Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Tron: Legacy.

Ivan Kovax said:
You could take this argument to its logical extreme and say that there because of this there are NO bad movies in the world. However this whole line of logic is entirely defeated when you bring "Showgirls" into the equation...

So yes, sometimes movies do suck. Badly :)
Click to expand...

That's a logical fallacy known as The Slippery Slope Argument. There's a reason why you used the word "extreme" there...

The point is that there's no way to objectively say something is "bad" and something else is "good" - because art and entertainment by definition are purely subjective.
I'm sure someone out there thought Showgirls was entertaining. Wasn't me, but I wouldn't discount the notion that someone did, and who am I to say to that person that their subjective opinion is wrong?

Think of the ugliest car you've ever seen. Right now, someone out there is driving around in it with a huge smile.
Think of the sexiest woman you've ever seen. Right now, someone out there is sick of banging her.
 
@ Dan. I have a feeling they were added for effect. They annoyed the hell outta me too.
 
Thor Melsted said:
That's a logical fallacy known as The Slippery Slope Argument. There's a reason why you used the word "extreme" there...

The point is that there's no way to objectively say something is "bad" and something else is "good" - because art and entertainment by definition are purely subjective.
I'm sure someone out there thought Showgirls was entertaining. Wasn't me, but I wouldn't discount the notion that someone did, and who am I to say to that person that their subjective opinion is wrong?

Think of the ugliest car you've ever seen. Right now, someone out there is driving around in it with a huge smile.
Think of the sexiest woman you've ever seen. Right now, someone out there is sick of banging her.
Click to expand...

Oh there is no argument there. What you said is all correct. And I actually have the showgirls bluray, and yes it is entertaining. Unfortunately for all the wrong reasons. The fact that I enjoy that movie doesn't negate the fact that it was a TERRIBLE movie in every sense ;) Capishi?

The irony in this discussion is that you are now trying to argue and disprove my subjective opinion regarding the topic of subjective opinions ... anyway, I digress :)
 
Ivan Kovax said:
Oh there is no argument there. What you said is all correct. And I actually have the showgirls bluray, and yes it is entertaining. Unfortunately for all the wrong reasons. The fact that I enjoy that movie doesn't negate the fact that it was a TERRIBLE movie in every sense ;) Capishi?

The irony in this discussion is that you are now trying to argue and disprove my subjective opinion regarding the topic of subjective opinions ... anyway, I digress :)
Click to expand...

How can I disprove anything when everything is subjective? :)
 
Thor Melsted said:
How can I disprove anything when everything is subjective? :)
Click to expand...

There is a movie in that!

Oh wait, that was Showgirls...

Seriously Thor, that was a BAD movie. If there is one movie in existence that proves theories of perceptual subjectivity in art wrong, it is Showgirls.

Please watch it.

You will change your mind about EVERYTHING :) I guarantee it.
 
I have seen it, and I thought it was pathetic, so we are in strong agreement on the quality of that film. But you can't quantify quality of something as subjective as a film. Yes there are movies that are generally considered awful. There are also films that are generally considered good. I'm sure we can both find films on either of those lists that we'd put on the other. That's my point.
Seriously Ivan, the subjectivity vs objectivity of films has been debated for over 100 years. We're not going to come to an agreement about this here... which actually strengthens my argument :)
 
Now, let's get back on topic.

For those who saw it at the IMAX, what was your opinion on the switching back and forth between 2.35:1 and full IMAX, and similarly, about the use of switching between 2D and 3D scenes?
 
@ Thor, at least we agree on that ;)

Now regarding the aspect ratio I saw it in a regular theater so I cant comment, however the 2D/3D I think worked fine, mostly because much of the 3D was shot as if he were trying to shoot 2D - so it cut fine.

Did IMAX use polarizing glasses or Electronic? I have noticed over time that I am starting to prefer electronic.
 
IMAX has the 90 degree polarized.

The 2D was interesting, they actually offset the left/right, to make the image go slightly behind the screen.
The IMAX / 2.35 switch worked fine the same way it worked for The Dark Knight. Basically anything having to do with action and showing off The Grid was IMAX, while dialog scenes and closeups were 2.35:1 - although I wasn't really keeping track.

The only theater near me using shutter glasses is the Arclight Cineramadome which uses Xpand, but it's not showing Tron. I've yet to try that.
 
I saw IMAX and it was polarized. Wish it was electronic. Maybe I need ome of those new Oakley glasses. The 2D vs. 3D thing actually not all that noticeable. It wasn't like 'wow, that's in 2D!' or anything. Not like going to B&W for a flashback.

Ivan- to get off topic again, I saw Showgirls opening night in a theater packed with frat boys. Not sayin' the film itself was good, but that was a very memorable night! So, from bad, good can be created.
 
Paul Lee said:
Ivan- to get off topic again, I saw Showgirls opening night in a theater packed with frat boys. Not sayin' the film itself was good, but that was a very memorable night! So, from bad, good can be created.
Click to expand...

Which is why I have the entire Ed Wood, and Russ Meyer collections as well. :)

Back to 3D, with the IMAX screen so big did you actually notice that characters on the side of the screen were relatively "demuxed" looking and that you had to turn your head to them to see them in proper 3D?
 
Props, Ivan, props.

And thus begins my 3D rant: NOT.

I'm just not feelin' it. I'll leave it at that. Social Network was 2D (but I felt many D's). Avatar and Tron were 3D- but I felt like I was wearing dirty glasses and my brain hurt looking at little tiny models of what should have been real. To your question- no, I have no idea. I wanted to take the friggin 3D glasses off and see the friggin' movie!!!

