PDA

View Full Version : Tron 2: LET THE VIRAL CAMPAIGN BEGIN...



CGI Addict
07-22-2009, 05:46 PM
http://www.flynnlives.com/

This is gonna be good!

pming
07-22-2009, 10:19 PM
http://www.flynnlives.com/

This is gonna be good!

Honestly? I doubt it. If the hollywood folks have anything to say about it, it will be in the "damnit...that could have been *so-o* f'in cool!...too bad they had to add in the cute-but-nerdy genius kid, his/her malcontent sibling and their disbelieving single-mom...".

I mean, seriously, do you think 'they' could make a movie about cool effects in a computer-net-vitual-world that *doesn't* market to teens in this day and age?

My Prediction: 6 / 10 if only for the cool effects. And that's being optimistic.

(PS: Sub-Prediction of Ultimate Negativeity: Somewhere in the film they say or heavily allude to DRM being a *good* thing...but that's just the pesemistic me talking...)

Andyjaggy
07-22-2009, 10:36 PM
I've given up on mainstreem hollywood movies. Meh, I'm tired of being disappointed.

calilifestyle
07-22-2009, 10:56 PM
Also, i really don't see the point of tron 2. I mean really how old are we. I know my brother my sister have no idea about tron. To top it off there hasn't been a any tron games, in arcades for some time. So not much a a market.

CGI Addict
07-22-2009, 11:58 PM
What's the point of making any movie for that matter then. It purely entertainment, that's all. I think they'll do a good job but who knows. I posted more so for the viral campaign, kinda feels like the "Cloverfield" viral. That was a bit of fun even if the movie didn't quite pan out.

My feeling though is that they'll get it right, kinda like the latest Trek movie.

cresshead
07-23-2009, 02:00 AM
if handled right tron II to could he another box office failure/long term game changer of a film.

tron1 was/is amazing and the subject matter is now everywhere with home pc's, the net, mobile phones, nintendo ds's, at work pc's.

http://www.tron-sector.com/

http://www.homeoftron.com/

Matt
07-23-2009, 02:23 AM
I think I was a tad too young for Tron, my vague memories of the film are, nice effects, confusing story, boring, cool light bikes (or whatever they were called).

I doubt I'd go to the cinema to see this, maybe a DVD rental.

cresshead
07-23-2009, 02:30 AM
I think I was a tad too young for Tron, my vague memories of the film are, nice effects, confusing story, boring, cool light bikes (or whatever they were called).

I doubt I'd go to the cinema to see this, maybe a DVD rental.

yeah stick to your romantic comedies, period dramas, magic wizards, spikey robots, action-insert actor-delete story[t4], teen school flicks and generally drab productions we have around now...HMm...ohh yeah..much more like it!

:devil:

archijam
07-23-2009, 03:31 AM
:devil:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKpVjpSavgs :thumbsup:

Pity they only played it the once!


i made that for the totally rad show in lw btw
pps. I know - I saw it way back when :)

cresshead
07-23-2009, 03:35 AM
i made that for the totally rad show in lw btw

Matt
07-23-2009, 04:30 AM
yeah stick to your romantic comedies, period dramas, magic wizards, spikey robots, action-insert actor-delete story[t4], teen school flicks and generally drab productions we have around now...HMm...ohh yeah..much more like it!

:devil:

???????????????

As I said, I think I was too young for it.

DiedonD
07-23-2009, 04:37 AM
Computer... the extension of human intellect - is no more!

Its considered like a game station, video playing, slave for the majority of people who afford it!

So why should one bother to dwelve in it any longer?

archijam
07-23-2009, 04:57 AM
Jeff Bridges FTW.

Matt
07-23-2009, 06:19 AM
I remember the arcade Tron game being hard as nails though! :D

cresshead
07-23-2009, 06:43 AM
???????????????

As I said, I think I was too young for it.

yeah...just messing!:D

Kuzey
07-23-2009, 08:14 AM
Ok...seems like a simple plot, the son tries to find his missing father of 25 years and gets sucked into the same machine environment, when trying to hack the same computer.

http://tron-2-trailer.blogspot.com/

There is a bootleg trailer too and it's looking interesting, I'll go and see this one for sure :hey:

Kuzey

cresshead
07-23-2009, 08:39 AM
looks bingo-tastic
hope it takes a few potter shots at other films, terminates them for good, uses some hi voltage transformers with a few stars treking out once again to kick their butts and yeah bruno who they are huh?

there are two worlds...

e.n.d .o.f. .l.i.n.e

borkus
07-23-2009, 11:18 AM
There's hope, as long as Michael Bay has nothing to do with it......

CGI Addict
07-23-2009, 11:22 AM
Joseph Kosinski, an up and coming director helms this film.

CGI Addict
07-24-2009, 01:54 PM
Check out the cycle here (looks pretty good, a mix of past concepts brought forward):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrew4XtbjrU&feature=related

CGI Addict
07-24-2009, 01:55 PM
Another:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_oBZcdz-UE&feature=related

I'm actually starting to look forward to this one.

Intuition
07-24-2009, 02:19 PM
Tron is and will be teh l337 |2()><><0|2z.

:hat:

;)

jasonwestmas
07-24-2009, 02:29 PM
Only a good story can save this one :D

Kuzey
07-24-2009, 03:34 PM
Here you go, more Tron 2 concept art :D

http://blog.signalnoise.com/?p=1405

Kuzey

cresshead
07-24-2009, 04:14 PM
"Greetings Program"

toby
07-24-2009, 08:01 PM
Love the trailer, really looking forward to it. The motorcycle animation is the best I've ever seen. The story is the only thing I'm worried about, as mentioned before Hollywood has a great talent for f***ing that up. You just know the suits are saying "it needs some Transformer-esque-ness to it"... but only because it made money.

Mr Rid
07-25-2009, 04:33 PM
HD- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1IpPpB3iWI

-EsHrA-
07-25-2009, 05:03 PM
meh...hollywood lost it ages ago..


mlon

Mr Rid
07-25-2009, 07:29 PM
75676

75677

75678

75679

75680

Mike_RB
07-25-2009, 07:36 PM
haha, Boxleitner is in this.

Mr Rid
07-25-2009, 07:47 PM
Hmm, I wonder why Jay Maynard, aka The Tron Guy is'nt in it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3609OtM138c&feature=related

75681

toby
07-25-2009, 07:59 PM
oh I forgot, here's some dd people having fun :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26W0zdJ1fds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sufw0-2TjV4&feature=related

jasonwestmas
07-25-2009, 08:00 PM
Hmm, I wonder why Jay Maynard, aka The Tron Guy is'nt in it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3609OtM138c&feature=related

75681

OMG, that is priceless.:cry:

Intuition
07-26-2009, 10:10 AM
oh I forgot, here's some dd people having fun....


Yeah, we're having fun alright, ;)

http://www.tron-sector.com/icons/MT_TossR.gifhttp://www.tron-sector.com/icons/Lightcycle_Blue_R.gifhttp://www.tron-sector.com/icons/MS_Rec.gifhttp://www.tron-sector.com/icons/MT_Smile.gif

Mr Rid
07-26-2009, 09:54 PM
Tron Guy's got an airplane!
75692
75691
I know many of you will want to check his website for, "Higher resolution image available on request." Surprisingly, he describes himself as "a serious computer geek."

calilifestyle
07-27-2009, 02:42 AM
Kind of O/T but i rather have them make Reboot the movie.

cresshead
07-27-2009, 03:04 AM
Kind of O/T but i rather have them make Reboot the movie.

don't worry i can confirm that hollywood screen writers are looking thru all films and tv shows for a re write of a successful show/film as it's simpler to get funding a past hit than an unkown new story.

toby
07-27-2009, 03:22 AM
don't worry i can confirm that hollywood screen writers are looking thru all films and tv shows for a re write of a successful show/film as it's simpler to get funding a past hit than an unkown new story.
... since they wouldn't know a good story if it shagged them. Much less care.

Kuzey
07-27-2009, 08:37 AM
Anybody for A Nightmare on Elm Street.... from your favorite transformer director :eek::eek:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Nightmare_on_Elm_Street_(2010_film)


Kuzey

borkus
07-27-2009, 10:46 AM
Anybody for A Nightmare on Elm Street.... from your favorite transformer director

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Night...eet_(2010_film)

You have got to be f***ing kidding me....

RollerJesus
07-27-2009, 01:35 PM
Just heard that Daft Punk is composition the music for Tron 2... Sweet!

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0698168/

blindsided
07-28-2009, 03:52 AM
The Comic Con footage is up in Quicktime if you havnt seen it
http://www.flynnlives.com/media/video/0xendgame.aspx

DiedonD
07-28-2009, 05:20 AM
don't worry i can confirm that hollywood screen writers are looking thru all films and tv shows for a re write of a successful show/film as it's simpler to get funding a past hit than an unkown new story.

Can you also confirm the remake of the Dynasty series?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjpCU4Zy9Cs&NR=1

I just confirmed it myself that anyone ranging from 30 and above years of age, irrelevant of gender, intel, race or coluture is still capable of recognizing that theme intro there, and they can do so here, within 5 seconds (Just tested 4 passing by people!)

DiedonD
07-29-2009, 05:35 AM
Whats the matter? Nobody ever heard of that Dynasty series?

Have my cells been bombarded with TV US serie rays throughout my childhood for nothing?

Its like 20 years afterwards and I still recall the exact music! That tells you something!

Or was this too only as popular as Profesional Wrestling level, though that too seemed worldwide TV event then!

toby
07-29-2009, 06:00 AM
Whats the matter? Nobody ever heard of that Dynasty series?
We're trying to forget -

starbase1
07-29-2009, 06:04 AM
We're trying to forget -

And trying to stay on topic...

DiedonD
07-29-2009, 06:28 AM
'Forget' and 'Stay on topic' huh!

