Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

'Tron: Legacy' Director Explains the Tron World

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the light-cycles-and-olivia-wilde dept.

Movies 384

An anonymous reader writes "We only had to wait 28 years for the second installment of 'Tron' — the sequel, 'Tron: Legacy,' comes out on Friday. It is expected to have less awesomely bad '80s graphics and more awesomely awesome millennial CGI. In advance of the opening, Discover has an interview with director Joe Kosinski in which he talks about reinventing the light cycle, and explains that the Tron world resembles the Galapagos Islands, where everything evolved in isolation."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (4, Insightful)

Eunuchswear (210685) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562262)

WTF!

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (2, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562364)

The awesomely bad graphics are one reason you can not purchase the original Tron in advance of the sequel. The awesomely bad plot is another. Disney doesn't want people to remember how bad the movie really was. I mean, I loved it as a kid, don't get me wrong, but I also loved the Dukes of Hazzard, Benny Hill, and the A-Team. Kids have terrible taste in entertainment.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (4, Insightful)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562452)

Kids "terrible taste in entertainment" is a good thing. Even though we can look back on Tron and say. God, that is a horrible film, to a child it spurned his imagination. Imagination is unfortunately repressed in our education system. Inspire it where ever possible.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (2)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562478)

That will teach me to his submit before rereading my post after having gone back and edited portions. Subtract "spurned" and replace it with "encouraged".

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (5, Funny)

6031769 (829845) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562546)

That will teach me to his submit before rereading my post

Want to bet?

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562722)

Snarky, but +1 funny anyway :)

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

decoy256 (1335427) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563110)

Or the word you were actually thinking of "spurred"... comes from riding spurs, which you would use to encourage a horse to go (or go faster).

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

baKanale (830108) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563414)

Perhaps you were meant to write "spurred"?

Where did you go to school? (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562534)

We had art and music classes through to High School in my town. My experience with the education system must have been very different than yours. Did you go to school in a poorer locality? The schools with less money tend to focus (to a fault) on metrics in order to secure enough funding from state/federal in order to keep the place running. Even then they have art and music...

Re:Where did you go to school? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562816)

Art and music can be taught without inspiring imagination (unfortunately). And art and music are only one part of imagination. Rote memorization does little good for anyone, but it is what what schools focus on. And much of it is lost so quickly after school ends that it really serves no use. Teach a man to fish... should be our schools motto. So much of what we think we know turns out to be wrong anyway, once we have more information. "Nerves don't ever regrow on their own. Oh wait, they can in the tongue. Oh wait, they can in other areas, too, our brain just aren't wired to remap pathways after childhood..." For just one example. And correcting rote memorization (for those times it does stick) after the fact is really hard.

art and music are the first things to cut then sho (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563314)

art and music are the first things to cut then shop!

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (4, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562900)

Gotta disagree with ye.

I find Tron more rewatchable than Star Wars A New Hope or Return of the Jedi (zzzzz). And I don't think the graphics are bad especially considering they are *supposed* to look like a computer world. If they looked like Gran Turismo 5 (i.e. real) then I wouldn't feel as if I was inside the circuitry.

Of course I also like that "Would You Like to Play A Game?" movie so maybe my taste's just bad. (shrug) Reminds me of my youth.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (5, Insightful)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563094)

Wargames. I re watched it recently. It actually has some of the most realistic representations of hacking and hackers in any movie ever.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

harrkev (623093) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563290)

You want computer realism in an 80's movie???

Electric Dreams

Good movie, but I remember the soundtrack begin great, with two great songs by Culture Club (cue the laughter at my expense now)...

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

harrkev (623093) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563344)

Sorry to reply to myself.

IMDB link is HERE [imdb.com]

I was also EXTREMELY shocked that the region-1 DVD is going for over $100! (region-2 much more reasonably priced for some reason)

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563248)

Of course I also like that "Would You Like to Play A Game?" movie so maybe my taste's just bad. (shrug) Reminds me of my youth.

I propose a new flame war: War Games vs. Hackers. I'm firmly in the War Games camp and find Hackers to be an unintentional comedy.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

harrkev (623093) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563404)

Perhaps, but Hackers has a **MUCH** better soundtrack. I still love that CD to this day...

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562970)

"Spurned."

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

eln (21727) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562498)

In general, a movie's quality is inversely correlated to how heavily it's marketed. Tron has been so heavily marketed, with almost all of the marketing concentrating on the eye candy special effects, that I would be absolutely shocked if it turned out to be a really good movie.

