or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Tron: Legacy (2D and 3D)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tron: Legacy (2D and 3D) - Page 2

post #31 of 622
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Overall, this felt like an average movie with average plot elements with none of the charm or innovation of the original. It didn't try anything new or push anything forward. It was merely a carbon copy of so many other movies placed in a world slightly skewed from our own.

I don't want to put words in nick's mouth, but what seemed very innovative back then is very dated today, that doesn't mean it doesn't remain enjoyable, but still, I wouldn't watch the original Tron very often now. I'm just glad I have it and I do want to see it from time to time. Some lines in the original are *very* corny in 2011. The cool concept remains, but some scenes are laughable imo. In Legacy, they took all the corny stuff off (they didn't really have a choice in this day and age), 'expanded' the digital world of Tron to a visual marvel (that's just my opinion here, again), added more depth to the Flynn's character (even in 1982, Flynn was kinda cliche too, the young genius getting fired and fighting for his credibility...). And they added Quorra. End of debate.



Seriously though, and back to Ebert's point of view, which I think nails it, yes he might be too old for 'the world of Tron' (yet he wasn't too old in 1982), but one doesn't have to be nerd to appreciate the film. And this is also where Disney succeeded. I know I'm biased simply because I liked the movie; my wife is certainly not a nerd, but she did enjoy it rather much as well. To me, and put into context, the original *was* too nerdy (which is why it's so corny now), Legacy is not. And visually, they managed to create a believable world mostly out of black tones and glowing lines, and that's quite an accomplishment, even in our "CGI age"


Pre-order placed as well!
post #32 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

I don't want to put words in nick's mouth, but what seemed very innovative back then is very dated today, that doesn't mean it doesn't remain enjoyable, but still, I wouldn't watch the original Tron very often now. I'm just glad I have it and I do want to see it from time to time. Some lines in the original are *very* corny in 2011. The cool concept remains, but some scenes are laughable imo.

You could say any movie using old technology becomes dated at some point. So will Legacy. Another example from that era would be "War Games", which relied heavily on computers that makes it look dated now. However, it's still one of the great geek movies.

The question is, while you say you wouldn't watch the original TRON very often now, I have to ask: how often do you think you'll want to see Legacy in 20 years?

My point is, the original was innovative for its time. Legacy is merely pretty to look at.

Quote:


In Legacy, they took all the corny stuff off (they didn't really have a choice in this day and age)

...I think they made it more corny with all the "Zen" stuff with Flynn, the whole stupid Zuse thing and the army of computer programs ready to march on the real world. Then they added every cliche in the book to top it off.

Quote:


'expanded' the digital world of Tron to a visual marvel (that's just my opinion here, again)

Now, come on, you can't compare them that way. TRON was a visual marvel when it was released. The fact that technology has improved since then isn't the fault of the original.

Quote:


added more depth to the Flynn's character (even in 1982, Flynn was kinda cliche too, the young genius getting fired and fighting for his credibility...). And they added Quorra. End of debate.

The funny part is, the original Flynn could be a prediction of the path of Steve Jobs: the tech genius who gets ousted from his own company, then fights his way back and becomes rich from it later with future innovations.

Quote:


Seriously though, and back to Ebert's point of view, which I think nails it, yes he might be too old for 'the world of Tron' (yet he wasn't too old in 1982), but one doesn't have to be nerd to appreciate the film. And this is also where Disney succeeded. I know I'm biased simply because I liked the movie; my wife is certainly not a nerd, but she did enjoy it rather much as well. To me, and put into context, the original *was* too nerdy (which is why it's so corny now), Legacy is not.

...and that's a failure of the new version to tie itself to current computer users. The old one tied to users back then - the problem was, there weren't enough of them to make the movie a true success.

Quote:


And visually, they managed to create a believable world mostly out of black tones and glowing lines, and that's quite an accomplishment, even in our "CGI age"

I find that another failure when you consider the accomplishment of creating the TRON world in the original without the CG tech of today. The new version simply looks like they modeled everything on a cityscape at night with cues from the MCP desk in Dillinger's office.

This should have been a movie to excite fans of the original (since it sure wasn't going to bring the masses in that didn't see it). Instead, it tried to be a mainstream movie that was merely a "meh" experience.

