Topic: TRON: Legacy

[Critter]

TRON: Legacy 2010



Director: Joseph Kosinski

Cast: Jeff Bridges, Garrett Hedlund and Olivia Wilde

My Thoughts:

I didn't plan on seeing this film, but I ended up going to a screening yesterday as a spur of the moment decision and I am so glad that I did. I saw this in 2D due to a mishap during booking the tickets but I am actually considering seeing it again to experience it in 3D which shows how much I enjoyed it. This movie was fun from beginning to end. Sure this wasn't the most challenging or intricate storyline I have ever witnessed, but with some films it is really more about the visuals and the sound, and this is definitely one of those films.

This film looked amazing and as some of you may know I am a real sucker for films with great animation and visual effects and in that sense TRON really takes the cake. The action scenes here were exhilarating and done very well. Everything was fast paced but unlike some action films with heavy visual effects (most things my Michael Bay) we could actually follow the action and see what was happening here, rather than just blurs of images and sounds. Many people have been praising Daft Punks original soundtrack to this film and I was most certainly not disappointed by it, the sound was amazing and fitted perfectly. I think the director knew that he was onto something with Daft Punks soundtrack as the songs are very prominent throughout the entire film, often quite loud and sometimes flowing from one track to the next making much of the film seem almost like an extended Daft Punk music video. Not that I'm really complaining about that as it just added to the fun and exciting nature of the movie.

While the storyline may not have been the most compelling thing I have seen all year, I was actually surprised by how well-developed the characters were. A few cheesy lines aside, mostly delivered by Jeff Bridges character, I actually found myself caring for the three main stars, especially Olivia Wilde's character Quorra. I was quite pleasantly by her character as when I first saw that Wilde had been cast in a role where she would be in skin-tight clothing the entire time it seemed that she would be used as typical eye-candy for the film, yet her character showed almost more substance than everyone else. We ended up with someone who is strong, highly intelligent, loyal, a good fighter and even more surprisingly someone who posessed almost childlike playfulness about her. It really is hard not to like a character like that.

Garrett Hedlund also gave a great performance as our protagonist Sam. He was also very easy to like and relate to as a character which made viewing this film even better. While I loved seeing this film in the cinema I can see this being something I would not get much rewatch value out of on blu-ray or DVD. In that sense it reminds me a lot of Avatar. Some films are just simply put awesome cinema experiences, the big screen, huge sound all added up to a great film, but in the end the fact that I wasn't really blown away by the story in any sense means I probably won't get as much joy out of this film on a normal TV screen. Either way I recommend this to anyone looking for something fun to see in the cinemas over the Christmas break.

Rating: 3½/5

[Najemikon]

Good review, Sophie, just about how I felt about it when I saw it last week. Difficult sell though and I hope it finds a good audience. The original was naive and clunky, but had such charm it carried it through. Not the best basis for a sequel, but they did fairly well.

I saw it in 3D and I am now absolutely, 100% convinced it is a con. There is little to no benefit seeing it in 3D, you have to pay extra for the "privilege" and as I saw with Avatar, they take a film which -whatever you think about it- is sharp and striking visually and then ask you to watch it with bloody sunglasses on!

3D in its current form is an insult to cinematographers. Just think about the work that goes into getting the balance of light correct in photographs. Next time you flick through a photo album, remember to put your sunglasses on first. 

[goodguy]

I saw it in 3D and I am now absolutely, 100% convinced it is a con. There is little to no benefit seeing it in 3D, you have to pay extra for the "privilege" and as I saw with Avatar, they take a film which -whatever you think about it- is sharp and striking visually and then ask you to watch it with bloody sunglasses on!

So far, I have never seen a 3D movie. I'm tempted to give Werner Herzog's Caves of Forgotten Dreams a try when it finally comes to German cinemas next year. But even there the reviews indicate that the 3D doesn't really work. And I will definitely see Wim Wenders' Pina, although I'm skeptical about its 3D as well. On the other hand, if even real filmmakers fail to get the technology to work, it will reassure me that I don't have to pay attention to it at all.

[Dr. Hasslein]

3D is bullshit! I fell sorry for all those suckers who have bought 3D TVs. Apart from the 3D titles on blu-ray the TV networks here in Australian hardly ever broadcast anything in 3D.