Not so, rewatched and thought it was decent (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562578)

I (luckily) bought the 20th anniversary DVD when it came out, and just recently watched it for a refresher to catch references in the new movie...

I had not seen it for a while, but the graphics were not too bad. The suits they wore looked pretty good, most of the computer world had a minimalistic stark look it is true but not really poor in the way the graphics from, say, "The Last Starfighter" looked - in part because much of Tron avoided gradient shading, which is when stuff starts to look dated. The worst part by far was the throwaway "grid bugs" scene that made no sense but was probably there for the video games.

The plot is Tron is also not too bad even for a modern film. Going back to Last Startfighter, there was a film where the graphics looked really dated and the plot was way too simplistic for a modern movie.

The graphics in the new Tron film look pretty good but one thing that bothers me is that the Recognizers have thrusters in the feet and realistic looking momentum, I'd feel a lot more like you were in a computer realm where the means of lift was not so apparent or varied and movement was more smooth and, well, binary. For some reason the light cycle changes do not bother me at all.

The real reason you can't buy it now has nothing to do with plot or graphics, it has to do with getting you to buy the two disc set with the old and the new movie later on.

Re:Not so, rewatched and thought it was decent (1, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562676)

They could sell you the old movie, and THEN sell you the two disc set. No, I think they really don't want too many people remembering how bad the original was.

You are comparing it favorably to "The Last Starfighter." Talk about damning with faint praise.

Better than you think (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562806)

You are comparing it favorably to "The Last Starfighter." Talk about damning with faint praise.

Not really, I am saying it's way better than that was. It holds up MUCH better than other movies from that era, visually and plot wise - as other people noted many of the graphics were not even done on a computer which is why that is true. In fact because so much of the game is set in the computer world you have very little dating of clothing and hairstyles!

Since you scoff at the Last Starfighter comparison, I'll add a more modern one - Mirrormask. I just saw that, I disliked the plot in that movie and thought Tron was a better movie overall, even with the older computer graphics.

It is a shame you can't even rent Tron (at least not on Netflix) to see for yourself. But I think the original is a classic that really deserves that term.

Re:Not so, rewatched and thought it was decent (2)

element-o.p. (939033) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563322)

Enough, already! All of this arguing over whether "Wargames", the original "Tron" and "The Last Starfighter" are really as bad as everyone says, or if it's just elitist snobbery ("I really liked them, but I'm too cool to admit it") is making me want to go watch all three movies to find out if I only enjoyed them because I was in junior high school at the time. In any case, I really don't have the time or money to watch a bunch of old movies, so can we PUH-LEASE end the list with just those three? :D

Re:Not so, rewatched and thought it was decent (1)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562932)

I had it in my Netflix queue a few months ago and they moved it to the saved queue, "availability unknown" and added Tron Legacy.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (4, Insightful)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562586)

I had the "wonderful kid movie, terrible adult movie" experience with "Escape to Witch Mountain".

However, rewatching Tron did not produce that experience. It was okay and some parts were better than okay. The story about the people/characters was reasonably solid and a good story can overcome weak effects while awesome effects can't overcome weak characters and bad story.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (4, Insightful)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562708)

This. The original isn't Citizen Kane, but it does hold up better than many of the films that came out during that time. Same goes for the SFX in my opinion (as long as you don't consider ROTJ).

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34563408)

Many of the films of that time hold up way better than films of this time. The fast editing nowadays is horrible and will be looked down upon in the future.

Exactly (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562820)

Tron has a decent plot to it and special effects that are not dated in the same way full-on CGI from that era generally is (except for the Grid Bug part which was full-on CGI).

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (5, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562632)

Jees, these kids... I was about 30 when Tron came out. Tron's graphics were awesome for the time, better than any of the coin operated video games that were out then that the movie was portraying.

As to the plot, aside from the necessary suspension of disbelief of a) a laser disassembling a human and storing him in a computer and b) true machine intelligence, it was as good or better than the average action flick, let alone one of the old westerns from the '40s.

I was working at Disney when it came out, and got to see a pre-release screening with 72 mm film close to a large screen. The DVD (my copy of which has been stolen, sadly) really paled in comparison to seeing it in 72 mm in the theater.

No, I had no part in making the movie; the pre-release was one of the many perks Disney employees got.