I understand the ''Stay on topic' though they were speaking of Elm Street back there! And I thought all on topic boundraries were off! If one can go off topic, so can I, without any special stoping mechanisms specifically designed for me not to go off topic!

But why 'Forget' I wonder.

Theres no question mark there, so...

Mr Rid
07-29-2009, 11:39 AM
Whats the matter? Nobody ever heard of that Dynasty series?...

Its like 20 years afterwards and I still recall the exact music! That tells you something!

People remember the theme song to The Love Boat, Magnum PI, and Dallas but that doesnt mean we need to see movies made out of them.

DiedonD
07-29-2009, 02:25 PM
Still it is an achievement to know those songs THAT WELL, even though, as you can tell from where I am, there wasnt not even one slightest trace of it for two decades afterwards!

Was it such a big hit there as well though? Im curious to know! Would anyone there remember who it is within 5 seconds like here?

PM me if you dont want to stand against these attempts at maintaining on only one topic as long as possible.

Mr Rid
07-29-2009, 03:31 PM
Still it is an achievement to know those songs THAT WELL, even though, as you can tell from where I am, there wasnt not even one slightest trace of it for two decades afterwards!

Was it such a big hit there as well though? Im curious to know! Would anyone there remember who it is within 5 seconds like here?

PM me if you dont want to stand against these attempts at maintaining on only one topic as long as possible.

I read only one vague mention of the rights to a movie about behind the scenes of Dynasty being offered.

But your observation on nostalgic recognition of musical themes from dumb, 80s TV shows (forgettable in themselves) that we were inundated with growing up just isn't remarkable, and is hardly imperative grounds for movie versions. A pop song you were exposed to hundreds of times naturally tends to stick in your head. We all remember dozens of TV theme songs from decades ago if we heard them again. I dont get why that is so amazing. And I (probably most people) might recognize the Dynasty theme, but would not be able to tell you what it is was from. For me, the Dynasty, Falcon Crest, Dallas intros were just a cue to change the channel.

Meanwhile, the initial, more interesting and topical observation made was how Hollywood sticks with known properties- remakes, bestselling books/comic books, TV series, videogames- to base scripts on for guaranteed opening weekend box office. Tron is a very appropriate property to continue. I dont know anyone who would give a poot about Dynasty.

Bog
07-29-2009, 06:26 PM
I think this is going to rock.

Why? Because of the ARG, and because of the HD tech-test footage.

Both of these show that the people making this film know that the people who loved the first one have grown up. Both show that they know where they came from - they went to the trouble of building an 80s arcade, and writing Space Paranoids and building authentic-feeling 80s-style arcade cabinets for 'em to go into.

Both show that they don't just *know* why Tron worked, they loved that time.

I think this is going to absolutely rock.

Mr Rid
07-29-2009, 11:12 PM
Yeah, to me it looks like they are approaching it right.

Will never forget the first time I saw the Tron trailer on the front of Conan in '82. My jaw hit the carpet. I just wanted to run out of the theater and tell everyone what I just saw..."sucked into computer world... glowy... killer robots...babe from Caddyshack... frisbee fu...LIGHTCYCLES!?" I dont think I had any comprehension of 3D animation then. It just looked so far out.

I was dissapointed however when it came out with all the Disney family friendliness, cute jokes and yapping instead of getting down to the action promised by the trailer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3efV2wqEjEY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cqMRwEX0Zo
I appreciate it more now.

But I could not stand the binky, synthesizery music that sounded like a cheap Casio. We were into Tangerine Dream, Vangelis, & Jarre electronica that sounded much more complex, dark and textural back then. Even some of Carlos' Clockwork Orange stuff from 10 years before was cooler.

Bog
07-30-2009, 04:00 AM
I'm pretty sure I lacked full comprehension of 3D graphics, being 8 at the time ;) It's kinda funny, as when I sprinted up to a TRON machine in an arcade sometime around then, even seeing the sleek, exciting LightCycle reduced to a one-pixel line wasn't too hearbreaking as my youthful imagination gleefully supplied the ground-level detail. Which is probably why I stank at arcade games at the time - too busy imagining what was happenning inside in Tron-like detail rather than paying attention to the screen.

toby
07-30-2009, 04:16 AM
I appreciate it more now.
It is a really entertaining movie, despite the bad acting and *ham-fisted* religious symbolism. I pulled it out ten yrs ago, and then again last month. I dare anyone to pick out flaws in the cg.

I noticed this upon last viewing, had to take a screengrab.

Bog
07-30-2009, 04:26 AM
Looks like Daft Punk are doing the music this time, too. That bodes well, IMAO.

cresshead
07-30-2009, 05:29 AM
one interesting note on tron was that it was a boxoffice flop when released and became a cult movie on vhs tape,tv and dvd well after the faliure of the cinema release.

why do they believe it will not be a flop this time round?
i really liked tron but it did not have mass appeal at the time...do you think it was so ahead of it's time that people just didn't 'get it'?

do you believe disney watered down the script and or it just came out before the majority of people could relate to it.

toby
07-30-2009, 05:52 AM
one interesting note on tron was that it was a boxoffice flop when released and became a cult movie on vhs tape,tv and dvd well after the faliure of the cinema release.

why do they believe it will not be a flop this time round?
i really liked tron but it did not have mass appeal at the time...do you think it was so ahead of it's time that people just didn't 'get it'?

do you believe disney watered down the script and or it just came out before the majority of people could relate to it.
Hm, depends on what you/they mean by 'flopped' - if it didn't blow away the box office the first weekend, there are people who would say it flopped, but I (and I'm sure most of you) refuse to judge success that way. I and all my friends saw it in the theatre, and it was popular enough to spawn arcade games, so I don't *think* it was that much of a bomb. To meet hollywood's idea of a hit, it has to have MASS appeal *and* perfect timing.

As far as the new version, 'they' think it's a good risk, because it targets teenagers, and especially the kids of people who saw it when they were kids. They target the parents as much as the kids, 'cuz that's where the money comes from.

Bog
07-30-2009, 05:52 AM
one interesting note on tron was that it was a boxoffice flop when released and became a cult movie on vhs tape,tv and dvd well after the faliure of the cinema release.

why do they believe it will not be a flop this time round?
i really liked tron but it did not have mass appeal at the time...do you think it was so ahead of it's time that people just didn't 'get it'?

do you believe disney watered down the script and or it just came out before the majority of people could relate to it.

Nah. It's just the hundreds of thousands of people who made it a cult hit are now in their 30s and 40s and in income bands B1 and B2. Pretty straightforwad, really. Also, those of us who's been busy breeding will take their kiddies to see it (having inflicted the original DVD on them at home) as part of a family bonding exercise.

blindsided
07-30-2009, 10:07 AM
In case you wanna play retro
http://www.armagetronad.net/

SEE YOU ON THE GRID!

CGI Addict
07-30-2009, 02:47 PM
And now, for your listening pleasure:

http://soundcloud.com/tuxboard/tron-legacy-theme

cresshead
07-30-2009, 03:20 PM
And now, for your listening pleasure:

http://soundcloud.com/tuxboard/tron-legacy-theme

wow that's one undynamic boring tune..hope that have nothing whatsoever to do with the film's score.

better than that try this>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63RgrnyqbpU&feature=related

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu5_33uRNzc&feature=related

cray 1 super computer 100milion operations per second...how's that stack to thesedays then?
well an intel atom cpu does 3300million instructions per second...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Atom

Intuition
07-30-2009, 03:51 PM
And now, for your listening pleasure:

http://soundcloud.com/tuxboard/tron-legacy-theme

Ah nice. I wanted to jam that when I saw the comic con youtube clip with the real light cycles in the hall that had the music in the BG.

Intuition
07-30-2009, 03:53 PM
wow that's one undynamic boring tune..hope that have nothing whatsoever to do with the film's score.



Most of Daft punk's stuff is of a droning ambience flavor. I like to work to it since its nice BG stuff.

Andyjaggy
07-30-2009, 04:35 PM
cray 1 super computer 100milion operations per second...how's that stack to thesedays then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Atom

Amazing what 25 years will do. :) People back then would have passed out if they knew the kind of power you could have in one tiny box on your desk in 25 years.

toby
07-30-2009, 05:15 PM
And now, for your listening pleasure:

http://soundcloud.com/tuxboard/tron-legacy-theme
Ugh, they really know how to make tedious music.

toby
07-30-2009, 05:16 PM
Amazing what 25 years will do. :) People back then would have passed out if they knew the kind of power you could have in one tiny box on your desk in 25 years. imagine what it'll be like in another 25!

Intuition
07-30-2009, 05:50 PM
imagine what it'll be like in another 25!

Yeah, there are days when I am rendering long sequences and I just want to skip to 256 core computers.

toby
07-30-2009, 06:59 PM
Yeah, there are days when I am rendering long sequences and I just want to skip to 256 core computers.
Oh it'll all be real-time by then :thumbsup:
Tweak a light, scrub through the *fully rendered* scene to see how it looks, tweak again...

Mr Rid
07-30-2009, 07:18 PM
one interesting note on tron was that it was a boxoffice flop when released and became a cult movie on vhs tape,tv and dvd well after the faliure of the cinema release.

why do they believe it will not be a flop this time round?
i really liked tron but it did not have mass appeal at the time...do you think it was so ahead of it's time that people just didn't 'get it'?

do you believe disney watered down the script and or it just came out before the majority of people could relate to it.

It was just a mediocre movie. I was a projectionist at a movie theater where it played originally and saw how tepid the audience response and ticket sales. I thought it was little disappointingly hokey, and I didnt know anyone who went 'WOW, I LOVE it!' It was just kinda mildly amusing with some fun moments. And I dont think the visuals were entirely impressive since most viewers did not know what they were looking at with the fuzzy monochromatic appearance of the actors and simple geometric designs. Lisberger was not exactly a remarkable director except in the area of animation. I actually spoke to him on the phone once thru a director friend. He sounded like a bit of a character who did too many drugs. I worked with one of the Tron designers who reported how everyone on that show was coked up to the gills. Thats how they got movies done in the 80s.

