TRON (2) Legacy

Started by Bryancd, July 26, 2008, 09:19:03 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

X

Quote from: HawkeyeMeds on December 20, 2010, 03:16:04 PM
Well i tell you what, i'm looking forward to your review on your 3D TV. I noticed something the otherd ay, on TV a advert for a 3D nature programme, and it did look like it stood out a bit, now if thats the future that i can deal.
There are 3D display tvs here in stores with the glasses. I saw a segment of some sort of carnival and I was beyond amazed. I crave one of those tvs like Bryan backs Apple.

Cost aside, I hope to have a nice pretty one being the centerpiece of my entertainment system as soon as there is 3D broadcast support. I want something other than just movies, but from what I've read, sports games have already been done in 3D and once there are more events .. I will be getting that system. It's like looking out of a window to the world outside.

Rico

I see A LOT of movies in the theater.  My eyes are used to a certainly level of brightness when seeing a film in a theater.  The whole time I watched the "Alice 3-D" movie it seemed dimmer to me.  I'm not talking about taking the glasses on and off.  The picture was less bright - period.  I'm not a cat, but I do have pretty good eyes.  Again, all I say is "I don't need no stinking 3-D" to enjoy a good movie.  Simply as that.

X

Quote from: Rico on December 20, 2010, 03:28:45 PM
I see A LOT of movies in the theater.  My eyes are used to a certainly level of brightness when seeing a film in a theater.  The whole time I watched the "Alice 3-D" movie it seemed dimmer to me.  I'm not talking about taking the glasses on and off.  The picture was less bright - period.  I'm not a cat, but I do have pretty good eyes.  Again, all I say is "I don't need no stinking 3-D" to enjoy a good movie.  Simply as that.
I get what you're saying, but was that the 3D or just Tim Burton? His films are always darker than other films. I think that at some point someone will need to direct compare 3D brightness with the brightness level of the same film in non-3D

Bryancd

Ok, I'm back from TRON 3D! Now, you all know I am with X and Kenny, I enjoy natively filmed 3D. I adored Avatar. It is true that the first 20 min of TRON has no 3D effects but you still wear the glasses and it looks perfectly fine. To Rico's point, yes, it is a bit dimmed due to the glasses but nothing very noticeable. Once they enter the grid, the 3D comes in to full effect. Let me just say right off the bat, this is a visually STUNNING movie. The 3D provided a nice compliment BUT this films visuals would be as good in 2D. The 3D is very....mellow, for the most part. The visual environment of the computer world is very dark with lots of beautiful light. It doesn't lend itself as much to the beauty of the 3D like Avatar where it was a real world natural environment. Avatar's 3D submersed me into the world, Tron's was more of a quiet compliment.

When TRON is doing action, this movie is terrific and exciting. When this movie is doing exposition, it drags terrible and it requires a lot of talking to get the story and backstory across. I had a lot of fun but the movie has some serious pacing issues and is about 10min too long. It awesome light cycles or disc war followed by long exposition followed by exciting fight followed by long exposition, ect. Having said that, this movie has two of the most stunningly beautiful women in it to stare at which really helps.

Bottom line, TRON Legacy suffers from what TRON suffered from. Amazing visuals and a slow story. The story wasn't bad, per se, but it was involved and the film has trouble getting around that. But I enjoyed it and recommend seeing , in either 2D or 3D as that doesn't matter as much with this one. One benefit of seeing the 3D is all the previews are the upcoming 3D releases. One thing is glaringly clear, Disney fins do excellent 3D. Cars 2, Pirates 3, Mars Needs Moms look great in 3D. Marvel and DC' Thor, Green Lantern, and Green Hornet don't look as good in 3D.

X

Quote from: Bryancd on December 20, 2010, 04:08:46 PM
Ok, I'm back from TRON 3D! Now, you all know I am with X and Kenny, I enjoy natively filmed 3D. I adored Avatar. It is true that the first 20 min of TRON has no 3D effects but you still wear the glasses and it looks perfectly fine. To Rico's point, yes, it is a bit dimmed due to the glasses but nothing very noticeable. Once they enter the grid, the 3D comes in to full effect. Let me just say right off the bat, this is a visually STUNNING movie. The 3D provided a nice compliment BUT this films visuals would be as good in 2D. The 3D is very....mellow, for the most part. The visual environment of the computer world is very dark with lots of beautiful light. It doesn't lend itself as much to the beauty of the 3D like Avatar where it was a real world natural environment. Avatar's 3D submersed me into the world, Tron's was more of a quiet compliment.

