively recently, and given that this is a Disney film, I wasn't surprised or really off-put by the occasional sentimentality, or moments of cheesiness.

 

Bridges is great, and even with the sometimes off-putting uncanny valley effect of Clu, he's magnificent as both characters.

 

If you're expecting 2001, you're not going to get it - if you're expecting to be entertained and enjoy a tech fetish and "The Dude" you'll be pleased, if not pleasantly surprised.

 

Strangely, it's a film that I find myself thinking about well after I left the theater, which is a good sign, for what is basically a pop-corn sci-fi flick.

 

edit: Came into work early Friday, worked a long ass day, didn't get a chance to change, so had to drive 30 miles, stand in line for an hour and a half in a full on suit, and watch the "special pass" assholes get let in first, just to see this in IMAX.

 

Conclusion: Would have been just as awesome in "regular" 3d - don't waste your time/sanity on IMAX for this one.

[Guest KY]

how much does the 3d contribute to the film?

 

1d

hahaha

 

btw The Overlook certainly seems like somebody you'd certainly want to drink with or talk to IRL.

[Joyrex]

My son and I went and saw it Saturday night in 3D (not IMAX), and for us it was our first 3D movie.

 

First off, I'll say I enjoyed the movie - not an Oscar contender or anything, but a good movie overall.

 

What was a bit disappointing (and they forewarn you before the movie starts) is there are scenes shot in 2D that are meant to be in 2D, and there's quite a bit (even in "The Grid" aka the computer world). I thought the 3D effects in the trailers for Cars 2 and Pirates 4 were better, although there were a few 3D moments that stood out nicely.

 

Olivia Wild was hot, but the other chick (Beau Garrett as Gem) was way hotter - nice eye candy for the film.

 

I was one of those skeptics who thought the inclusion of more "reality" in the computer world was out of place and bad (things like water, dust, smoke, wind, etc.), but it really wasn't - if you think that this world has evolved or upgraded since it was originally conceived in the first movie, it makes sense that more things like that would exist - nevermind whether or not they "should" exist in a computer.

 

Jeff Bridges channeling "The Dude" got a bit annoying, but overall his performance was good, and the CGI Bridges was really convincing, although in a few scenes his mouth was a bit artificial-looking.

 

So, in short - enjoy the movie for what it is - a nice popcorn flick. Don't go in expecting Inception or some other deep-thought film.

 

P.S.: Oh, and I liked Daft Punk's cameo in the film, and I enjoyed the music score enough to download the soundtrack. Haven't listened to it yet.

[Guest maus]

how much does the 3d contribute to the film?

 

i thought they used it just about right. it was nice that they didn't abuse the 3d thing... this was the first movie i remember seeing in 3d where it seemed subtle (if that's even possible) - inasmuch as i didn't get any headaches or feel like they were forcing it in my face. and if ever there was a movie that could have done that, it's this one.

 

i think the 3d element definitely added something. although i might have enjoyed it just as much in 2d...

 

i dunno, upon further reflection, i still think the 3d makes it a bit more immersive... perhaps even more so with this film.

 

still pleased with it the morning after.

[oscillik]

cost of 3D films in my local area

 

Odeon Cinema, Liverpool One shopping centre

for 2D 'experience

£6.00 / $9.30 per ticket (peak times Friday after 5pm and all weekend)

 

for 3D 'experience'

£8.00 / $12.40 per ticket (peak times Friday after 5pm and all weekend)

+ £1.00 / $1.55 for 3D glasses

+ £3.75 / $5.81 for IMAX 3D

 

total for someone who wants a normal experience: £6.00 / $9.30

total for someone who doesn't have 3D glasses and wants 'standard' 3D experience: £9.00 / $13.95

total for someone who doesn't have 3D glasses and wants 'premium' 3D experience: £12.75 / $19.76

 

profit cinema makes just so you can watch a few scenes in 3D

standard 3D: £3 / $4.65

IMAX 3D: £6.75 / $10.47

 

Cineworld Cinema, Runcorn Halton Lea shopping centre

for 2D 'experience

£6.70 / $10.39 per ticket (peak times Friday after 5pm and all weekend)

 

for 3D 'experience'

£8.80 / $13.65 per ticket (peak times Friday after 5pm and all weekend)

+ £0.80 / $1.24 for 3D glasses

 

total for someone who doesn't have 3D glasses and wants 3D experience: £9.60 / $14.89

 

profit cinema makes just so you can watch a few scenes in 3D

standard 3D: £2.90 / $4.49

[TwiddleBot]

Even with the polarized glasses I kept seeing double lines all the time when in the computer world. Sort of like astigmatism plus. It was kind of weird, I thought polarized light filters worked better than that.

[springymajig]

I saw this the other day in IMAX 3D... I was a little disappointed.

 

I think the original film is really bad but intriguing for it's technical aspects and at least the light cycle bit is pretty exciting and well directed.

 

 

From the trailers of legacy I expected a cliche story but one that would be moderately well acted and solidly structured so that it hit all the right feel good moments like any mindless blockbuster... the kind of film where you see all of it coming a mile off but you just sit back and relax and watch it coming anyway, so at least an improvement on the shambles of a story that the original had.

 

It really wasn't much better than the original in terms of story though and that's what was disappointing... it's still a boring, vague, directionless mess.

 

The visuals were good of course... I love the look of the world. But the 3D wasn't as pronounced as I hoped it would be. My take on 3D is that it pretty much takes a huge crap on any film you see so I only go see really DUMB hollywood blockbuster type films in 3D (I refuse to see a Pixar film in 3D for example)... I expect like a rollercoaster ride from the 3D, I like it when it's abused cos the story, like I said, should be predictable but well told so it's just fun and enjoyable (again, like a rollercoaster, you KNOW it's gonna go really fast after you climb the big high bit in the beginning, but that doesn't stop it from being fun).

 

The 3D was so subtle I didn't even realise there was any 3D at all until I took my glasses off to check. But it was still worth seeing it in the IMAX cos it was big and beautiful.

 

Also, I fell asleep near the end.

[Silent Member]

I felt like sharing prices as well.

The cost of seeing Tron Legacy over here is $18,38. The Glasses are $3.34.