I kept a print article somewhere I would have to dig out that divulged how Tron nearly sank Disney at the time. They were supposedly in some tricky financial spot and had a lot invested in Tron, with grand merchandising revenue plans that really fell thru with the lukewarm response. Their stock dropped after the release and a number of things conspired to ruin.

As a projectionist I spent a lot of time watching scenes repeatedly. Some people laughed at Bit. But the one joke I remember always got a laugh was, 'Now that is a big door.'

IgnusFast
07-30-2009, 07:59 PM
I actually kinda like that song. Tedious yes, but most themes used in movies are edited into bite-size chunks anyway.

It actually reminds me of something like a techno remix of an old John Carpenter soundtrack (think Big Trouble In Little China or Escape From New York)

toby
07-30-2009, 08:05 PM
It actually reminds me of something like a techno remix of an old John Carpenter soundtrack (think Big Trouble In Little China or Escape From New York)
Yea I love that stuff, cheesy as it is. Daft punk just doesn't do it for me.

Carpenter did that music himself (maybe not big trouble, but the Thing and Esc from NY).

IgnusFast
07-30-2009, 08:12 PM
Yeah, I actually mentioned Carpenters soundtrack work with respect. Some people hated his movie scores, but I really dug them. Not sure how much of them were Alan Howarth vs. how much was Carpenter himself, but I loved them. Especially that theme from Escape - I think that piece still holds up.

Mr Rid
07-30-2009, 08:30 PM
Yea I love that stuff, cheesy as it is. Daft punk just doesn't do it for me.

Carpenter did that music himself (maybe not big trouble, but the Thing and Esc from NY).

China is Carpenter and Howarth. Still have the LP. ;D

Yeah, I find most Daft Punk plain and headache-inducingly repetitive.

Mr Rid
07-30-2009, 08:46 PM
Oh it'll all be real-time by then :thumbsup:
Tweak a light, scrub through the *fully rendered* scene to see how it looks, tweak again...

MachStudio-
http://www.studiogpu.com/

toby
07-30-2009, 09:23 PM
MachStudio-
http://www.studiogpu.com/
Actually I almost went to work for them. It's not quite real time, but it does show that it probably won't take 25 years, don't it.

Mr Rid
07-30-2009, 10:15 PM
Actually I almost went to work for them. It's not quite real time, but it does show that it probably won't take 25 years, don't it.

Maybe 25 months. :)

starbase1
07-31-2009, 07:26 AM
It is a really entertaining movie, despite the bad acting and *ham-fisted* religious symbolism. I pulled it out ten yrs ago, and then again last month. I dare anyone to pick out flaws in the cg.


Considering the tech constraints they were under, it is awesome. Look at something like the recognisers - they must be about 40 polygons! How many of use could get a sense of menace out of 40 polygons?!

starbase1
07-31-2009, 07:37 AM
I kept a print article somewhere I would have to dig out that divulged how Tron nearly sank Disney at the time. They were supposedly in some tricky financial spot and had a lot invested in Tron, with grand merchandising revenue plans that really fell thru with the lukewarm response. Their stock dropped after the release and a number of things conspired to ruin.

There's a bit about that on the wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(film)

Also a news clip here:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1314&dat=19820708&id=ONkRAAAAIBAJ&sjid=0O4DAAAAIBAJ&pg=5948,2829876

Mr Rid
07-31-2009, 06:21 PM
...How many of use could get a sense of menace out of 40 polygons?!

How bout one!
75873

Mr Rid
08-03-2009, 10:52 PM
...
I noticed this upon last viewing, had to take a screengrab.

I dont know if people catch Mickey Mouse's head.

toby
08-04-2009, 01:28 AM
I dont know if people catch Mickey Mouse's head.
Ok tell you what, *I'll* catch it, if *you* swing the axe...

flakester
08-04-2009, 02:02 AM
I dont know if people catch Mickey Mouse's head.

There is also a Pacman on a screen behind Sark at one point too.

--
flakester

Mr Rid
07-23-2010, 03:40 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8R7cmdCUXpM

86611

safetyman
07-23-2010, 06:37 AM
Looks like they did a great job making Jeff Bridges look 25 years younger.
Is that the guy from "Four Brothers" and "Troy"?

DiscreetFX
07-23-2010, 10:01 AM
http://www.flynnlives.com/

This is gonna be good!

Cool, thanx for posting this info.

:thumbsup:

Intuition
07-23-2010, 10:46 AM
:thumbsup:

:hey:

:D

LW_Will
07-23-2010, 04:59 PM
Hello? Did we all see the DIGITAL Jeff Bridges? Did we all see DD/Disney/whoever skip over the uncanny valley?!

WHAT THE FRACK?!

How was this done? Anybody??

If anyone is on this board, works for Digital Domain, and knows ANYTHING... SPILL!

My guesses...

1) character is totally CG. (least likely)

2) Jeff's son, or nephew, or just someone who looks like Bridges' 25 years ago, is the character with digital enhancements.

3) its a partial cg rig covering said actor's head.

4) Its Bridges' driving his own face, cleaned up by CG artist. So the current Jeff is running his face 25 years ago. (wtf?!)

5) Lola... naw...

This is freaking me out!!

If you can't say anything, when will you be able to? I need to know, people.

LW_Will
07-23-2010, 05:04 PM
:thumbsup:

:hey:

:D

Why I ought to...!!!

:cursin:

Make with the explanations!

IgnusFast
07-23-2010, 05:16 PM
Looks like a double with a CG-enhanced face. Could be wrong, but the lips aren't quite right in the new trailer. Still looks awesome, though!!

Mr Rid
07-23-2010, 07:45 PM
Its definitely a CG Clu (young Bridges) that looks great, except for the facial animation that is shockingly stiff. There's no excuse with today's tech. Sometimes FX shots are rushed for the trailer, but I suspect this is final. There's also some odd, subtle movements in the face that seem unmotivated.

8663986642

Intuition
07-23-2010, 07:57 PM
Why I ought to...!!!

:cursin:

Make with the explanations!

NDA :hey:

LW_Will
07-24-2010, 12:23 PM
NDA :hey:

Okay... but you'd better be here with an explanation on the 18th of December... or whenever they let you out of the NDA!

Or... maybe I could buy you a beer at SIGGRAPH? Just as a friend, mind you...

:hey:

:thumbsup:

Mr Rid
10-27-2010, 02:01 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPFpcKm0B7U&feature=player_embedded

IgnusFast
10-27-2010, 06:04 AM
AWESOME!!!! Man, but I hope the movie is *good*. :)

Mr Rid
10-27-2010, 10:50 AM
Yeah I hope its more than just eye candy- the ubiquitous problem of FX movies. Like, why does Sam need four girls to come out and change his outfit? Doesnt everything 'rez' and computer generate in Tronworld? Wouldnt someone just click a button to change his suit? Seems gratuitous.

The living rooms look borrowed from the end of 2001. An aging Flynn appears to be in a gilded cage like Bowman, with underlit floor and 18th century furniture detail.
89383
89382

shrox
10-27-2010, 12:09 PM
...The living rooms look borrowed from the end of 2001. An aging Flynn appears to be in a gilded cage like Bowman, with underlit floor and 18th century furniture detail.
89383
89382

Most likely an homage.

The trailer now reminds me of Speed Racer, I liked the simplicity of the original Tron world. I am thinking the new is going to eye candy...

Mr Rid
10-27-2010, 05:17 PM
The trailer now reminds me of Speed Racer...

Dont say that. :)

jasonwestmas
10-27-2010, 05:32 PM
Should have been rendered completely with polygons imo. There is a certain weight and feeling about it that looks like CG pasted on top of live action because that is what it is. Just seems like a contradiction of the whole "Tron World".

Jim_C
10-27-2010, 05:41 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8R7cmdCUXpM


>>This video contains content from ABGroup, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds. <<

Weird.. we are both in the USA aren't we....?

Mr Rid
10-28-2010, 12:42 AM
"TRON: LEGACY - Daft Punk's "Derezzed"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Afc2uzw4g

I agree JW, the characters might have looked a little more digitally derived.

bazsa73
10-28-2010, 01:12 AM
I dont know, all these today's CG movies are just way too cool, every detail, shot, acting calculated with digital precision, no analog glitches, slight lameness, mild stink of camembert in the wind...

jasonwestmas
10-28-2010, 11:17 AM
Still hoping the film will be alrightish. And that I will find a theater that will show it in 2D. Made me miss several recent films...

Me too, I hope it turns out well regardless of how I feel about the visual style.

For my own personal personality, my formula has been like this for all movies:

Characters => Similar to how shapes dominate in a painting, good characterization has to be believable and I have to Like or Hate the characters. Nothing can save the movie if I don't care about the Characters and the Acting isn't engaging.

Story => I can forgive a somewhat boring story or motive if I Like or Hate who the Characters are. The characters have to be doing something important and emotionally thought provoking. The movie doesn't necessarily have show something I've never seen before for me to enjoy the movie. BUT one thing a story can't be is a direct rip-off of another story. It has to be DIFFERENT and CLEVER ENOUGH so that the movie is not predictable.

Visuals and Sound/Music => Visual and Audible stimulation is a grand complement to the above but cannot be allowed to override anything. The stimulation has to be believable in the sense that it furthers the emotional/physical understanding of each situation or event. The stimulation can't just be there to make a lot of noise and visual excitement because the excitement is held within the understanding of the stimuli. The stimuli needs to bring the audience back into the story and character's perspective to provide drama, enjoyment and understanding.

BigHache
10-28-2010, 01:45 PM
The stimuli needs to bring the audience back into the story and character's perspective to provide drama, enjoyment and understanding.

And that's why I'm over the Real3Dģ already. It's okay, but, meh.

And I'm still wondering why in the trailer this guy has a pager after 20 years. :D

Intuition
10-28-2010, 01:55 PM
Sweet NDA .. mwah hahaha.

Hieron
10-28-2010, 02:13 PM
I thought I had big tires on my motorbike.. wonder how these guys round a corner :)

Not the movie for me... and too young for Tron 1. So no nostalgia here..

jasonwestmas
10-28-2010, 02:26 PM
I thought I had big tires on my motorbike.. wonder how these guys round a corner :)

Not the movie for me... and too young for Tron 1. So no nostalgia here..
Tron Bikes can actually turn on a 90 degree angle instantly. Those circular parts aren't really wheels, they are merely the parts of the bike that remains in contact with an imaginary digital plane.
The interesting part of Tron is that it is based on imaginary physics. Thus the characters are constrained only to what is programmed into the Tron world. You've seen the Matrix right? Rules can be bent other rules can be broken. The other cool thing about Tron is that it is stylized to look completely separate from the real world.

I was born in 1977 and never got a chance to see Tron but I understand it because I used to play the video game in 1982.

JeffrySG
10-28-2010, 03:37 PM
There's a new 1min clip in HD here at apple... not sure if it's been posted already

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/disney/tronlegacy/

jasonwestmas
10-28-2010, 04:29 PM
Yeah those other videos actually make me want to see the film.

massmusic
10-30-2010, 03:19 PM
I’m sure I’ll see ‘Legacy’ for being a fan of Tron, but I’m not liking what I see so far in the trailers. Exhaust plums and heat trails from recognizers, road debris, dust, dirt and thunder and lightning don’t belong in the computer world. Or maybe that’s what causes crashes in the real world?

jasonwestmas
10-30-2010, 04:17 PM
Iím sure Iíll see ĎLegacyí for being a fan of Tron, but Iím not liking what I see so far in the trailers. Exhaust plums and heat trails from recognizers, road debris, dust, dirt and thunder and lightning donít belong in the computer world. Or maybe thatís what causes crashes?

Yeah that kind of stuff doesn't make sense to me either.

toby
10-30-2010, 05:12 PM
... And that I will find a theater that will show it in 2D.
Damn straight. Tired of wearing bulky glasses just for the sake of a gimmick, which actually distracts you from the movie.

cresshead
10-30-2010, 06:39 PM
i hope i'm wrong, but i'm getting a bad feeling about the new TRON film..

i love the old film..yeh it's not perfect but it has a great long lasting vibe.

toby
10-30-2010, 07:17 PM
I don't have a bad feeling, but I'm doubting I'll be thrilled by it. It is a hollywood movie after all.

The most important thing to me is the story, second would be how they tell it (which includes character development, pacing), third would be visuals. With 2 out of the 3 it can still be very good. Tron had bad acting and the visuals are no longer impressive, but it's still a blast to watch.

Philbert
10-31-2010, 07:10 AM
I was born in 1977 and never got a chance to see Tron but I understand it because I used to play the video game in 1982.

I was born in 77 too. Finally got around to seeing it about a year ago I think. I don't know that I played the real arcade game in arcades, but I remember my older brother programed a lightcycle game on our old Commodore +4. Sadly we had no disk drive for it so once we shut it off all his work was lost.

jasonwestmas
10-31-2010, 09:50 AM
I was born in 77 too. Finally got around to seeing it about a year ago I think. I don't know that I played the real arcade game in arcades, but I remember my older brother programed a lightcycle game on our old Commodore +4. Sadly we had no disk drive for it so once we shut it off all his work was lost.

Oh cool, yeah a few of my friends had a commodore. Nobody I knew had an Amiga so I didn't learn about that and 3D graphics till much later. I had a Tandy Color Computer 3 with built-in basic programming and a cartridge deck. Likewise I had no way to save any of the programs because my disk-drive was read only. I could have bought a digital tape deck, those were interesting as you could save programs on those. Interesting times for a 9 year old kid.

I think it's funny how excited I got when actual photographs were starting to appear on computer screens. Then the actual pre-rendered adventure games from Sierra and all that.

Mr Rid
11-02-2010, 09:53 PM
I’m sure I’ll see ‘Legacy’ for being a fan of Tron, but I’m not liking what I see so far in the trailers. Exhaust plums and heat trails from recognizers, road debris, dust, dirt and thunder and lightning don’t belong in the computer world. Or maybe that’s what causes crashes in the real world?

I suppose you can make the case that the Tron world reflects computer advances since the time Flynn was first digitized. Smoke is appropriate since we now have volumetrics and fluid simulators. There is also a ditally grid thing happening in the cloud lightning. The inclement weather suggests a dark occupation of the computer world. I just hope there is a reason for everything we see, and its not done just to 'look cool.' I dont like the scene of four hotties with laser fingers slinking out to personally undress Sam when it would make more sense to just scan, and 'computer generate' a uniform for him at the push of a button. If Flynn had a daughter, would four La Bare dancers pop out to peel her clothes off?

LW_Will
11-03-2010, 03:08 AM
Sweet NDA .. mwah hahaha.

HEY! Mister...

I'm going to come up there if you show that NDA one MORE TIME!!

;-)

BigHache
11-03-2010, 07:53 AM
I dont like the scene of four hotties with laser fingers slinking out to personally undress Sam when it would make more sense to just scan, and 'computer generate' a uniform for him at the push of a button. If Flynn had a daughter, would four La Bare dancers pop out to peel her clothes off?

I guess sex sells, even with Disney.

Philbert
11-03-2010, 08:48 AM
I know Kiki sold a lot of NewTek products! Rawr! :devil:

jasonwestmas
11-03-2010, 09:04 AM
I suppose you can make the case that the Tron world reflects computer advances since the time Flynn was first digitized. Smoke is appropriate since we now have volumetrics and fluid simulators. There is also a ditally grid thing happening in the cloud lightning. The inclement weather suggests a dark occupation of the computer world. I just hope there is a reason for everything we see, and its not done just to 'look cool.' I dont like the scene of four hotties with laser fingers slinking out to personally undress Sam when it would make more sense to just scan, and 'computer generate' a uniform for him at the push of a button. If Flynn had a daughter, would four La Bare dancers pop out to peel her clothes off?

Exactly, but Disney is typically creating images just because they look cool and not necessarily because they make an exciting film. There should be rules that define the Tron world to be mostly different from the real world. If it doesn't then it starts to look like a broad-way dancing musical with trance music and flashing strobe lights. Please pass the LSD.

IgnusFast
11-03-2010, 01:37 PM
I actually like many of the changes to the world of TRON. My take is that having an actual human presence in the world is causing unintended changes; they make the world both more and less realistic at the same time. In addition, who knows what intentional changes Flynn can make from his mountaintop retreat? :)

toby
11-03-2010, 01:39 PM
HEY! Mister...

I'm going to come up there if you show that NDA one MORE TIME!!

;-)

no kidding

Intuition
11-03-2010, 01:47 PM
HEY! Mister...

I'm going to come up there if you show that NDA one MORE TIME!!

;-)

;D

Yeah, well, Dec 17th will be here before you know it.

:hey:

Mr Rid
11-03-2010, 06:13 PM
Exactly, but Disney is typically creating images just because they look cool and not necessarily because they make an exciting film. There should be rules that define the Tron world to be mostly different from the real world. If it doesn't then it starts to look like a broad-way dancing musical with trance music and flashing strobe lights. Please pass the LSD.

(Repost from CGsoc) We are inundated with a glut of excessive, digital blitzkriegs with every genre movie, TV show and commercial, with FX budgets to rival the GNP of many countries. Special effects are just not special anymore since I have not been high or 16 for a long time now. For me theres gotta be more to today's irritainment than the usual hyped up digi-dazzle (although somewhat appropriate for Tronworld). The highly processed, partially hydrogenated technicality of CG assembly line tends to squash spontaneous living detail, organic tactility, and interesting 'flaws' that are far more telling than anything crunched on a Xeon. When watching only pixels zip around the screen, there's no sense of witnessing anything actually at stake other than render time. Back when actual stuntmen were getting thrown around and actual property was being destroyed in camera, there was a greater sense of urgent danger (I still think Road Warrior the best actioner of all time, without a single pixel). I find vapid monstrosities like Transformers so tedious to endure, I felt as if I were hit in the face with a keyboard for two hours. If I divide the title of 300 by 10 I get how many IQ points I lost sitting thru it. And I totally sympathize with someone like Alan Moore not wanting his name associated with the Hollywood excreted versions of his brilliant stories. But I guess Pixar wouldnt be special if every studio exec refused to budge toward production until they first know they have a winning script.

For many years now, all there is to admire about most shlockbusters is the way they look... and thats it. But I am going to hurl bricks at the screen if studios dont retire some of these cliches: big, impossible shwoopy CG camera moves (golly, that musta taken at least eight keys!), CG debris and fire flying right past camera (howd they do that?), CG monsters roaring into the lens (its so much scarier when we get to see every polygon on screen), a flock of birds taking flight in every farkin' exterior CG landscape of the last decade (geeze!), processing everything to look blue/green, the heroes narrowly escaping overkill explosions and ridiculous CG calamities every 12 seconds, and ponderous scripts with serviceable performances at best, slathered in mountains of pixel-pooh. But thats just me.

I stopped having expectations for movies long ago (soul crushed after Episode VI- Return of the Muppets). For some reason, the Legacy trailer sparked the long dead Star Wars baby in me, and against better judgement I just couldnt help getting a semi over the ripe possibility. But when peering behind the gloss and rapid edits, I fear its just more of the same pubescent flash and noise. Maybe not. I'm afraid to look.

jasonwestmas
11-03-2010, 06:30 PM
But I am going to hurl bricks at the screen if studios dont retire some of these cliches: big, impossible shwoopy CG camera moves (golly, that musta taken at least eight keyframes!), CG debris and fire flying right past camera (howd they do that?), CG monsters roaring into the lens (its so much scarier when we get to see every polygon on screen), a flock of birds taking flight in every farkin' exterior CG landscape of the last decade (geeze!), the heroes narrowly escaping overkill explosions and ridiculous CG calamities every 12 seconds, and ponderous scripts with serviceable performances at best, slathered in mountains of pixel-pooh. But thats just me.



No, it's not just you.

What do you do to keep your sanity being around all these cliches so often?

Mr Rid
11-03-2010, 08:45 PM
No, it's not just you.

What do you do to keep your sanity being around all these cliches so often?

4-Play "Gentlemen's Club"
89566 ;D

What I dont support is pixel porn. Buying a ticket to a movie that I know is excrement (if you cant see past hype, the Tomatometer & top critics tend to be a fair indicator) is like voting for a candidate I dont like, and sending them $10 ($14 here). I might be curious to see the FX in Transformers 2 but why on earth would I vote the likes of Bay or give him any money? If people stop supporting crap, 'they' will stop making it. Course, there are too many people around who enjoy the flavor of manure.

Naturally, I have to work on cliches (or worse concepts that even my grandmother would know just will not work), and from that one shot I immediately know the movie will be a lump of s*** due to a visionless director. Sometimes am in a position to make suggestions, like when a director wanted the tired flock-o-birds thing on a commercial. After struggling to not roll eyes and slap my forehead, I convinced him to just make it two birds instead which all agreed made the exterior seem more natural.

Jim_C
11-04-2010, 05:00 AM
Scott Pilgrim?

I thought that had a little heart and story along with some jim dandy pixel porn

Course you guys are way over my head with the critical eye.

Mr Rid
11-04-2010, 05:15 AM
I dont get to the theater anymore, but I am curious to see Pilgrim and Inception.

Jim_C
11-04-2010, 05:24 AM
It is certainly visually stunning.

Fairly techy article with Director and Cinematographer

Director Edgar Wright and cinematographer Bill Pope, ASC, bring a comic book to life in Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

http://www.hdvideopro.com/display/features/excess-baggage.html

jasonwestmas
11-04-2010, 08:36 AM
I dont get to the theater anymore, but I am curious to see Pilgrim and Inception.

I thought Inception was going to be all goofy pixels and no substance but it turned out to be fun to watch. I enjoyed the characters, the mystery, the far-fetched dream psychology and the suspense.

I did this all while I was in a bad mood while in L.A. so that's saying something :D

Jim_C
11-04-2010, 09:40 AM
Scott Pilgrim trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgOLmjhxVVU

I think it is a MUST see for anyone who would be here reading this.....
Not perfect by any means, but one heck of an effort.

toby
11-04-2010, 01:35 PM
Exactly, but Disney is typically creating images just because they look cool and not necessarily because they make an exciting film. There should be rules that define the Tron world to be mostly different from the real world.
As it happens, there's an entity that wants to make the world inside look like the world outside. Not sure why.

But making a movie look good is a bit more important than making it look realistic anyway.

jasonwestmas
11-04-2010, 01:46 PM
But making a movie look good is a bit more important than making it look realistic anyway.

Yeah, you seem to be talking about the style of the images in the movie.

Looking "Good" in my perspective of this particular movie should be about bringing interest and understanding to what is happening in the film. If the plot is about some mastermind characters copying the image of real world behavior but simply change the way they dress and put neon lights everywhere, that sounds rather uninteresting to me. If the behavior within the Tron World is uniquely different, one would expect the images to be uniquely different as well and not confined to our version of real world physics and materials. Not that the film has to look like the 1982 Tron film but that movie had some good ideas for a virtual world from what little I've seen from it.

toby
11-04-2010, 05:09 PM
Yeah, you seem to be talking about the style of the images in the movie.

Looking "Good" in my perspective of this particular movie should be about bringing interest and understanding to what is happening in the film.Actually I'm talking about aesthetics. The script/dialogue/editing/composition are much more heavily relied on for storytelling.


If the plot is about some mastermind characters copying the image of real world behavior but simply change the way they dress and put neon lights everywhere, that sounds rather uninteresting to me. If the behavior within the Tron World is uniquely different, one would expect the images to be uniquely different as well and not confined to our version of real world physics and materials. Not that the film has to look like the 1982 Tron film but that movie had some good ideas for a virtual world from what little I've seen from it.
You seem to be judging it based on what it looks like, plus the only ideas for a story that you can think of. We should all just wait and see.

jasonwestmas
11-04-2010, 05:26 PM
Actually I'm talking about aesthetics. The script/dialogue/editing/composition are much more heavily relied on for storytelling.

You seem to be judging it based on what it looks like, plus the only ideas for a story that you can think of. We should all just wait and see.

Right, I presuming. I want to see it anyway.

Mr Rid
11-09-2010, 05:29 PM
last trailer- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIpU7dYDmAA
89806

jasonwestmas
11-09-2010, 05:35 PM
The fx look a little more interesting this time around.

Randog
11-10-2010, 12:04 PM
Yes


Hello? Did we all see the DIGITAL Jeff Bridges? Did we all see DD/Disney/whoever skip over the uncanny valley?!

My guesses...

1) character is totally CG. (least likely)

If you can't say anything, when will you be able to? I need to know, people.

Randog
11-10-2010, 12:08 PM
What are you referring to?


Should have been rendered completely with polygons imo. There is a certain weight and feeling about it that looks like CG pasted on top of live action because that is what it is. Just seems like a contradiction of the whole "Tron World".

jasonwestmas
11-10-2010, 12:17 PM
What are you referring to?

The compositing and blending of synthetic CG with live video footage.

Randog
11-10-2010, 12:22 PM
Aw ok - Cool.

Just out curiosity; which parts are you seeing that you have issue an issue with? Are there specific instances/shots that pop out to you?


The compositing and blending of synthetic CG with live video footage.

lwaddict
11-10-2010, 12:26 PM
Must be some weird nostalgic thing...
I watched Tron when I was a kid...
played the video game until I was broke at the local arcade when I was a kid...

and yet...
have no desire whatsoever to see this film.

It's not the fx, it's the story. It just wasn't all that interesting back then.

Randog
11-10-2010, 12:40 PM
Tell me about it - I saw it when I was a junior in highschool. Did not care for it.

But you know this is not a remake right?


Must be some weird nostalgic thing...
I watched Tron when I was a kid...
played the video game until I was broke at the local arcade when I was a kid...

and yet...
have no desire whatsoever to see this film.

It's not the fx, it's the story. It just wasn't all that interesting back then.

Intuition
11-10-2010, 12:47 PM
Its a REMAKE!?

OMG RANDY! NDA SPOILERS!

;D

Just kidding. :D

IgnusFast
11-10-2010, 01:06 PM
I absolutely LOVED the Monolith game, TRON 2.0. And though the original movie is quite flawed, it's still a gem. :)

I can't WAIT!!! I already have half the toy line on my desk...

Randog
11-10-2010, 01:15 PM
Shhhhhhh...oops

Damn


Its a REMAKE!?

OMG RANDY! NDA SPOILERS!

;D

Just kidding. :D

jasonwestmas
11-10-2010, 01:26 PM
Aw ok - Cool.

Just out curiosity; which parts are you seeing that you have issue an issue with? Are there specific instances/shots that pop out to you?

To me the whole Tron thing is interesting philosophically (even though disney might not have intended it to be). In Tron World especially within the Video Game concept itself, nothing is trying to mimic our reality except perhaps the idea of confining objects to a plane much like gravity would. Tron world has it's own set of physics and social rules for how conflicts are dealt with as robotic/Autoministic as they appear. There is a philosophical appeal here that I think many overlook and not because the appeal is complicated and stuffy.

Like I wrote earlier, there is a logical appeal in making the humanoid characters look more like they subject to the conditions of Tron world. Instead of being wrapped in organic flesh all the characters are instead wrapped in a nature of digitization. This can be best expressed by use of polygonal surfacing and rendering. I believe this makes more logical sense and is artistically more appealing for this kind of situation where someone's humanity is digitized and brought into an enslavement or confinement of a computerized/digital world. Maintaining live action video throughout this computerized world kind of destroys or masks this idea of a digitized reality as pretty as the eye candy is imo.

The purpose of seeing moving pictures is not to just see pretty eye candy. The movie has to interact more deeply than that for a human being like myself to fully appreciate it. Some might say that is just an unrealistic and stuffy goal for the moving pictures medium and sequential art in general, but I say if I can't enjoy something that personally connects with me on a logical level then ultimately, there is no reason to see the film.

lwaddict
11-10-2010, 03:22 PM
But you know this is not a remake right?

Yeah, I knew that.

But more of the same just doesn't interest me...
hearing all the "oooooo's" and "ahhhhhh's" when Bridges stepped out onto a platform during the Trailer just had me cringing.
Obviously going to do well with a lot of people...
but I'd dare say that they were fans to begin with.

The "psychological" aspects of the story were not overlooked by the way... again, it just wasn't interesting. Even that part of the story wasn't new or refreshing at all.

Intuition
11-10-2010, 03:59 PM
Story? Bleh, give me some eye candy anyday.

;)

Oh wait, I think Randy has some eye candy!

har har.

jasonwestmas
11-10-2010, 04:33 PM
Story? Bleh, give me some eye candy anyday.

;)

Oh wait, I think Randy has some eye candy!

har har.

Moving eye-candy isn't cinema though, it's moving eye-candy.

toby
11-10-2010, 04:53 PM
To me the whole Tron thing is interesting philosophically (even though disney might not have intended it to be). In Tron World especially within the Video Game concept itself, nothing is trying to mimic our reality except perhaps the idea of confining objects to a plane much like gravity would. Tron world has it's own set of physics and social rules for how conflicts are dealt with as robotic/Autoministic as they appear. There is a philosophical appeal here that I think many overlook and not because the appeal is complicated and stuffy.
The first movie was so ham-fisted religious that it slaps you in the face. There was nothing subtle about that part of it!