The original Star Trek, on the other hand, DID often have cheesy effects, bad acting, and bad plots, even though a lot of the episodes were and still are awesome.

I fear the new Tron will suck, but hope it doesn't.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (5, Funny)

vuke69 (450194) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562730)

The DVD (my copy of which has been stolen, sadly)

Wow, Disney is more serious about suppressing the old version than I had initially suspected.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563000)

better than any of the coin operated video games that were out then that the movie was portraying

Graphics that take weeks to produce were better than ones that were rendered in realtime? Shocking!

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563410)

Actually, the new cut of ST:TMP is pretty damned good. The story line is still a little slow for a franchise that was often seen as part of the action SF genre. But you know, I actually enjoyed TMP on the last few viewings, going at it from the angle that it was more like 2001 and less like Buck Rogers. The problems with the special effects in the original cut are well known, being largely to do with Roddenberry's mismanagement and with the fact that they were rushed. Being able to go back and clean things up has produced a film that has some pretty dazzlingly effects even for our jaded 21st century eyes, and not the muddy mess that the film was for so many years.

I've only seen Tron once since I saw it in the theater as a kid. It struck me the same as my rewatching of Black Hole, another Disney big budget effects film from that era in that it was a tolerably decent story with some cool effects, but nothing as fantastic as the marketing would suggest it was. At least ST:TMP had enough of an influence to spawn a sequel within three years. Tron was a quarter century old before a sequel was greenlit.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (3, Informative)

Chelloveck (14643) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562694)

Those "awesomely bad 80s graphics" were awesomely good back in, you know, the 80s. I have no doubt that in another 30 years or so, the graphics in Tron Legacy will be just as laughable. And from everything I hear, the original Tron script will read like Shakespeare compared to the new one... Actually, I didn't find the original script too bad. It's certainly not great, but it held up a lot better than I expected it to when I saw it again a couple years ago.

BTW, there's already been a Tron sequel, just in video game form. Tron 2.0 [wikipedia.org] came out in 2003 and was created as being a direct sequel to the original. It even had much of the original cast doing voice work, and Wendy Carlos doing the soundtrack. Find a copy and play it. It's a decent FPS, and it's very much in the spirit of the original movie. I hope there's at least some mention of the events of Tron 2.0 in Tron Legacy.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (4, Interesting)

raddan (519638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562766)

Huh. Here I am thinking that the story is inspired (anthropomorphizing a computer's internal conflicts and merging them with the real world conflict... well before The Matrix did the same thing) and that the graphics are pretty cool given that most of them were not CGI. The frisbee-battle and the guy-jumps-into-MCP thing at the end are still visually unique to me. Good thing I have it on DVD so I don't have to listen when other people tell me what is "awesomely bad". It would be sufficient to say that Tron was a contributing factor in my decision to become a computer scientist :^)

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

Dalroth (85450) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562894)

Whatever.

Tron is a product of its time. I can look back at the movie today, and you know what, despite some of the cheesy special effects and acting, I still think it's a pretty damn good movie. Is it the best move ever? No. But it's enjoyable, and fun, and that's all that matters.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563152)

The awesomely bad graphics are one reason you can not purchase the original Tron in advance of the sequel. The awesomely bad plot is another. Disney doesn't want people to remember how bad the movie really was.

I can't? Tron has been available on DVD since 2002.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

RevWaldo (1186281) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563230)

TRON came out during my "BASIC programming on the school's PETs and making regular runs to Radio Shack and the video arcade" days, so of course I loved it. The best part for me was when one of the characters says "Bring in the logic probe!" and being one of the smattering of people in the audience who laughed because we knew what a logic probe was.

(Also had to love the available-ten-years-from-now graphics used in the fake arcade games. Still love how completely batshit the Comic Con audience went over the sneak preview trailer [youtube.com] for "TR2N". )

.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

Target Practice (79470) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563352)

Have to disagree. Have you seen how Disney releases DVDs? Pinocchio is out in the 70th anniversary edition. Try to find another edition that's current and you'll be disappointed. They do this all the time. Tron will probably be available for purchase again after Tron Legacy comes out.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562372)

Marketing babble for late 90's lenses flare effects. If you thought startrek was bad, yikes for this.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562390)

What part of that is confusing? With the exception of the Space Shuttle, pretty much everything born of the 80s is "awesomely bad."

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

julesh (229690) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562482)

With the exception of the Space Shuttle, pretty much everything born of the 80s is "awesomely bad."

Whereas the Space Shuttle, being born of the 70s (the funding was authorised in 69; most development took place in the 70s; by 1981 an orbiter had been built and the first flights conducted) is amazingly bad.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562556)

I was tempted to say "HEY! I was born in the 80s!" But that only enhances you point.

My best friend was also born in the 80s, and she's awesomely awesome, not awesomely bad.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (2, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562778)

With the exception of the Space Shuttle, pretty much everything born of the 80s is "awesomely bad."

Bullshit. Counting from 1978 to 1992

  • PCs
  • Cell phones
  • CDs
  • Affordable VCRs
  • Affordable microwave ovens
  • Infrared TV remotes
  • Continuation of good hard rock (which pretty much died in the '90s and is practically nonexistent today)
  • Budweiser frogs
  • My daughters!
  • Star Trek II
  • Widespread use of airbags
  • ABS
  • Die Hard
  • The Terminator
  • Total Recall
  • etc.

Granted, there was a whole lot of bad stuff in the '80s, like Reagan, the War On (some) drugs (which launched a snowstorm of cocaine use, since it was really just a war on pot), the Challenger explosion, etc, but it was a hell of a lot better decade than the one now ending.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34563178)

No one cares about your daughters nor your awful taste in music.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563210)

With the exception of the Space Shuttle, pretty much everything born of the 80s is "awesomely bad."

Bullshit. Counting from 1978 to 1992

  • ...
  • My daughters!

  • ...

Granted, there was a whole lot of bad stuff in the '80s, like Reagan, the War On (some) drugs (which launched a snowstorm of cocaine use, since it was really just a war on pot), the Challenger explosion, etc, but it was a hell of a lot better decade than the one now ending.

<joke> Oh, they are awesomely bad girls alright.</joke>

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563282)

You're lucky they were born in the 80's. Otherwise that could border on creepy as they could be underage.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

gmac63 (12603) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562408)

No shit. That's what made the whole movie. In fact, I WISH they would have kept the graphics the way they were. Granted the names :RAM, MCP, CLU, TRON (yes the name is kinda hokey, but...) At least it gave you a whole 'you are truly in cyberspace' look and feel. From what I've seen, its 'lets remake reality as real as we can". Lost the cyber mystique totally.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562590)

TRON is a command line program that turns tracing on.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (5, Informative)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562812)

TRON (yes the name is kinda hokey

TRON [wikipedia.org] is a debugging command in the BASIC programming language. It is an abbreviation of TRace ON. It is used primarily for debugging line-numbered BASIC GOTO and GOSUB statements. In text-mode environments such as the TRS-80 or MS-DOS/IBM PC-DOS, it would print the current line number which was being executed, on-screen. In a windowed environment, when the TRON command had been executed, a window would indicate the line number being executed at that instant. This command's opposite is TROFF, or TRace OFF, used to turn off command tracing.[1]

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (5, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563072)

MCP (which did stand for Master Control Program) was the operating system on Burroughs Large Systems machines, from the B5000 onwards. It was released in 1961, so predated TRON by some time. It was the first OS to support multiple CPUs, the first OS to be written in a high-level language, and the first commercial OS to support virtual memory.

From the director's commentary on the DVD (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562422)

A tremendous amount of the original Tron "graphics" were actually done the old-fashioned way: multiple passes with filters on the cameras, hand-drawn art, and fancy non-computer special-effects tricks.

There were also a lot of computer graphics in the movie, but not nearly as much as modern viewers seem to think.

This is probably because we are so accustomed to everything being done by computer enhancements, especially things that look computer-y, that we just assume anything similar was done on a computer.

In the case of Tron, much of it was not.

Fun fact: the name "Tron" was not derived from the old "Trace On" command, but from the word "electron."

Re:From the director's commentary on the DVD (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562508)

Yes, I know that. But "graphics" != CGI. The graphics in TRON are not "awesomely bad", they're great.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (5, Funny)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562430)

Perhaps the submitter does not understand that Tron's graphics were cutting edge at the time. If he doesn't get off my lawn, I'll have to run him over in my awesomely bad 80s monster truck.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562622)

Exactly. Just take a look at some of the super computers from that time Tron was mind blowing at the time. The plot was a bit weak but at the time most people didn't even own a computer and 1200 baud modems where rare of not even available yet. I know I lusted after a 300 baud modem at that time.
For the time it was unreal. Today many people have a "virtual self" or many virtual selfs on Facebook, WOW, and Slashdot for example.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562532)

Yeah I would describe this article's summary as 'awesomely bad'.