Honestly, the only thing that really grabbed me was the light cycle scene. Unfortunately, that puts it on the same level as "SW: Episode 2" for me, of which only the pod race really excited me.
post #33 of 622
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Now, come on, you can't compare them that way. TRON was a visual marvel when it was released. The fact that technology has improved since then isn't the fault of the original.

I didn't make a comparison, just said they 'expanded' the digital world. In that regard I think they succeeded.


Quote:


...and that's a failure of the new version to tie itself to current computer users. The old one tied to users back then - the problem was, there weren't enough of them to make the movie a true success.


I find that another failure when you consider the accomplishment of creating the TRON world in the original without the CG tech of today. The new version simply looks like they modeled everything on a cityscape at night with cues from the MCP desk in Dillinger's office.

We obviously have different opinions here and that's fine. To me though, as groundbreaking as the orginal was technically, it was a *minimalistic* world, and it still is a minimalistic world in Legacy, hence the black tones and glowing lines that I was referring to. Of course there are the cities and stuff, but still, it maintains some of the feel that was present in the first film.
post #34 of 622
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

...and that's a failure of the new version to tie itself to current computer users. The old one tied to users back then - the problem was, there weren't enough of them to make the movie a true success.

Why is it a failure? Who doesn't use the internet today, who hasn't a computer? (Maybe I don't get your point so in that case sorry)
post #35 of 622
Just curious: Will the 3D Bluray (or 2D bluray for that matter) have the IMAX 3-D sequences in 1.78, like what was done with The Dark Knight?

I saw a preview trailer formatted this way, where the 2-D real world scenes were shown in 2.40, while the 3D virtual world was shown in 1.85. ..Was quite effective..

The link below is YouTube 3D encoded, so set your 3-D viewing preferences accordingly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyoj9Aj93k0
post #36 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Why is it a failure? Who doesn't use the internet today, who hasn't a computer? (Maybe I don't get your point so in that case sorry)

Because the new movie tied itself to the old one, not the computer user of today. Today, it's all about streaming media, social networking and online gaming, with a massive push toward the portable "app". The characters in the TRON world are supposed to me the manifestation of technology, barred from entering the real world by a portal that can only be opened from the outside. Yet, there was no evidence any of that was in place there. It was still DOS and machine code.

Instead of the state of computers and programs of 2010, we got a cheap version of 1984. This was Skynet...if the menace was the result of pissed off Keebler Elves.
post #37 of 622
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Because the new movie tied itself to the old one, not the computer user of today. Today, it's all about streaming media, social networking and online gaming, with a massive push toward the portable "app". The characters in the TRON world are supposed to me the manifestation of technology, barred from entering the real world by a portal that can only be opened from the outside. Yet, there was no evidence any of that was in place there. It was still DOS and machine code.

Instead of the state of computers and programs of 2010, we got a cheap version of 1984.

That's precisely the point. Apps and facebook and online gaming are not part of this world.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

The Tron World hasn't had access to the internet, it's a closed system. The world evolved but it evolved based on what it was, not what was surrounding it. It's the world Flynn created in 1989 when he disappeared. By evolving they became smarter, intelligent, and now Clu and co. want out.
post #38 of 622
Wasn't there a part in the movie where Sam is describing how the outside world is and we pretty much hear from Flynn "wow, incredible!"?
post #39 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregK View Post

Just curious: Will the 3D Bluray (or 2D bluray for that matter) have the IMAX 3-D sequences in 1.78, like what was done with The Dark Knight?

I saw a preview trailer formatted this way, where the 2-D real world scenes were shown in 2.40, while the 3D virtual world was shown in 1.85. ..Was quite effective..

The link below is YouTube 3D encoded, so set your 3-D viewing preferences accordingly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyoj9Aj93k0

I don't remember the aspect ratio ever changing when I saw it on Imax.
post #40 of 622
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirjonsnow View Post

I don't remember the aspect ratio ever changing when I saw it on Imax.

Oh yes it did, and it was pretty! I think the race was IMAX AR, and for example when Sam arrives in the Tron world and is being taken, the aspect ratio shifted... I'm sure you can google it and find out which sequences exactly for the whole movie.
post #41 of 622
Amazon just sent me an email letting me know I can pre-order the boxed set.

I have an issue with this boxed set. There is a 3D disc in it. I don't want a 3D disc! Why no 4 disc edition without the 3D disc!