Like I wrote earlier, there is a logical appeal in making the humanoid characters look more like they subject to the conditions of Tron world. Instead of being wrapped in organic flesh all the characters are instead wrapped in a nature of digitization. This can be best expressed by use of polygonal surfacing and rendering.
Aren't you now putting looks above story?


Maintaining live action video throughout this computerized world kind of destroys or masks this idea of a digitized reality
Didn't it work fine in the first movie?


The purpose of seeing moving pictures is not to just see pretty eye candy. The movie has to interact more deeply than that for a human being like myself to fully appreciate it. Some might say that is just an unrealistic and stuffy goal for the moving pictures medium and sequential art in general, but I say if I can't enjoy something that personally connects with me on a logical level then ultimately, there is no reason to see the film.
While it's true that hollywood makes movies with eye candy and no substance, that doesn't mean that any movie with eye candy has no substance.

jasonwestmas
11-10-2010, 05:22 PM
"The first movie was so ham-fisted religious that it slaps you in the face. There was nothing subtle about that part of it!"

"Religious" is a word that gets into semantics. In essence, if any worshiping or exaltation is being done there are religious "works" or activities attached to that. This could include a lot of movies that don't have the word "God(s)" attached to it.

"Aren't you now putting looks above story?"

No, I'm voicing an opinion about the equality between emotional stimulation and psychological implications through symbolism. This includes visuals, sound, plot, personality traits etc.

"Didn't it work fine in the first movie?"

Not according to the standards that I wrote about scattered throughout this thread. There is a lot of potential in the Tron plot that just wasn't taken advantage of. I don't think Disney took full advantage of what Tron is or could be. That's basically what I'm rambling on about.

"While it's true that hollywood makes movies with eye candy and no substance, that doesn't mean that any movie with eye candy has no substance."

No, that's not what I'm trying to say, see above :)

Maxx
11-10-2010, 05:40 PM
For me, what's not working just in the visuals is the little details. I would have expected the world of TRON to be extremely clean again - antiseptic. Yes, I have heard the "computers have more power today, computer games are much more detailed, so it makes sense" argument before, it still does not work for me. The "game levels" of the first TRON had connections to the games of the time, which were extremely basic, sure. But TRON was not a movie only about computer games. There was a whole world and that "computer world" was ... "digital" as well. That has not changed much today. It has not become more graphic, "DX11-ish", hardware-shader-ish - it's still clean.
I disagree. Look at the state of the operating systems common now compared to DOS when TRON was released. It's all incredibly more graphic oriented, and graphically more sophisticated from even the recent releases. We've got cell phones that will automatically animate rain and condensation (with a wiper to remove it) on your screen when it's raining where you live.

And if you ask me, today's standards of hardware and software manufacturing have even increased - it should be even cleaner. And yet I see dust and rain, steam(?), there's one shot where the main actor walks towards a light and the floor is pretty rough, used... why? The 4 wardrobe-programs(?) have been mentioned before. There are clouds... well, the flashes are "pixel-ly", ok, it's... what? Discharges of... some... things.
With the GUI and functionality updates of operating systems and programs in general, there's an ever-increasing amount of legacy code in things. Sure, we'd like to believe that programs are scrubbed each time they're updated, but anyone who has used Adobe or Microsoft programs can attest to the ever-increasing amount of bloat and slow-down with each ordinal release. Even our own beloved LightWave has to keep an amount of legacy code from release to release to accommodate commonly used but out-dated plug-ins and functionality. The system is getting dirtier with each release. As for the wardrobe programs... I got nothin'. Just hope it's over quickly or somebody somewhere makes it make sense. And I have to admit, the four women beat the crap outta the paper clip from MS Office help.

I can buy some gritty locations ("Uh, we're in the fragmented parts of the system disk..." or something. Suspension of disbelief, no worries, I'm with you.). But I am really curious (again, hopefully I will find a theater that shows the 2D version) what for example that rocky mountain sequence will represent. Which location of the system is it? Do they explore the... dark parts of the WWW?
I'm personally hoping it's like the version of the Internet that William Gibson pioneered with this ideas of unexplored areas. I don't know for sure, but I think that would rock.

Anyway... for now, most of the trailers have shown me a world that is not designed by what the former TRON has established, it's simply designed to look cool, groovy, sexy. Fair enough, and of course it does, it's amazing, and it's what sells today. But especially the world of the original was pretty coherent and it was one of the movie's (few) strong points. You were curious, when a new element was introduced, what that would be... "Hey, cool... it's a BIT! LOLROFL!" With TRON 2's world not living up to my expectations for now (judging only from what I've seen from the trailers - I will of course give it a chance, maybe it all makes sense, well, maybe the trapped Flynn tried to rebuild "reality" for solace or something), I unfortunately doubt it will excel TRON 1 in other areas (story, characters,...). As Jason said... for just moving eye candy I go to Scene.org (http://scene.org/news.php).
A former commercial director... well some can, some can't, I like a lot of his work. But the writer's credits don't give me high hopes. We will see... :boogiedow
I agree with some points you make here, and (it may be a bit obvious) I am a massive fan of the original. We're not going to talk about how many times I've seen TRON now, as that's a bit embarrassing. I personally think that the updates to environment, characters, and the other things (the Recognizers look awesome and - dude! LightJets?!?!) we've seen in the stills and trailers and teasers show the original world of TRON after having followed the real world of computer updates. There's more power, more flotsam, more potential, more people using it all incorrectly. This for me is exciting.

Admittedly, I'm worried about the story and the performances (I can't remember where I read it, but apparently there was some fairly massive issue with the kid playing Sam during the filming and testing), but that may only be because I don't want TRON ruined for me the way Star Wars was with the prequels (thanks, Lucas; you dick).

I hope to be able to watch Legacy in 2D, walk in to the theater the next door over to immediately watch it again in 3D, then have enjoyed it enough to watch it immediately *again* in 2D. I've already asked for the entire day off work. :thumbsup:

Intuition
11-10-2010, 07:41 PM
Moving eye-candy isn't cinema though, it's moving eye-candy.

Was kidding. I am a "story first" guy myself. If there is no story then what is the point. I prefer a story shot on a crappy camera with no fx as opposed to the bigest FX budget ou can find with no interesting subject matter.

I like popcorn flicks as much as the next person but... my faves always have a good story to them.

jasonwestmas
11-10-2010, 08:28 PM
Was kidding. I am a "story first" guy myself. If there is no story then what is the point. I prefer a story shot on a crappy camera with no fx as opposed to the bigest FX budget ou can find with no interesting subject matter.

I like popcorn flicks as much as the next person but... my faves always have a good story to them.

Yeah I kinda thought you were kidding or being sarcastic. Either way, I just wanted to state the obvious :).

toby
11-10-2010, 11:18 PM
"Religious" is a word that gets into semantics. In essence, if any worshiping or exaltation is being done there are religious "works" or activities attached to that. This could include a lot of movies that don't have the word "God(s)" attached to it.
I was referring to the obvious church, pastors, 'do you believe' in the 'users'... "oh my user!" - all that stuff.



No, I'm voicing an opinion about the equality between emotional stimulation and psychological implications through symbolism. This includes visuals, sound, plot, personality traits etc.

Are you referring to digital faces as 'symbolism'? It's more like a style choice. Whether the faces are digital or not does not affect the story, it affects the feel of the movie, like any other style choice. The look of their faces was never literal anyway - it's what they look like if you were a program too. So it's no more important than whether or not you show blood in a murder mystery.

Regardless, there's no style of digital face, which could be done in any of million different ways, that you can put on the screen that the audience will be able to bond with as well as a real face. Digital actors could become annoying too, as in Beowulf. Also, the opinions and discussion of the digital characters completely overshadowed the rest of that movie. So, digital characters could certainly make the film worse.

But for all we know, maybe they *are* doing something to the film to make them look more digital. Just because it's 'live-action' doesn't mean they're not doing something like that in post.

jasonwestmas
11-11-2010, 09:54 AM
Are you referring to digital faces as 'symbolism'? It's more like a style choice. Whether the faces are digital or not does not affect the story, it affects the feel of the movie, like any other style choice. The look of their faces was never literal anyway - it's what they look like if you were a program too. So it's no more important than whether or not you show blood in a murder mystery.

Regardless, there's no style of digital face, which could be done in any of million different ways, that you can put on the screen that the audience will be able to bond with as well as a real face. Digital actors could become annoying too, as in Beowulf. Also, the opinions and discussion of the digital characters completely overshadowed the rest of that movie. So, digital characters could certainly make the film worse.

But for all we know, maybe they *are* doing something to the film to make them look more digital. Just because it's 'live-action' doesn't mean they're not doing something like that in post.

Let's start from the beginning. :)

I have pretty good evidence to suggest that when most people look at Tron Legacy they are either not aware that Tron is supposed to take place inside an imaginary digital world controlled by programs. Or the person just accepts the imagery because it looks sci-fi and that the world is rendered with photorealistic 3D rendering techniques inside the imaginary world where all these conscious entities exist. Therefore it's completely acceptable to mimic the hyper-real imagery that we see with our own two eyes every day.

I on the other hand find that to micmic hyper-real materials implys that the events taking place in the movie are still taking place within the real world. Tron World is supposed to be a separate plane of existence with different rules to play by.

Details like zippers, seams, wrinkles, creases, skin pores, out of place hair that bows to gravity, sweat, random smoke, dust and mist, decoration from human history, Earthly proportions, etc. destroys this illusion that we are in Tron World; That we are in fact in a different reality that has been manufactured from scratch and can exist separately from the physical rules of our human existence.

These kinds of details that we see in our human existence are not necessary to make Tron World world work, they are an offshoot of the human perceptions of reality. My point is that I want to get LOST in Tron World when I watch the movie. Instead of me forcing myself to suspend my disbelief I want to movie to make me believe subconsciously that it truly does exist or it can exist. Yes I know that logically I have no idea of how Tron World can possibly exist but that's not the point. I want the story to be played out that way. Instead of expressing photo-realism in human terms, these details should be replaced with digital effects that make me FEEL and THINK that I am in a totally different reality with materials and functional ideas that can only exist within Tron World. There are a few of these effects in the movie, which is a great start but the producers obviously chose to just simply add to our human reality instead of try to make us believe that it was a different reality visually and audiably speaking.

So to conclude, polygonal and volumetric rendering (For faces, all surfaces, and ethereal substance) in theory and in actuality can provide the necessary levels of control to create a completely separate reality. A reality that still looks logically functional and emotionally engaging to a human standard of enjoyment. Post production is great too, if that works to provide the necessary levels of control.

erikals
11-11-2010, 01:13 PM
Let's start from the beginning. :)
......
...
These kinds of details that we see in our human existence are not necessary to make Tron World world work, they are an offshoot of the human perceptions of reality. My point is that I want to get LOST in Tron World when I watch the movie. Instead of me forcing myself to suspend my disbelief I want to movie to make me believe subconsciously that it truly does exist or it can exist. Yes I know that logically I have no idea of how Tron World can possibly exist but that's not the point. I want the story to be played out that way. Instead of expressing photo-realism in human terms, these details should be replaced with digital effects that make me FEEL and THINK that I am in a totally different reality with materials and functional ideas that can only exist within Tron World. There are a few of these effects in the movie, which is a great start but the producers obviously chose to just simply add to our human reality instead of try to make us believe that it was a different reality visually and audiably speaking.

So to conclude, polygonal and volumetric rendering (For faces, all surfaces, and ethereal substance) in theory and in actuality can provide the necessary levels of control to create a completely separate reality. A reality that still looks logically functional and emotionally engaging to a human standard of enjoyment. Post production is great too, if that works to provide the necessary levels of control.

thanks for writing what i thought... ;]

jasonwestmas
11-11-2010, 01:41 PM
thanks for writing what i thought... ;]

Sure, I knew I wasn't that special. ;)

erikals
11-11-2010, 01:59 PM
...don't underestimate yourself, hehe ;]

Cageman
11-11-2010, 02:07 PM
Was kidding. I am a "story first" guy myself. If there is no story then what is the point. I prefer a story shot on a crappy camera with no fx as opposed to the bigest FX budget ou can find with no interesting subject matter.

I like popcorn flicks as much as the next person but... my faves always have a good story to them.

Well, thankfully for you and alot of other talanted artists, these types of movies gives oppertunities for many of us to do what we love and also earn cash for doing it.

This industry would have been quite small if there would only be movies with focus on story and less FX.

:)

Mr Rid
11-11-2010, 04:00 PM
Must be some weird nostalgic thing...
I watched Tron when I was a kid...
played the video game until I was broke at the local arcade when I was a kid...

and yet...
have no desire whatsoever to see this film.

It's not the fx, it's the story. It just wasn't all that interesting back then.

The story of Tron is not the main appeal. Rare is the film to convey a style that begins to transcend narrative in significance. Tron's blend of technique and concept was as visionary as Star Wars or more so. Most people (nerds anyway) naturally find artificial reality immersion intriguing as it drives so much of the $20+ billion video game industry, and CGI. Tron was first to widely glamorize the promise of computers and 'holodeck' worlds in pop culture, and thereby quietly inspire imaginations of developers of the tech around us. Discovery of a complex, dangerous alien world holds universal appeal, and the basic mythology continues to resonate now as it did in cold war 1982 about struggle against the ever impending threat of oppressive technology and new world order. But more to the point, whats not to like about killer frisbees and lightcycles that pop out of your arse?! :rock:

89878

jasonwestmas
11-11-2010, 04:20 PM
But more to the point, whats not to like about killer frisbees and lightcycles that pop out of your arse?! :rock:
89878

For sure, visually speaking the whole Jedi image with robes and light sabers are the basis for the success of the Star Wars Franchise. Take that away and you have very little imo.

Tron's image is held within the Frisbees and and Lightcycles. Those are the visual concepts that bring life to Tron.

However I think all this is more about selling an image than selling an exciting film. An image can only go so far on it's own and vice versa, the other elements that engage the viewer on a more psychological level are nothing in and of themselves without an image to represent it.

toby
11-11-2010, 06:01 PM
Let's start from the beginning. :)

I have pretty good evidence to suggest that when most people look at Tron Legacy they are either not aware that Tron is supposed to take place inside an imaginary digital world controlled by programs. Or the person just accepts the imagery because it looks sci-fi and that the world is rendered with photorealistic 3D rendering techniques inside the imaginary world where all these conscious entities exist. Therefore it's completely acceptable to mimic the hyper-real imagery that we see with our own two eyes every day.

I on the other hand find that to micmic hyper-real materials implys that the events taking place in the movie are still taking place within the real world. Tron World is supposed to be a separate plane of existence with different rules to play by.

Details like zippers, seams, wrinkles, creases, skin pores, out of place hair that bows to gravity, sweat, random smoke, dust and mist, decoration from human history, Earthly proportions, etc. destroys this illusion that we are in Tron World; That we are in fact in a different reality that has been manufactured from scratch and can exist separately from the physical rules of our human existence.

These kinds of details that we see in our human existence are not necessary to make Tron World world work, they are an offshoot of the human perceptions of reality. My point is that I want to get LOST in Tron World when I watch the movie. Instead of me forcing myself to suspend my disbelief I want to movie to make me believe subconsciously that it truly does exist or it can exist. Yes I know that logically I have no idea of how Tron World can possibly exist but that's not the point. I want the story to be played out that way. Instead of expressing photo-realism in human terms, these details should be replaced with digital effects that make me FEEL and THINK that I am in a totally different reality with materials and functional ideas that can only exist within Tron World. There are a few of these effects in the movie, which is a great start but the producers obviously chose to just simply add to our human reality instead of try to make us believe that it was a different reality visually and audiably speaking.

So to conclude, polygonal and volumetric rendering (For faces, all surfaces, and ethereal substance) in theory and in actuality can provide the necessary levels of control to create a completely separate reality. A reality that still looks logically functional and emotionally engaging to a human standard of enjoyment. Post production is great too, if that works to provide the necessary levels of control.

Again, what style the characters are in has little to do with how much substance or story a movie has. What you're asking for is only one step above eye-candy, and sacrifices some of the humanity of the characters. I don't blame them at all for not setting the movie in uncanny valley. You lose a big chunk of the actors' personality and emotion when they're digital.

erikals
11-11-2010, 06:25 PM
Again, what style the characters are in has little to do with how much substance or story a movie has. What you're asking for is only one step above eye-candy, and sacrifices some of the humanity of the characters. I don't blame them at all for not setting the movie in uncanny valley. You lose a big chunk of the actors' personality and emotion when they're digital.

this is where we disagree, the "effect" is almost as bad as glowing-glittering vampires.

it is not an intended visual effect, but rather an unfortunate side-effect.

this rushed VFX is also shown in one of the trailers where 3D-Jeff leaves the house.
(trailer #2 - 28 sec into the video)
 

jasonwestmas
11-11-2010, 09:33 PM
"Again, what style the characters are in has little to do with how much substance or story a movie has."

I might as well give up and go home then since this implies that visual creativity and stylistic decisions adds no meaning to a film. I disagree, I believe that decisions in style can enhance one's perception of believability in a movie, including a plot or personality trait if done intelligently. I don't choose a set of stylistic rules just because I think it defines me as an individual and it's the next hip, cool thing to do, I choose a style to best tell the story and personal identity in the film.

"You lose a big chunk of the actors' personality and emotion when they're digital."

Is that how you felt when you saw all those characters in pixar, sony and dreamworks films? No emotion? Lots of 3D emotional personality in there and a lot of it was hand animated using 3D tools. Again, if that is true, then I might as well pack up, go home and never come back.

My guess is that the 3D styles that you must be thinking about must be really bad art styles or are at best used poorly. I'm talking about artistic freedom in inventing/ mixing and matching visual elements that represent and point to a logical context in a film and better define that context. This is not about adding visual flim flam and pazazz that has no meaning and could be easily added to any old film. I'm talking about specialized freedom from being a complete stylistic hack relying on visual cliche. Not that there is anything wrong with that sometimes, but hey Tron is a great opportunity to invent some new ways to tell an Fantasy story. understanding of story through creative visual elements. I think I already said that several times.

toby
11-12-2010, 01:48 PM
"Again, what style the characters are in has little to do with how much substance or story a movie has."

I might as well give up and go home then since this implies that visual creativity and stylistic decisions adds no meaning to a film.
No, they do exactly that; *add* meaning. You're putting visuals on the same level as story, when it's closer to eye-candy. A good story is a good story whether you read it in a book, or see it with window-dressing.


I disagree, I believe that decisions in style can enhance one's perception of believability in a movie, including a plot or personality trait if done intelligently. I don't choose a set of stylistic rules just because I think it defines me as an individual and it's the next hip, cool thing to do, I choose a style to best tell the story and personal identity in the film.

"You lose a big chunk of the actors' personality and emotion when they're digital."

Is that how you felt when you saw all those characters in pixar, sony and dreamworks films? No emotion? Lots of 3D emotional personality in there and a lot of it was hand animated using 3D tools. Again, if that is true, then I might as well pack up, go home and never come back.

I didn't say 'no emotion', I said you lose a big chunk. No, pixar characters cannot show as much emotion as a human, and audiences cannot connect with caricatures as well as humans. Caricatures are a whole different story, grossly exaggerated to get that level of emotion. Do you think that would work for Tron? That's fine if you do, but don't look down on someone if they don't.



My guess is that the 3D styles that you must be thinking about must be really bad art styles or are at best used poorly.

As I said, there's a million ways a 'digitized' human could look, but all of them would be less human.