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (1)

SpeedyGonz (771424) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562550)

Ditto, WTF is the submitter smoking?

Back then it was cutting edge, and still today it looks beautiful in it's own kind of retro way

Re:"awesomely bad 80s graphics" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34563114)

Submitter sees "awesomely bad 80s graphics", I see computer art. Pacman is a more iconic image that the thousands of characters introduced in games for more powerful systems isn't he?

I think the CG art in Tron is awesome -- better than current CGI. Hint: This was a film taking place inside a computer, it was never supposed to be photo(un)realistic like Avatar.

Soundtrack (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562352)

On the other hand. I've heard the soundtrack is fantastic as well. They made a very good pick, I feel, in asking Daft Punk to compose the soundtrack.

Re:Soundtrack (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562758)

I wish that Wendy Carlos had done some work on the sound track. Seeing as how she's 71 now though, I don't think that was possible.

Re:Soundtrack (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562858)

71 year olds can't compose music?

Re:Soundtrack (1)

raddan (519638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562836)

I think I'll reserve judgement until I see the movie. A lot of good ingredients went into The Hitchhiker's Guide, like Mos Def as Ford (risky, but possible great choice) and Sam Rockwell as Zaphod (inspired!), but what came out was total crap. Too many special effects, Ford mumbling through his lines, and Arthur's character actually being more annoying than funny. At least they kept the original Guide narrator from the radio series.

I loved the original Tron movie. I love Daft Punk. Here's to hoping this installment makes the story better, not worse.

Gah. (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562366)

Tron was a simple movie. This thing looks like they're throwing in the kitchen sink WRT plot devices. Can't say I really care to see a re-make of Tron. The original was silly enough. I'd bet money the characters will have smartphones inside the computer world...

Re:Gah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562462)

It isn't a re-make. Please stop your useless uninformed conjecture.

Re:Gah. (1)

gmac63 (12603) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562788)

It isn't a re-make. Please stop your useless uninformed conjecture.

We know its not a remake. Its an evolution of what Flynn's character after the first movie. We understand that. I have to tell ya tho, It is one of my 4 favorite movies and just plain fun. It's Disney so that tells you something too.

Take the original TRON for what its worth.

Re:Gah. (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563258)

it's a remake of the freakin' Bible -- creator of the universe's right-hand man wants to be in charge and needs to be taken down

Re:Gah. (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562568)

Then why call it Tron again, why not come up with a new name? Reboot? Recycle? It's re-something.

Re:Gah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562656)

It is a continuation of a storyline set in the same world, otherwise known as a sequel. This is inherently different than a re-make or reboot.

Re:Gah. (1)

whovian (107062) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562818)

In fact, ReBoot [wikipedia.org] is already taken. It had great CGI animation at the time -- sort of rigid movements and not a whole lot of textures.

Re:Gah. (1)

arb phd slp (1144717) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563136)

...and the TV show Reboot was obviously heavily influenced by TRON itself. It was a cartoon about anthropomorphic programs running around inside a computer where they had to play life-or-death games. No, you definitely wouldn't want to call a TRON movie Reboot.

One mistake they did NOT make (1)

beetle496 (677137) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562594)

I'd bet money the characters will have smartphones inside the computer world...

From TFA:

If you want to send a message to someone, you can’t just beam it across cyberspace. You have to get on your light cycle and deliver it in person.

80s graphics were state of the art (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562454)

Those 80s graphics were state of the art in 1980 when the movie started production. It sounds like AC has no idea what the fuck he is talking about. See the "Making of Tron" to understand all the complex work involved.

Re:80s graphics were state of the art (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562496)

indeed, what BS summary is this?

Don't dis the 80s (1)

jewens (993139) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562474)

At least the 80 special effects had folks saying "how did they do that?"

Now you see the same quality of effects as the current movie in everything from video games to commercials for everyday (boring) products.

Re:Don't dis the 80s (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562490)

Damn you George Lucas! Damn you and your ILM!

80s vs 2010 light-cycles (1)

jewens (993139) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562514)

In all fainess to the 80's light cycles, they were only limited to 90 degree turns on the game grid. Once they escaped the grid they turned much like an ordinary two-wheeled machine.