Did I mention the soundtrack by Daft Punk was ill?
 
good but...

good but...

heres the problems;

1. We see Flynn/Kevin to early in movie, wanted another 5 minutes or so of Sam and Qorra interacting, little to easy finding or getting to him.

2. Movie seemed a little short or to rushed in some scenes, maybe needed a little more drama about 10 or 15 more minutes to the length.

3. Wanted to see some tanks blazing away, but thats probably just me.

--------

spoiler


Ending should of ended more like the directors cut of Blade Runner, where Decker and Rachel go into this uncertain future, Tron's ending a little to cheesy with Alvin right there etc.

OH, OH, OH... And Have a flashback to the grid (have Sam not switch off computer) and to the water were Tron was sinking, and have him hit bottom and suddenly start to swim up (put that at the end of the credits). This would be a better entrance for maybe a sequel.


ANYWAYS, I did like it over all, it's just.... that I find myself daydreaming of other scenarios. It was close.

Finally... I am writing this at 3 a.m., so take all comments with a grain of salt.
 
So I just got back from my TRON IMAX show and here are my thoughts:

The Good:

Overall, the design of the grid was stunning and the action scenes were a ton of fun. The Daft Punk soundtrack was off the hook (and I hope there will be many more soundtracks from the dynamic duo). I actually liked the 3D, it was not too in your face.

The Bad:

The pacing was odd. The movie exploded into action once he arrived in the grid but it felt very slow and a little lifeless in the middle. The writing needed a bit more polishing as well. The characters could have used some more depth as well. Zeus was the most interesting but they killed him off too fast and I wish Tron was more than just a mindless killing machine/hunter of programs. I constantly had the uncanny valley feeling with CLU, he looked great for a cg face but not quite there. In four our five years, they should have it down.

They may want to talk to David Fincher, he seems to do the best face replacement.

As with Avatar, the 3D really shined in the mostly CG scenes but still looked a little pop up bookey in the live action portions. It was good 3D but I think it is held up by the limitations of live action 3D shooting.

The story is meh but it was one of the most visually striking films I have seen in recent years and you can tell that they put a lot of time and effort into the designs and effects.

Overall, I would give it 3.5 out of 5.

Side Note: Dammit! There was no Pirates 4 Trailer in IMAX 3D, just 2D trailers for The Green Lantern/Hornet. I was really looking forward to seeing Red projected in Imax. It would have been icing on the cake. Thank a lot Regal Stadium 20 in Aliso Viejo!
 
Last edited:
The standard Disney Digital 3D was better than most, but I suspect the nature of the dramatic contrasts of the film were taylor made for 3D. My Avatar experiance was marginal at best, my eyes/mind really didn't like it until the final aviator scene at the end of the film (and it gave me a headache). When most of your surrounding are black and dark gray and the interesting things are emmitting light the 3D effect is pretty seamless. In avatar the whole damn planet glowed which I think may have been the problem for me. There is a scene in TRON L. where a projectile is fired at the audiance and I actually jumped in my seat, it's that good.

Like most are posting the story was just OK.

--Light Spoiler Alert--

The ending was unimagnative and there was no big reveal for TRON himself. This frusterated me as I'm a bit of a Bruce B. fan and the original TRON was one of the bigger things he ever did. The Flynn hippee thing was really lacking and his reaction to his son's appearance was written / directed poorly.

I absolutely hate the 'needless sacrifice' endings that have become so prevalent in this type of movie. This "It's time for me to die" attitude runs contrary to the human condition so if you don't set up the situation as the only possible way to win the whole thing turns out looking needlessly foolish and stupid. I don't leave the theater thinking the character was noble or heroic, just dumb. (Casino Royal anyone?)

Bob
 
Andrew Rieger said:
They may want to talk to David Fincher, he seems to do the best face replacement.
Click to expand...

funny you say that, the vfx time that did the face for clu and young flynn was the identical team that worked on benjamin button for brad pitt. i guess it's easier to make someone look older rather than younger...
 
Tom.Wong said:
funny you say that, the vfx time that did the face for clu and young flynn was the identical team that worked on benjamin button for brad pitt. i guess it's easier to make someone look older rather than younger...
Click to expand...

I suspect a direct comparison exists in the form of a person's younger self. Whereas what a person looks like when they are older has yet to be seen by anyone.

I thought younger Flynn's eyes were "wrong".

-sc
 
the lips were a little off too, and the skin tone was also off, but it as a admirable attempt. I personally loved the film, i felt like it was truly a direct sequel to the original, with the flavor of modern times. I mean if you look at the original film, dialogue and plot points really weren't all that great either. It's still a PG disney film after all. But it was a fairly standard classic story arch, biblical and political undertones but executed well. Performance is a bit off every now and than, but it's very difficult to have a great performance when you're surrounded by endless green screen.

some of the best vfx i've ever seen. i thought all in all it was a big rollercoaster ride, and as a huge Tron fan, I think he did a lot more than justice to the original. It was modern, it was really fun, and it stayed true to the original and especially with the classic and campy lines like "End of Line" and "De-Resolution" I think it's ok that it's campy and the acting wasn't Daniel Day Lewis caliber. I had fun every moment of the way, and I'm probably gonna watch it a few more times.

I think my only REAL complaint was that i thought it was WAY too conservative on the 3d. I really wanted to see more use of it, but most of the film is in 2d and the 3d stuff was super subtle, I really didn't see where my extra 5 dollars went...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top