Comments on: Comments on 9324

Post number 9324

ed — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:51:51 -0800

Tron returns with a vengeance. With a theatrical sequel, a 20th anniversary DVD and a first-person PC shooter, you have to wonder why Disney is rollling out the red carpet all of a sudden.

By: skallas

skallas — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:59:49 -0800

Without a doubt, Tron is an amazing groubreaking movie and I'm itching to get that DVD. If Disney's recent efforts are a clue to the sequel's future I can only imagine the sequel to be a William Gibson-esque CGI crap-o-rama.

By: NortonDC

NortonDC — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:25:04 -0800

Too bad Tron is a crap-o-rama of its own. Watch with an adult's eyes, and be ready for disappointment.

By: Skot

Skot — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:36:26 -0800

you have to wonder why Disney is rollling out the red carpet all of a sudden Hm. I don't wonder, actually. Nostalgia + Juggernaut Marketing = $

By: ed

ed — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:46:09 -0800

Al Gore must be spinning his robotic arms in a 360 at this news.

By: Shadowkeeper

Shadowkeeper — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:49:33 -0800

Disney is releasing a 20th anniversary DVD next year? * snort * That's ridiculous, Tron's not 19 years old! I saw it when I was 11, so if Tron were really 19 years old, that would make me ... ... Good gravy! When did I turn 30?!

By: owillis

owillis — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:08:12 -0800

Too bad Tron is a crap-o-rama of its own. Watch with an adult's eyes, and be ready for disappointment. Ah, c'mon its still cool. I watched it recently and especially considering when it was made - it looks great...

By: NortonDC

NortonDC — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:38:39 -0800

Ah, c'mon its still cool. I watched it recently and especially considering when it was made - it looks great... Here's salt for that wound: Star Wars is a bad movie. I'm not kidding. And still more: Def Leppard didn't get worse, you got older.

By: webmutant

webmutant — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:51:33 -0800

I kind of like the article referring to "Disney" as "Dis" -- Dis being, mind you, the Roman name for the lord of the Underworld and the dead. (Even more appropriately, the Greeks called this figure "Pluto" ... )

By: ed

ed — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:29:53 -0800

Webmutant: Don't deconstruct it too heavily. It's just an article from some underpaid journalist working for the Hollywood Reporter.

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:17:35 -0800

Ya know, by this time (2001), I was convinced we'd have lightcycles. Where are the goddamn lightcycles?

By: fooljay

fooljay — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:34:42 -0800

I still want an electrified Whammo to stick to my back without making the short hairs stand up and sizzle...

By: fooljay

fooljay — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:36:16 -0800

Oh, and by the way, thank you. I now have the melody and sound effects from the spider/cone segment of the video game looping ceaselessly through my head...

By: Dillenger69

Dillenger69 — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:46:10 -0800

Dis being, mind you, the Roman name for the lord of the Underworld and the dead. (Even more appropriately, the Greeks called this figure "Pluto" ... )
Pluto is Roman.
Hades is Greek.
Here's a bit on Dis. It's all interrelated.
No matter how you slice it, it fits into Disney. :)

By: th3ph17

th3ph17 — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:50:22 -0800

i just watched Tron again about 4 months ago, it is still cool. -the disks of tron was an amazing game [not the regular tron game, the other one] -def leopard was always bad, except for pyromania -dong_resin, you will have to be content with one of these.

By: NortonDC

NortonDC — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 18:02:04 -0800

Even Pyromania was bad. You just didn't know it when you were in junior high. Now you should be able to tell. No defense for Star Wars, eh? (wait, that sounds funny in unapproved ways. the home office won't be pleased)

By: NortonDC

NortonDC — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 18:11:20 -0800

...and Discs of Tron is available in for MAME, though it loses something without the blacklit booth and rotating controls.

By: Grum

Grum — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 18:39:22 -0800

Tron isn't really a good movie after seeing it as an adult. It's just fun to imagine when you were a kid and how it was SO cool back then. [offtopic] The Discs of Tron stand-up video game (with the full booth) was easily one of the most enjoyable games I ever played in an arcade. It was hard to find (but our local Wizard's Castle had one) but it was well worth the search. The feeling of being isolated from the other gamers, the stereo sound coming from the big speakers, standing on a pad that LOOKED like the pad your character was on in the game...I sunk my allowance and paper-boy money into it with glee. I just loved trying to pull off the 2-wall kills and watching my opponent pinwheel his arms as he was about to fall off the disc. [/offtopic] Oh, and Star Wars is a fun movie, not a good movie. Just like this one is...fun, but not good.

By: Dirjy

Dirjy — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:25:23 -0800

"Ah, c'mon its still cool. I watched it recently and especially considering when it was made - it looks great..." "Here's salt for that wound: Star Wars is a bad movie. I'm not kidding. "And still more: Def Leppard didn't get worse, you got older." STOP IT! STOP IIITTT!!! MY CHILDHOOD IS A SHAM!!!!! (*weeps* *wails* *gnashes teeth*)

By: Ptrin

Ptrin — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:33:46 -0800

Did anyone ever accuse Star Wars of being good? Besides you. Put your hand down. There. Didn't think so.

By: NortonDC

NortonDC — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:54:58 -0800

Did anyone ever accuse Star Wars of being good? Shockingly, yes.

By: hootch

hootch — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 20:48:54 -0800

My brother is going to be pissed...his name is Tron (it's Norwegian). He was in junior high when the original came out and was teased endlessly about it.

By: skallas

skallas — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:03:41 -0800

Did anyone ever accuse Star Wars of being good? Is Star Wars bad like Critters II was bad? I think its pretty obvious that when dealing with mainstream entertainment you have to judge a movie according to what its supposed to be. Star Wars is a sci-fi adventure, good guys win, scary villain, etc type film aimed at every demographic you can imagine. Its entertainment and it works. You can argue endlessly about parsecs, gravity/explosions in space, and men in silly costumes or whatever is the new stylish way to bash pop sci-fi but you could also do a lot worse at the video store.

By: judomadonna

judomadonna — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:21:48 -0800

i guess disney's to blame, but i'm still very surprised it's taken this long for next-gen "tron" video games to get developed. a really great game set in the "tron" universe would probably sell as many copies as the latest (and dull as fuck) "final fantasy" game.

By: benjh

benjh — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:22:52 -0800

"When we created (the character) Tron, there were no PCs. We were looking at a possible future," