Tron Legacy

[stu]

[Riggswolfe]

[stu]

Ooooh. I think I thought that at first and then started confusing myself by thinking too hard on it. Thanks 

[Surlyboi]

[HaemishM]

Saw this last week in 3D. This was the first time I've seen a 3D movie with these types of glasses and I wasn't impressed. The 3D effects were good but the 3D was better on the trailers than in the actual movie. The movie itself was way too dark, almost like the glasses were foggy. I had to continuallly try to wipe them clean. I enjoyed the story but you definitely have to try hard not to think too much on it. It was fun, as good as the first, but I look forward to seeing the 2D version in HD.

[Riggswolfe]

[LK]

Memories can trick you. I'd need to see the scene again to know for sure.

[Riggswolfe]

Memories can trick you. I'd need to see the scene again to know for sure.

Yes, and I've seen this particular scene interpreted both ways so who knows, I may be an unreliable witness.

[LK]

It didn't stand out to me the way certain other things did which I've mentioned in this thread. But showing a scene from the film to support a statement does a lot, for me, to dispel a notion I have. Especially with conflicting reports.

[Riggswolfe]

It didn't stand out to me the way certain other things did which I've mentioned in this thread. But showing a scene from the film to support a statement does a lot, for me, to dispel a notion I have. Especially with conflicting reports.

I doubt if we'll be able to find that scene until it comes out on blu ray or something. It's not a big deal it's just how I remember it and it made alot of sense to me as foreshadowing.

[Surlyboi]

In the game, you witness the same incident from another angle.

[Oban]

This was the first time I've seen a 3D movie with these types of glasses and I wasn't impressed.

Try IMAX 3D next time.  The digital 3D cinemas just are not up to the same level of resolution/technology as the IMAX cinemas.

[SurfD]

This was the first time I've seen a 3D movie with these types of glasses and I wasn't impressed.

Try IMAX 3D next time.  The digital 3D cinemas just are not up to the same level of resolution/technology as the IMAX cinemas.

This is true. The theatre I work at has 4 Sony Digital 3D screens and one IMAX Digital 3D screen.    Both projector type show what i believe is considered a 2K image (~2 thousand Horizontal lines), however, the Sonys only use one physical projector with an ~3000 watt bulb in it and a splitter head for the 3D effect, where as the IMAX setup actually uses 2 complete projector units each with an ~5k watt bulb in them (effectively giving you the illusion of a 4k digital image instead).   The Picture quality on the IMAX screens is just much brighter and more vivid.

[LK]

From what I'm reading about art vs. entertainment, film critics may be looking at the piece as art and taking it too seriously, while everyone else is looking at it as entertainment and enjoying it for what it is?

I think I'm starting to see some of the greater flaws in Tron: Legacy based on the standards being used by critics and others (Plinkett)...

http://jazzkiosk.blogspot.com/2010/12/heres-whats-wrong-with-your-tron-legacy.html

I don't agree completely with his assessment of Kevin Flynn, but he raises some honest points.

[Ratman_tf]

http://jazzkiosk.blogspot.com/2010/12/heres-whats-wrong-with-your-tron-legacy.html

What is a fix list? If I had read the script and seen the rushes before it was released, and I had been asked, I could have single-handedly fixed this movie and it would be in the high-80's on Rotten Tomatoes with a long, profitable box office run due to glowing word-of-mouth.

*snerk* Sure buddy.

[Sand]

From what I'm reading about art vs. entertainment, film critics may be looking at the piece as art and taking it too seriously, while everyone else is looking at it as entertainment and enjoying it for what it is?

This coming from the guy who said....

You must not be into literature. I bet you thought Gulliver's Travels was some story about a dude that kept going to all these strange places which made for a "meh" story.

It is just a movie, one that has proven to be not very popular or critically acclaimed. You seem to be the one reading all these deeper meanings into and mentally masturbating over the whole thing.
I agree with every critique I read from the link you posted from jazzkiosk, ie the plot/story sucks.

[Ratman_tf]

It is just a movie, one that has proven to be not very popular or critically acclaimed.

71% audience likes it on RottenTomatoes. 7.5 user score on Metacritic.

From what I've seen, it seems a fair bunch of people liked it, and some just had sand in their vaginas. 

[LK]

From what I'm reading about art vs. entertainment, film critics may be looking at the piece as art and taking it too seriously, while everyone else is looking at it as entertainment and enjoying it for what it is?

This coming from the guy who said....

You must not be into literature. I bet you thought Gulliver's Travels was some story about a dude that kept going to all these strange places which made for a "meh" story.

It is just a movie, one that has proven to be not very popular or critically acclaimed. You seem to be the one reading all these deeper meanings into and mentally masturbating over the whole thing.
I agree with every critique I read from the link you posted from jazzkiosk, ie the plot/story sucks.

Maybe you didn't realize this, or you don't care, but you've been coming off like an elitist prick who is too important to explain himself. What was especially insulting was your follow-up to me after I answered your question about the food. I was enjoying thinking about the metaphors of the world and some of the imagery used *which is completely separate from the plot and unrealistic characters*.

With new input from other sources, my opinions have changed as I focused on more than just the visual metaphor and ham-fisted imagery. I agree that there were things that appeared that required knowledge not explained in the film and required critical analysis, which would be immersion breaking and take you out of the film.

No, I don't think my comparison to Gulliver's Travels is apt anymore, and I apolgize, but I didn't understand exactly what you meant by your very detailed and elaborate review of the problems you had with the film. I'll summarize it for you: "meh"

[DraconianOne]

Just got back from this.

Totally agree with Haemish about the 3D - would much rather have seen it in 2D.

Enjoyed it overall but it's definitely flawed.  Story was by the numbers - very predictable and definitely a bit weak but not terrible. Probably my main issue is that Sam Flynn was too sterile and bland. He had no significant flaws, displayed little to no emotion and for most, if not all, of the third act was a very passive protagonist.

But... loved the visuals, loved the soundtrack and sound design, thought CLU was really well done, liked Jeff Bridges, thought Michael Sheen was superbly over the top. Also Olivia Wilde, Beau Garrett. Action was pretty good and quite frankly, I enjoyed it as much as the original, if not more. I didn't enjoy it enough to go full Lorekeep and analyze it to death though.  

As for the direction, to be quite honest, for someone making his directorial debut on a film with a $300m budget, I think Joseph Kosinski did really well. It's a fucking huge responsibility and I have no doubt that the Disney suits were looking over his shoulder watching every move.

EDIT: Sat in a theatre with a load of obvious geeks and I was the only person who even sniggered at the Wargames reference. So disappointed!

[NiX]

Sand and Lorekeep.

Shut up, please.

[Lakov_Sanite]

They did, five days ago.

[Ironwood]

They're not some Comic Book Serial Villian...

[Tannhauser]

I see what you did there.  Your internet is in the mail.

[NiX]

They did, five days ago.

Just to be safe.

[ghost]

I have yet to see, or even sniff, the movie.  However, the soundtrack is kick ass. 

[Mattemeo]

I have yet to see, or even sniff, the movie.  However, the soundtrack is kick ass. 

And yet inexplicably snubbed in the Oscar Nominations.

*boggle*

[Mrbloodworth]

Michael Sheen

Dear god, I thought that was Simon Pegg. Wow, did I get that wrong.

[NiX]

Dear god, I thought that was Simon Pegg. Wow, did I get that wrong.

So did I.

I've enjoyed the movie enough to have seen it 3 times in IMAX. It also helps that I get to hear the soundtrack on that glorious sound system.

[K9]

Michael Sheen

Dear god, I thought that was Simon Pegg. Wow, did I get that wrong.

I have made this mistake too; they do bear more than just a passing resemblance to each other.

[Soulflame]

Michael Sheen was Zuse?

I was wondering where they found a spare Ziggy Stardust.   

[Khaldun]

The Oscar snub to the soundtrack and the visuals is pretty baffling. Especially the soundtrack.

[Riggswolfe]

The Oscar snub to the soundtrack and the visuals is pretty baffling. Especially the soundtrack.

The Oscars are not about quality or anything else. They're about politics. Even if the show wasn't hours and hours of boredom I wouldn't watch it because they generally award the wrong actors/movies/directors/etc with awards.

[Sand]

The Oscar snub to the soundtrack and the visuals is pretty baffling. Especially the soundtrack.

Because it was electronica/pop music? Nothing original ala Star Wars theme and nothing hit making ala Titanic theme?
ie nothing new or special to see?

[stu]

I knew a music professor who once told me that her orchestral colleagues thought John Williams was just a derivative bottom feeder creating pop. Just sayin'.


edit: redundant ninja strikes twice

[Merusk]

Everyone hates success. 

Considering the Oscars are all about being seen, rubbing elbows with 'your betters' and politics, the snub to Daft Punk shouldn't be shocking.  Guys who go around in Robot suits keeping as low a profile as is possible with such a gimmick aren't who the Academy wants to associate with.