Anyway good review Sophie. I've never seen the original Tron, Disney has never been my cup of tea.

[Jimmy]

The original was a fun and pretty impressive film (it was when I saw it at 12 years old). I even remember playing the game at the video arcade (an ok one, but not a favorite of mine).

I know I will sound like a broken record but I won't see the remake/sequel, I prefer to keep my childhood memory as they are (without 3D and bad acting).

[Najemikon]

Jimmy, Jeff Bridges is great in this and he plays essentially three parts, via cgi which ranges from dodgy to astonishing. It must have been fun for him to go back to his Starman look for a bit. That alone is worth seeing because it's kind of nostalgic. Plus, Bruce Boxleitner is really good. That man deserves more work.

So far, I have never seen a 3D movie. I'm tempted to give Werner Herzog's Caves of Forgotten Dreams a try when it finally comes to German cinemas next year. But even there the reviews indicate that the 3D doesn't really work. And I will definitely see Wim Wenders' Pina, although I'm skeptical about its 3D as well. On the other hand, if even real filmmakers fail to get the technology to work, it will reassure me that I don't have to pay attention to it at all.

If it wasn't for the sunglasses I'd be more positive considering Scorcese's work on The Invention of Hugo Cabret. It is a beautiful book which you might have seen me speak about before and apparently he is doing that in 3D. Maybe he'll keep it black and white too... that should help.

[Critter]

I kind of like 3D. Especially in some movies like computer animated ones. It adds another layer to the film and makes it more immersive without detracting from the actual story (if done well). I think 3D is crap when it's just that gimmicky stuff flying in your face, but when they are genuinely trying to make the film a more immersive experience then it's kind of cool.

[goodguy]

Maybe he'll keep it black and white too... that should help.

On a side note: Have you seen Coppola's Tetro? It might be not entirely your thing, but that has to be the most beautiful looking B&W film of recent years.

[Najemikon]

No, I want to though because it sounded like he was making an effort again. He should be a favourite director of many, including myself, considering The Godfather, Apocalypse Now and The Conversation. But he just went off the boil so damn fast.

[Dragonfire]

I've been interested in seeing this one..I haven't yet.  Not sure I'll get to.
I don't remember seeing much, if any of the original.

[Critter]

I haven't seen the original. I watched the first 20 minutes of it and never finished it. Even though I hadn't seen the original I didn't feel like that was an issue with this film.

[Dragonfire]

I know I've seen images from the first one...maybe a scene or two..but that's it.

[Jimmy]

You're too young Marie

I remember that when it was released the original was a revolution and something never seen on the screen. Sure it can looks cheap for the audience of today (an oppinion I don't share of course), but it was unique. The new one is in 3D, so what? Everything is in 3D now, even Yogi Bear for God sakes is. If something didn't need a film it's sure that, maybe the next one will starring Wally Gator or Touché Turtle and Dum Dum (I laugh but I would buy a cartoon with Touché the Turtle, it was a fun one).

I can tell you one thing for sure : Tron and Flash Gordon are two great memories of my younger years and I doubt highly that anyone will remember Tron Legacy in 2 years.

Revolutionary concept always stay, but unoriginal cash ripoff disapear fast...

[Najemikon]

  Oh, Jimmy, I wish you'd calm down sometimes. It really makes me sad to see you so aggressive. You don't have to watch Tron Legacy in 3D, but however you watch it, your argument is badly flawed.

Tron has a reputation and is fondly remembered, but it is not a very good film. It was a silly story designed to exploit visual effects of the time. It was little more than a demo to show off fancy effects. The sequel is doing exactly the same. The irony is, many of the major developments of CGI, motion capture and even 3D, that you rant and rave against so strongly... are precisely because of Tron!

Of course, I enjoyed Tron for what it was, but it is not a film to be taken seriously. Neither is the sequel. For crying out loud, lighten up.

[Critter]

The irony is, many of the major developments of CGI, motion capture and even 3D, that you rant and rave against so strongly... are precisely because of Tron!

This is true! I remember watching a Pixar doco once and I think it was John Lasseter... or someone who said that TRON was a real revolution for Pixar as a company. They saw what computers could be used for in film in the original TRON and it really inspired them to go out and work as hard as they could on developing their own computer animation for film... and look where they are now! So in that respect I really do have a lot of gratitude towards TRON.