Re:80s vs 2010 light-cycles (2)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562798)

Actually, they were making sharp turns along progressively smaller triangles.

What? Finches? (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562522)

The movie is going to have 17 species of finches? And ground dwelling sea going lizards?

Good job, (1)

daid303 (843777) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562538)

Now go and make Tron Guy proud!

oh we can't have teh interwebs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562544)

so this tron server wasn't connected to the internet? pretty sure the MCP was pulling programs from other networks in the first film.

Re:oh we can't have teh interwebs (1)

GaryOlson (737642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562784)

TRON was an intelligent computer. After a few tastes of ILOVEYOU, Melissa, and the Slammer worm, TRON closed all the ports again.

Re:oh we can't have teh interwebs (1)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562790)

Nope. The internet did not exist until Al Gore invented it in 1992. Before that, all computers were autonomous and did not communicate with each other at all.

Don't Diss the 80s (4, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562642)

Hey, don't diss the 80s. Those effects were state of the art for their time and deserve better than being said that with 10000X more computer power that we can do better now.

Re: If you ignore Star Wars/etc (1)

drhamad (868567) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563002)

They're only state of the art if you ignore the fact that Star Wars came out FIVE YEARS before it.

Re: If you ignore Star Wars/etc (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34563184)

Except that the effects in the original SW were not computer-generated, whereas a lot of the FX in the TRONworld are completely CG.

(posting anomymously as I work at one of the companies that did CG work on the original TRON but do not wish to speak for them).

New versus Original (1)

theamarand (794542) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562664)

I have to say, the new Tron movie has certainly reminded me that I should go back and re-watch the original Tron movie. There's another article on Slashdot talking about how special effects just don't have the same impact now.

http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/10/12/14/1853200/Why-Special-Effects-No-Longer-Impress [slashdot.org]

Before CGI was the standard, you actually had to build models, use actual smoke and pyrotechnics. I have respect for vintage movies that had to work for it and that didn't have the same tools we had today. When a 10-year old girl today has a better processor and more memory in her cellphone than any of the computers used during the creation of Star Wars, that turns the tables a bit.

My problem is that special effects should enhance a story-line or visual, not be the story-line or visual itself. As has been proven by many excellent movies in the past, you don't need to render a 3-D space scene to make the audience believe that our actor is in space. Science fiction stories have also proven for decades that you don't need a visual or even much detail about the technology itself, to build a compelling world that people will visit and revisit again and again. In the end, our minds will always have a greater capacity for creativity than anything that can be generated by a computer, and sometimes leaving out details (Hitchcock? Asimov?) can make a piece have greater significance and longevity than one that pulls out all the stops and ends up leaving the audience feeling empty. Storytelling is becoming a lost art, sadly.

"There's a 68.71% chance you're right." (3, Funny)

mrnick (108356) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562844)

End of line.

Tron. Yawn. (1)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562672)

...more awesomely awesome millennial CGI...

That's too bad. I was hoping it might have an awesomely awesome plot.

Is this going to be like Wallstreet 2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562742)

Seriously, from the previews I have seen this looks like it's going to have the same problems Wallstreet 2 did compared to the original.

It's a bunch of bullshit pop culture stuff crammed into a plotline similar to the old one then hyped up with the advertising machinery. It's probably going suck.

Re:Is this going to be like Wallstreet 2? (1)

arb phd slp (1144717) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563174)

Wall Street 2 didn't have a Daft Punk score, however.

Tron's Original Message (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562768)

Everyone I'm sure is fully aware that the Master Control Program in the first Tron movie basically protrayed an operating system, and applications complained about not being able to compute freely. So the user essentially needed to save the applications from the evil operating system.

So what's the underlying message for Tron: Legacy? Will the MCP portray Microsoft Windows and the overall message is "oh shit, we were completely right!"?

* Note: Its been over 15 years since the last time I watched Tron, so hopefully I remembered the general plot correctly.

Has anyone found the original Tron on TV? (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562822)

Seems obvious that someone would show it. I've been looking for a few months with no luck.

Re:Has anyone found the original Tron on TV? (1)

Teese (89081) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562888)

HDNet showed it a lot recently, but they show movies in cycles.

Joe Kosinski? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34562856)

I'm not sure that the director of this film matters so much, since it has likely been designed by committee, but I'm wondering who Joe Kosinski is.