Disney...you disappoint me.

http://www.amazon.com/Tron-Five-Disc...6847396&sr=1-7
post #42 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Because the new movie tied itself to the old one, not the computer user of today. Today, it's all about streaming media, social networking and online gaming, with a massive push toward the portable "app". The characters in the TRON world are supposed to me the manifestation of technology, barred from entering the real world by a portal that can only be opened from the outside. Yet, there was no evidence any of that was in place there. It was still DOS and machine code.

Instead of the state of computers and programs of 2010, we got a cheap version of 1984. This was Skynet...if the menace was the result of pissed off Keebler Elves.

I wouldn't say it's ALL about social networking, online gaming and streaming media today.

Anyway if you start getting into the details the entire thing is so ridiculous that I don't see the point. It would've just become unbelievable silly if they had the characters become manifestations of IMs, pokes, profiles, netflix downloads, etc. come on! Plus how would his being trapped in the old computer have anything to do with all this stuff??

I don't particularly see how the first one felt particularly tied into using computers back in the early to mid 80's! Everyone though it was utterly ridiculous (lots of Atari and CBM, and apple users, computers hardly rare back then) and just ignored all that and turned the brain off and enjoyed it.
post #43 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Oh yes it did, and it was pretty! I think the race was IMAX AR, and for example when Sam arrives in the Tron world and is being taken, the aspect ratio shifted... I'm sure you can google it and find out which sequences exactly for the whole movie.

I saw it on one of the digital imax screens and the AR definitely changed (although nothing super dramatic like 1.85:1 or 2:40:1 to true imax ratio or anything).

Did anyone see it on 70mm imax?
post #44 of 622
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by neveser View Post

Amazon just sent me an email letting me know I can pre-order the boxed set.

I have an issue with this boxed set. There is a 3D disc in it. I don't want a 3D disc! Why no 4 disc edition without the 3D disc!

Disney...you disappoint me.

http://www.amazon.com/Tron-Five-Disc...6847396&sr=1-7

yet I don't think the price would be much different for a 3-disc set... I don't care for the 3D disc either, but oh well. And if there is a time when I'm properly 3D-equipped, I'll check it out!
post #45 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by skibum5000 View Post

I saw it on one of the digital imax screens and the AR definitely changed (although nothing super dramatic like 1.85:1 or 2:40:1 to true imax ratio or anything).

Did anyone see it on 70mm imax?

I saw it in IMAX and there were definitely points in the movie that were in 1.37:1 or whatever the IMAX ratio was, while everything else was in 1.85:1. I think they'll probably put this out in 1.85:1 instead of 2.40:1, because most theaters, even none IMAX played the movie at 1.85:1, and very few 3D and 2D places played it at 2.40:1. Seriously, though, the movie looks better in 1.85:1 (to me anyways), so I really hope it just stays there.
post #46 of 622
Umm... can anyone confirm that the original movie included in the boxed set is in fact a blu-ray?

It's unclear from the image whether it's BD or just DVD.
post #47 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebard View Post

Umm... can anyone confirm that the original movie included in the boxed set is in fact a blu-ray?

It's unclear from the image whether it's BD or just DVD.

The original movie is a Blu-ray.
post #48 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxarwing42 View Post

I saw it in IMAX and there were definitely points in the movie that were in 1.37:1 or whatever the IMAX ratio was, while everything else was in 1.85:1. I think they'll probably put this out in 1.85:1 instead of 2.40:1, because most theaters, even none IMAX played the movie at 1.85:1, and very few 3D and 2D places played it at 2.40:1. Seriously, though, the movie looks better in 1.85:1 (to me anyways), so I really hope it just stays there.

I saw it in IMAX and I hope they preserve the aspect ratio shifts on Blu-ray. I usually prefer 2.40:1, but 3D feels a bit more immersive when it's allowed to fill the screen.
post #49 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebard View Post

Umm... can anyone confirm that the original movie included in the boxed set is in fact a blu-ray?

It's unclear from the image whether it's BD or just DVD.

I just preordered from Amazon, and it's clearer in the title:

Tron: Legacy (Five-Disc Combo Blu-ray 3D / Blu-ray / DVD / Digital Copy + Tron: The Original Classic Special Edition Blu-ray)
post #50 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by skibum5000 View Post

I don't particularly see how the first one felt particularly tied into using computers back in the early to mid 80's! Everyone though it was utterly ridiculous (lots of Atari and CBM, and apple users, computers hardly rare back then) and just ignored all that and turned the brain off and enjoyed it.