If you were just saying "it would be cool if they did this..." that would be one thing. But you're accusing them of showing nothing but eye-candy and being uncreative. You're criticizing the whole movie because they didn't do the visuals *your* way - without having seen it.



I'm talking about artistic freedom in inventing/ mixing and matching visual elements
Like... the freedom to mix live-action with 3d?



that represent and point to a logical context in a film and better define that context. This is not about adding visual flim flam and pazazz that has no meaning and could be easily added to any old film. I'm talking about specialized freedom from being a complete stylistic hack relying on visual cliche. Not that there is anything wrong with that sometimes, but hey Tron is a great opportunity to invent some new ways to tell an Fantasy story. understanding of story through creative visual elements. I think I already said that several times.
How do you know they didn't invent new ways? Because it doesn't slap you in the face while viewing a 480x360 clip?

erikals
11-12-2010, 05:39 PM
the thing is that it enters the Uncanny Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley)...

so in my and Jason's opinion (if i get him right) it is better to go either one way or the other, to get out of the Valley.

so, either work on the animation and make it more realistic, or do the exact opposite, and make it more artistic.

right now it falls in between two chairs.

 

jasonwestmas
11-12-2010, 06:59 PM
"No, they do exactly that; *add* meaning. You're putting visuals on the same level as story, when it's closer to eye-candy. A good story is a good story whether you read it in a book, or see it with window-dressing."

(Now I'm going to make you read all of this because you didn't seem to understand much about what I wrote earlier. ;) )

First of all, critiquing is not accusation, I'm sharing ideas of what I believe would make a better Tron Film, not LOTR or any other Fantasy or Mythological film.

Second of all it 's not like we can gage all of this and say that the visuals of Life and Film is only providing 25% of the meaning while the plot and dialogue is providing the other 75%. Seems like a wasted effort to measure that.

So okay, you're draggin books into this, I didn't really want to do that because it's an unfair comparison. Do books have more meaning in them than a modern cinematic feature? Of course they do, they have far more meaning in them than any movie can hope to address. This is mainly because it takes far more work and energy to create a film based on what is in a book than it does to write the book.

The only reason we write books is because it is the faster and less expensive medium to develop ideas with. Does this mean that we just stop there and say that Books are for the serious artist/creative person and movies are just for fun because they only provide 25% of the meaning and emotion in life? No I'm taking it further in saying that film is taking all the visuals, plot, character, effects beyond the highest level of textual meaning and climbing to a higher plane of reason and understanding (potentially). This therefore takes all these things that we gather from text and develop it into something more than text alone.

Does all of this mean that Visuals are on the same plane as a story book or novel? That's kind of silly question because there are A LOT of visual descriptions that accompany the systematic networks in every sci-fi novel I have read. It's not like the visuals are there just to romanticize and "dress-up" the purpose of the story and provides much less than a "huge chunk" of meaning and understanding.

I believe film is the next technological leap in providing a medium that has a higher level of specificity, whether we find Tron interesting or not. In pre-production the movie does in fact use text and dialogue as a partner to BETTER describe what a sci-fi novel attempts to convey. Sure we can only make a movie so many hours long but previously in this thread I'm mostly addressing visual STYLE in a cinematic world called Tron World. You've seen a story board correct? Cinematic story boards begin to establish a style within the film. Stylization isn't only about embellishment of an idea, it's about making intelligent choices like composition, camera movement, lighting, shade, material, dialogue, overall tonality and much more. These are all visual elements and they do tell a story. I'm not going to argue how much of a story they tell but they are a genuine part of a story that is being told with text or with film.

Yes, even books provide composition, only it is framed within the reader's imagination which to me is constantly in motion and can become blurry between the lines. A film has the ability to more specifically communicate a story regardless of how long or short it is. So why do we watch a film then? Because it's less work and it gives us more of an emotional rush? I think it is that reason and also more. I figure the more work an artist puts into a film the more the viewer is going to get out of it. This does not exclude text.

"I didn't say 'no emotion', I said you lose a big chunk. No, pixar characters cannot show as much emotion as a human, and audiences cannot connect with caricatures as well as humans. Caricatures are a whole different story, grossly exaggerated to get that level of emotion. Do you think that would work for Tron? That's fine if you do, but don't look down on someone if they don't.

As I said, there's a million ways a 'digitized' human could look, but all of them would be less human."

Precisely my point, you can disagree with me, it won't make much difference in my viewpoint, but If I were to be "digitized" and put into a different world where all the rules if not most of the rules have changed, I would expect the visuals, materials and surfaces to imply this as well. I don't believe Disney pushed it far enough. No I haven't seen the movie yet but I have seen clips and high resolution picts. What's wrong with being a little prejudice? I don't have a problem with people proving me wrong later.

"How do you know they didn't invent new ways? Because it doesn't slap you in the face while viewing a 480x360 clip?"

I welcome being slapped in the face and surprised, it keeps thing interesting.

jasonwestmas
11-12-2010, 07:03 PM
the thing is that it enters the Uncanny Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley)...

so in my and Jason's opinion (if i get him right) it is better to go either one way or the other, to get out of the Valley.

so, either work on the animation and make it more realistic, or do the exact opposite, and make it more artistic.

right now it falls in between two chairs.

 

Right, I know why Disney chose to use live actors but there is a nice in-between if we search for it through experimentation. If they chose to do some things to the faces in post rather than use polygonal surfaces and it worked well then that's great too.

erikals
11-12-2010, 07:06 PM
not much prejudice here imo, as the clips can be watched in HD...
(not only 480x360...)

toby
11-13-2010, 06:22 PM
Exactly, but Disney is typically creating images just because they look cool and not necessarily because they make an exciting film. There should be rules that define the Tron world to be mostly different from the real world. If it doesn't then it starts to look like a broad-way dancing musical with trance music and flashing strobe lights. Please pass the LSD.


Maintaining live action video throughout this computerized world kind of destroys or masks this idea of a digitized reality as pretty as the eye candy is imo.

The purpose of seeing moving pictures is not to just see pretty eye candy.


Moving eye-candy isn't cinema though, it's moving eye-candy.



Details like zippers, seams, wrinkles, creases, skin pores, out of place hair that bows to gravity, sweat, random smoke, dust and mist, decoration from human history, Earthly proportions, etc. destroys this illusion that we are in Tron World

the producers obviously chose to just simply add to our human reality instead of try to make us believe that it was a different reality visually and audiably speaking.

Constantly comparing it to eye-candy is more accusation than critique, especially considering you haven't seen either movie. You're saying that more visuals are needed to support the story, but how can you know? Have you never seen a trailer and thought "how can that possibly work?" then seen the movie and said "oh - that's how." ?

And harshly judging the visuals when you don't know the story, while decrying "eye-candy" seems a bit ironic; eye-candy is flashy visuals that are unneccesary, and you're asking for more visuals without knowing if they're neccesary.

I brought up books to demonstrate that visuals are not as important as the story. And visual descriptions therein are also only supportive or embellishment. (That's not to say they're frivilous.)

That's kind of silly question because there are A LOT of visual descriptions that accompany the systematic networks in every sci-fi novel I have read.
And how much of that is only to provide something cool to geek out over? Lots of it is just mind-candy.

toby
11-13-2010, 06:26 PM
the thing is that it enters the Uncanny Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley)...

so in my and Jason's opinion (if i get him right) it is better to go either one way or the other, to get out of the Valley.

so, either work on the animation and make it more realistic, or do the exact opposite, and make it more artistic.

right now it falls in between two chairs.

I don't think he said anything except to make the characters digital -

not much prejudice here imo, as the clips can be watched in HD...
(not only 480x360...)
Sure, compressed, unfinished clips with no context...

toby
11-13-2010, 06:28 PM
this is where we disagree, the "effect" is almost as bad as glowing-glittering vampires.

it is not an intended visual effect, but rather an unfortunate side-effect.

this rushed VFX is also shown in one of the trailers where 3D-Jeff leaves the house.
(trailer #2 - 28 sec into the video)

Which effect are you talking about?

Almost every trailer is lower quailty than the finished shots. And most of them are 'rushed' in any production.

jasonwestmas
11-13-2010, 07:17 PM
Constantly comparing it to eye-candy is more accusation than critique, especially considering you haven't seen either movie. You're saying that more visuals are needed to support the story, but how can you know? Have you never seen a trailer and thought "how can that possibly work?" then seen the movie and said "oh - that's how." ?

And harshly judging the visuals when you don't know the story, while decrying "eye-candy" seems a bit ironic; eye-candy is flashy visuals that are unneccesary, and you're asking for more visuals without knowing if they're neccesary.

I brought up books to demonstrate that visuals are not as important as the story. And visual descriptions therein are also only supportive or embellishment. (That's not to say they're frivilous.)

And how much of that is only to provide something cool to geek out over? Lots of it is just mind-candy.

You totally missed the points I was making but that's ok.

erikals
11-13-2010, 09:04 PM
Which effect are you talking about?

Almost every trailer is lower quailty than the finished shots. And most of them are 'rushed' in any production.

we'll see, i'm afraid they are the finished shots though... :[

Mr Rid
12-07-2010, 08:06 PM
Almost every trailer is lower quailty than the finished shots. And most of them are 'rushed' in any production.

My experience has been that we rush to squeeze out shots for an early trailer assuming we'll go back later to improve them, but then there never is time.

Sounds like what I thought- "A film that awes and bores in frustratingly equal measure. Visually and musically, it's a triumph. Dramatically, it needs some re-wiring."

toby
12-07-2010, 09:18 PM
Sounds like what I thought- "A film that awes and bores in frustratingly equal measure. Visually and musically, it's a triumph. Dramatically, it needs some re-wiring."
This is a review you read? I did hear about the visualy stunning part from someone whose judgment I trust, so I will be checking it out in 3d. Apparently they get really creative with it.

Mr Rid
12-07-2010, 11:41 PM
This is a review you read? ...

...and the general consensus on Rotten. Usually the meter drops after release when top critics chime in.