Tron Legacy cost somewheres around 200 million to make and market yet they put a rookie director in charge of it? His last credit before this was doing a morning show in the UK. I wish I had the number for his agent.

Too bad no one seems to give Chris Cunningham the same chance.

Inside Tron? Really? Digital Gay Porn? (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562904)

I remember Tron. It was a movie named after a program that was represented in this digital world that HAD NO NAME. Tron was a program created by "a user" (and I forget his name) for the purpose of infiltrating the mainframe computer's operating system to discover what the MCP (Master Control Program) was doing.

So as I read the interview and they keep saying "Inside Tron" I have to wonder if they really knew what they were saying. Tron was the name of a character, not the world. It would be okay to say "the world of Tron" to identify the world, but not "inside Tron"... that's just kinda... ihhhh

Re:Inside Tron? Really? Digital Gay Porn? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34563268)

Stop being so pedantic! The name of the movie is 'Tron'...

Backlit film (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 3 years ago | (#34562996)

The irony of the new film being awash in CGI is that the original film actually had very little CGI. The tank exteriors, Bit, grid bugs, lightcycles, and maybe a couple other elements were, iirc, the only computer-generated elements in the original Tron, amounting to about 20 minutes of footage. Most of the rest of the "effects" were done with matte paintings and backlighting.

Saw a screening last night, not impressed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34563062)

Some people say there are no new ideas. Maybe so. There are certainly very few in "Tron: Legacy".

I was disappointed to find that "Tron: Legacy" doesn't really expound on the world portrayed in 1982. Rather than taking advantage of 28 years of progress in CGI to present an even more fantastical universe, great pains are taken to make things look more solid and physical. In areas that the earlier film threw out the rules of a physical world, the sequel seems very much bound by Newtonian physics. It's as if the producers were worried that their film about being laser-zapped into a computer and playing gladiatorial games to please your dad's computerized evil twin just wasn't realistic enough.

I had no problem suspending my disbelief. When movies like "Blade Runner" or "Strange Days" (that present possible near-future scenarios in our own universe) push the envelope of disbelief much further than the inside-the-computer alternate reality of "Tron: Legacy", you know you're in trouble.

Still, I enjoyed the presentation. The visuals were generally stunning in IMAX 3D and the Daft Punk soundtrack seemed to drive the action. Jeff Bridges' Zen version of "The Dude" from "The Big Lebowski" works well enough, though, again, breaks no new ground. 3D effects didn't always evoke the same wow-factor that I experienced with "Avatar" in IMAX 3D, but they were still quite effective.

Overall, I have no hesitation in recommending the film, even though I would heavily chide the producers for not taking full advantage of the intervening advances in technology to portray a less-recognizable universe. I guess "accessibility" is the watchword when you're producing a $200 million Disney behemoth. Give me a $10 million film that shows me something new ("Equilibrium", anyone) any day of the week. "Tron: Legacy" is an experience (especially in IMAX 3D), but not one that will stick with you, unfortunately.

Re:Saw a screening last night, not impressed (1)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563238)

Give me a $10 million film that shows me something new ("Equilibrium", anyone) any day of the week. .

Ok, I was with you right up until you called Equilibrium "new".

Unless by "new" you mean instead of plagiarizing a previous movie, they produced a montage of plagerism on a scale never before seen in a motion picture. They managed to rip off: 1984, Farenheit 451, The Matrix, A Brave New World, and Logans Run...all in one movie.

That's not to say it was a bad movie, I liked it a LOT...but it was as far from original as you can get.

you have to be kidding...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34563256)

"less awesomely bad 80s graphics and more awesomely awesome millennial CGI."

Truly there is no accounting for taste - nothing new here. But motherf****** this is meant to be a site for nerds... this really is a new low for slashdot.

If you're not just trying to get attention mr taco then this is the most fucking incredible thing i've seen in a long time.

A new fucking low.

Really Tron 3? (1)

Stregano (1285764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34563310)

I guess I am way too big of a nerd, but I always took Tron: Legacy as Tron 3. Tron 2.0 was released on PC, X-Box, and GBA Tron 2.0 [wikipedia.org] and this follow's Alan's son. Tron: Legacy follows Flynn's son. The game is even called Tron 2.0, which would mean it is the direct sequel. I guess with movie sequels and not counting other media this is Tron 2, but come on, this is Tron we are talking about here, it makes sense that one of its sequels is a video game.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?