I never said computers were rare.

I said few people could afford one - and, no, those Ataris, Commodores and Adams weren't true computers. They were game devices disguised as computers, which is why you would never find them in schools.

I'm talking about 1982 when the IBM PC and the Apple II series computer were at the top of the heap - and they cost a heap of cash in 1982 dollars. An IBM PC a year earlier started at $1500 - with no disk drives. A year after the movie came out, my family bought a model with one of the first color monitors, 128K of memory and a price tag of over $3000. Heck, even the Atari 800 was $1000 (OK, $999.95). Just for some perspective, $1000 in 1982 is roughly $2200 now.

This was before the Mac, before widespread IBM clones and before Windows and before stuff started to come down in price in the 90's.

It was also just prior to the video game crash that occurred in the 80's, which decimated the industry for a period of time and killed several home consoles.
post #51 of 622
I just hope the 7.1 track makes it home
post #52 of 622
I saw the IMAX version and I really don't think there were any aspect ratio shifts at all

I don't recall seeing that it was filmed in different ratios anywhere either, just that there were flat and 3-D scenes.

i could be wrong, but I don't remember any shifts in image size, just depth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by giantchicken View Post
I saw it in IMAX and I hope they preserve the aspect ratio shifts on Blu-ray. I usually prefer 2.40:1, but 3D feels a bit more immersive when it's allowed to fill the screen.
post #53 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

I never said computers were rare.

I said few people could afford one - and, no, those Ataris, Commodores and Adams weren't true computers. They were game devices disguised as computers, which is why you would never find them in schools.

I'm talking about 1982 when the IBM PC and the Apple II series computer were at the top of the heap - and they cost a heap of cash in 1982 dollars.

Wow Ataris and CBMs were not true computers??? Good grief. What exactly were they then? Calculators? Abacus?
Apple II and IBM at top of the heap? Apple II????

Wow, you really swallowed the kool-aid back then.

The Atari and C64 were 10x the computer the Apple II ever was.
What was an Apple II? A keyboard, a little memory and a 1MHz 6502 CPU. That is it. No custom chipsets, nothing.

What was the Atari 8bit? A keyboard, a little memory, a 1.79MHz 6502 CPU (yes, almost twice the computing power of the Apple II right there) plus it had custom graphics and audio chips so the CPU didn't have to do everything itself.

The IBM PC had the same basic joke of a design as the Apple II, although the Intel chip was a little faster and more powerful. A bit more powerful for raw calculation but no custom graphics/audio chips either. IBM put there bottom rung design team on it since they thought the idea of home computers was dumb and didn't expect it to go anywhere.

A few schools did use Ataris and CBMs but yes many did not but:
1. since when do you look to schools for the best decisions?
2. the Apple II/TRS80 did come out first and many had already purchased and couldn't afford to re-buy; heck some stuck with printer as screen ancient junkers
3. Apple had a certain brilliant marketing guy who knew that giving schools deals and free this and that would then help them get the impression that they were the real computer and the one to have at home; MS too
4. apple/ms had much better business guys pushing things and they played numerous dirty tricks behind the scenes too (with the press as well)


Quote:
An IBM PC a year earlier started at $1500 - with no disk drives. A year after the movie came out, my family bought a model with one of the first color monitors, 128K of memory and a price tag of over $3000. Heck, even the Atari 800 was $1000 (OK, $999.95). Just for some perspective, $1000 in 1982 is roughly $2200 now.

Well not so much by '82 at Trons release true, but not long after, just by '83 I remember a ton of kids in grade school got Atari 8bits and even moreso by '84. C64s too. I think you could get the Atari 800 for around $780 or so by then. True, that wasn't cheap in those days, but all the same plenty had 'em. Granted it wasn't like today where almost everyone has one and the people who had them were certainly more technical on average than today and you can get one for a lot less money today, but I wouldn't call 'em particularly out of the ordinary by '83.

Quote:
This was before the Mac, before widespread IBM clones and before Windows and before stuff started to come down in price in the 90's.

Once again that was the junk, the MAC and Windows clones. Crazy expensive and no custom audio, disk, graphics processors, no dedicated video memory, no multi-tasking at all at first and not pre-emptive until years later. Heck Apple and Microsoft actually used Amiga computers hidden behind the tables to run their trade show appearances at times, hah, because their own stuff couldn't cut it. They were the leaders in marketing/management/business not cutting edge technology. Granted it was more expensive back then since even an Amiga system was around $1500-$1800 early on.

