Why isn't Tron out on DVD?
- Thread starter Trekker4747
- Start date
^ When you gave him the boot, did you say "END OF LINE"? 
^ When you gave him the boot, did you say "END OF LINE"?
You know how we always think of the perfect thing to say just when the moment's passed, or like a week later? (Sometimes, for me, it's years later.) I wish I'd thought of that. That would have been a good one.
Even better if he'd derezzed on the spot...
Disney announced yesterday that Tron on Blu-Ray is planned for release this year.
^ Really? Cool. Can you give a link?
And you're sure they meant the original film, yes? They weren't talking about Legacy? I just checked The Digital Bits, and they said that Disney did announce several Blu-Rays, one of which included Legacy. Maybe this is the film you meant?
And you're sure they meant the original film, yes? They weren't talking about Legacy? I just checked The Digital Bits, and they said that Disney did announce several Blu-Rays, one of which included Legacy. Maybe this is the film you meant?
Here's the scoop....
Tron getting some tweeks before blu ray release
The short version is that blu ray treatments on Tron REALLY showed how outdated the CGI is and Lisberger has gone back in to do color corrections and tweek a few things.. That said, they have been very upfront that they are not pulling a George Lucas on the original and changing it significantly...
Tron getting some tweeks before blu ray release
The short version is that blu ray treatments on Tron REALLY showed how outdated the CGI is and Lisberger has gone back in to do color corrections and tweek a few things.. That said, they have been very upfront that they are not pulling a George Lucas on the original and changing it significantly...
Yeah, the color correction is a must. I just watched my 2002 DVD for the first time in years. It really stands out how various effects techniques were used from scene to scene. It almost appears like 3 different movies shot with the same same cast at the same time but with different cinematography. Even the computer coloring of the electric lights on the characters shift from shot to shot sometimes.
^ I don't remember Quorra looking quite that punk...
I saw the original movie just before seeing the sequel, and I think it might be a mistake to package them together, because the sequel falls short in a number of ways when compared to the original. (Mainly color. The original's computer world was richly colored and diverse and only the people were monochrome, yet for some reason the sequel's computer world is profoundly more bland. I mean, look at that cover. It might as well be in black and white.)
It may also be brilliant. The original has been in moratorium for a while now and packaging it with the new film might just get a few more people to pick it up just for the original Tron on blu-ray. So far I haven't seen plans to release it on its own...
I agree that Legacy did need a bit more color, but I still think it was a fun enough movie.
I agree that Legacy did need a bit more color, but I still think it was a fun enough movie.
^It was an okay film, but I just don't think it works as a continuation of the original. Tron was essentially an animated film, in style and technique, despite the inclusion of live actors. The whole thing about embracing the aesthetic of an artificial, simulated environment and trying to make the live actors look like part of it. Legacy was far more of a live-action film in look and style. While the original computer world consisted almost entirely of what we would now call virtual sets (albeit hand-animated in any scene with live actors, since the technology for compositing live actors into CGI didn't exist yet), this film made much more extensive use of real sets, which is ironic considering how much the technology for virtual sets has progressed. I just wasn't convinced by the pretense that T:L's world was a continuation of the world created in the original film. It was just too different in design and execution.
And in the characters as well. T:L opens with Flynn's son stealing Encom's proprietary software and distributing it as freeware for everyone, alleging that that's what his father would've wanted. But the original film's Flynn had the exact opposite motivation: he wanted to prove that Dillinger had stolen his game designs so that he would get proper credit and compensation for his proprietary work. He was nothing if not a capitalist. So the discontinuity between the films exists on a character level as well as a design level. Either film works reasonably well by itself, as its own entity, but watch them back-to-back and the illusion that they represent a continuous reality is undermined.
And in the characters as well. T:L opens with Flynn's son stealing Encom's proprietary software and distributing it as freeware for everyone, alleging that that's what his father would've wanted. But the original film's Flynn had the exact opposite motivation: he wanted to prove that Dillinger had stolen his game designs so that he would get proper credit and compensation for his proprietary work. He was nothing if not a capitalist. So the discontinuity between the films exists on a character level as well as a design level. Either film works reasonably well by itself, as its own entity, but watch them back-to-back and the illusion that they represent a continuous reality is undermined.
^ Well, technically, the computer worlds in the two films aren't the same. The one in the first film was based in ENCOM's servers, but the Grid in the second film was Flynn's own (housed in his own computers in the arcade basement).
It could be argued that since ENCOM was jacking up the price on its software, yet adding absolutely no new features (nothing that would *justify* raising the price), Flynn would not have wanted that. That's definitely not something he would have done. He may not have advocated giving it away for free, just charging a *fair* price for it. Which ENCOM was clearly not doing.
It could be argued that since ENCOM was jacking up the price on its software, yet adding absolutely no new features (nothing that would *justify* raising the price), Flynn would not have wanted that. That's definitely not something he would have done. He may not have advocated giving it away for free, just charging a *fair* price for it. Which ENCOM was clearly not doing.
I agree with most of what you said, but particularly this. I had a fun time with the movie and enjoyed the lightcycle sequence and the lightplane sequence and all the action for what it was. I enjoyed the David Bowie night club owner and the sexy ladies... but it never really felt like it was in the same universe as the first Tron. The costumes, the sets, the effects - everything felt too far removed as you've mentioned.
I guess I was also hoping for a bit more integration with modern tech. Like I kind of hoped they'd work the internet into this movie in some way rather than just having it set in an isolated system.
Anyway, I'll probably pick up this set when it releases (though I kind of hope they release a version without the 3d blu-ray disk... I have no need for that).
Let the suspense end...
The Digital Bits posted yesterday:
Though keep in mind that still isn't an official announcement from the studio.
Yeah, I didn't get what Flynn's supposed goal was between the movies either. Isn't making software and then distributing it for free, especially a major piece of software like an operating system, pretty much the exact opposite of what a business does?!
Sure plenty of businesses thrive on their product being out there for free or without an major ad revenue but if ENCOM is in the business of technology, operating systems, games and the like then selling those thing is pretty much needed isn't it?
All of those people in Flynn's Arcade were PAYING to play those games, right? Or did Flynn just smoke one messed-up crack pipe at somepoint and then decided everything should be, like, free man?
Similar threads