When TRON is doing action, this movie is terrific and exciting. When this movie is doing exposition, it drags terrible and it requires a lot of talking to get the story and backstory across. I had a lot of fun but the movie has some serious pacing issues and is about 10min too long. It awesome light cycles or disc war followed by long exposition followed by exciting fight followed by long exposition, ect. Having said that, this movie has two of the most stunningly beautiful women in it to stare at which really helps.

Bottom line, TRON Legacy suffers from what TRON suffered from. Amazing visuals and a slow story. The story wasn't bad, per se, but it was involved and the film has trouble getting around that. But I enjoyed it and recommend seeing , in either 2D or 3D as that doesn't matter as much with this one. One benefit of seeing the 3D is all the previews are the upcoming 3D releases. One thing is glaringly clear, Disney fins do excellent 3D. Cars 2, Pirates 3, Mars Needs Moms look great in 3D. Marvel and DC' Thor, Green Lantern, and Green Hornet don't look as good in 3D.
You sold me on seeing it ASAP. I was expecting great visuals and a slow story, I don't have rose tinted glasses on about the first one, but I still love it. If they exceeded that with this one and pushed the visuals up a level, then I'm stoked.

The best part is that this is the first Tron with CG. I want to see how they do that now that they can.

Blackride

@Bryan thats the same thing I thought. Just too painful for me when there was no action or special fx. Please note that I am not saying this is a horrible film because it's not, but I was hoping for a bit more from the story and characters.
Ripley: Ash. Any suggestions from you or Mother?
Ash: No, we're still collating.
Ripley: [Laughing in disbelief] You're what? You're still collating? I find that hard to believe.

X

Quote from: Blackride on December 20, 2010, 05:03:06 PM
@Bryan thats the same thing I thought. Just too painful for me when there was no action or special fx. Please note that I am not saying this is a horrible film because it's not, but I was hoping for a bit more from the story and characters.
What did you think of the first one?

Blackride

Quote from: X on December 20, 2010, 05:07:49 PM
Quote from: Blackride on December 20, 2010, 05:03:06 PM
@Bryan thats the same thing I thought. Just too painful for me when there was no action or special fx. Please note that I am not saying this is a horrible film because it's not, but I was hoping for a bit more from the story and characters.
What did you think of the first one?

Same as the remake :) . It showed some cool effects and had some cool ideas but they never explored them.
Ripley: Ash. Any suggestions from you or Mother?
Ash: No, we're still collating.
Ripley: [Laughing in disbelief] You're what? You're still collating? I find that hard to believe.

X

Quote from: Blackride on December 20, 2010, 05:10:23 PM
Quote from: X on December 20, 2010, 05:07:49 PM
Quote from: Blackride on December 20, 2010, 05:03:06 PM
@Bryan thats the same thing I thought. Just too painful for me when there was no action or special fx. Please note that I am not saying this is a horrible film because it's not, but I was hoping for a bit more from the story and characters.
What did you think of the first one?

Same as the remake :) . It showed some cool effects and had some cool ideas but they never explored them.
LOL! So it was pretty much true to the first movie's pacing with updated effects? That's pretty much what I expected, I didn't think they were going to drift too far from center.

Blackride

Quote from: X on December 20, 2010, 05:38:08 PM
Quote from: Blackride on December 20, 2010, 05:10:23 PM
Quote from: X on December 20, 2010, 05:07:49 PM
Quote from: Blackride on December 20, 2010, 05:03:06 PM
@Bryan thats the same thing I thought. Just too painful for me when there was no action or special fx. Please note that I am not saying this is a horrible film because it's not, but I was hoping for a bit more from the story and characters.
What did you think of the first one?

Same as the remake :) . It showed some cool effects and had some cool ideas but they never explored them.
LOL! So it was pretty much true to the first movie's pacing with updated effects? That's pretty much what I expected, I didn't think they were going to drift too far from center.

YEP! Same thing.
Ripley: Ash. Any suggestions from you or Mother?
Ash: No, we're still collating.
Ripley: [Laughing in disbelief] You're what? You're still collating? I find that hard to believe.

Bryancd

One of the most impressive effects is the 28 years they manage to remove from Jeff Bridges face! It looks amazing, seemless.

ElfManDan


Rico

Trying to work out some time today to go see this later this afternoon.

billybob476

I hope to see it during my Christmas break too, I still need to see Harry Potter as well!

Geekyfanboy

Yeah I'm going next week during break.. want to see Narnia 3 as well