I remember all the MAC and Windows clone lemmings going on and on about how the more advanced Amigas and such were just plastic little toys because they had graphics processors and could show more than a few colors at once and was told again and again that multi-tasking was just a little toy gimmick. (I even had some joker salesman try to talk me into at least getting an Apple II instead of an Amiga even if I wouldn't go for a top computer like a MAC or IBM PC clone. Hah 1 mhz 6502 with a few K's of memory and no custom chips and barely even an OS is a better buy than a 7MHz 68000 with 1.5MB memory and custom graphics bus, stereo sample audio, blimmer for moving graphics around, display list controller, GUI (plus UNIX-like console complete with pipes, etc.), pre-emptive multi-tasking OS, etc. etc.

Funny how the same people then went on years later to brag about their OS finally 'introducing' pre-emptive multi-tasking to the world or how amazing their NVidia GTX 580 and PCIe bus are today hah. I guess they decided they liked little plastic toys and not 'real' computers in the end.

A modern windows/mac box looks a heck of a lot more than the 'toy' 'not real computers' of years past than the Apples and IBM clones of years past.

Anyway let's get back to Tron....
post #54 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddski View Post
I saw the IMAX version and I really don't think there were any aspect ratio shifts at all

I don't recall seeing that it was filmed in different ratios anywhere either, just that there were flat and 3-D scenes.

i could be wrong, but I don't remember any shifts in image size, just depth.
I definitely saw minor shifts at the digital imax (the 70mm film imax may have had larger shifts). It seemed like only some of the 3D scenes jumped AR though, not all.
post #55 of 622
The "real-world" sequences were in 2.40. Most of the Tron world sequences were in 1.44:1. This was at a real IMAX theater with the film projector, not the 2k digital LieMAX. There were definitely aspect ratio shifts throughout the film. As a whole, they were not jarring, unlike the shifts in TDK.
post #56 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by singhcr View Post

The "real-world" sequences were in 2.40. Most of the Tron world sequences were in 1.44:1. This was at a real IMAX theater with the film projector, not the 2k digital LieMAX. There were definitely aspect ratio shifts throughout the film. As a whole, they were not jarring, unlike the shifts in TDK.

Yes, this is what I saw as well and everything was common top-line, so the shifts in AR kinda made you feel like you were falling into the movie by filling in the lower 20-30% of your vision when you were in "The Grid." Very effective IMHO. If they preserve the AR changes, though, I don't think they will keep common-top. They'll just center the 2.4:1 scenes in the middle. I would be surprised, anyway.
post #57 of 622
Was all set to order it til I saw the price. I was ok with Star Wars 1-6 for $90. Its actually a good deal. But $55 for 2 movies is a little ridiculous. I will place the order anyway hoping for a price drop, but I am going to cancel unless it drops down more.
post #58 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjmarchini View Post

Was all set to order it til I saw the price. I was ok with Star Wars 1-6 for $90. Its actually a good deal. But $55 for 2 movies is a little ridiculous. I will place the order anyway hoping for a price drop, but I am going to cancel unless it drops down more.

I'm hoping for a price drop as well. I was able to use a $5 Disney coupon. Still $50 for 2 movies is a bit steep.
Not too thrilled at all about getting stuck with a 3D disc I won't need.
post #59 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by singhcr View Post

The "real-world" sequences were in 2.40. Most of the Tron world sequences were in 1.44:1. This was at a real IMAX theater with the film projector, not the 2k digital LieMAX. There were definitely aspect ratio shifts throughout the film. As a whole, they were not jarring, unlike the shifts in TDK.

So they did shoot some in true IMAX format then. The AR change is way more dramatic then on IMAX compared to LieMAX (where it was kept pretty modest looked almost sort of like 1.85:1 going to 1.78:1 )
post #60 of 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flexx View Post

Yes, this is what I saw as well and everything was common top-line, so the shifts in AR kinda made you feel like you were falling into the movie by filling in the lower 20-30% of your vision when you were in "The Grid." Very effective IMHO. If they preserve the AR changes, though, I don't think they will keep common-top. They'll just center the 2.4:1 scenes in the middle. I would be surprised, anyway.

Interesting method
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Tron: Legacy (2D and 3D)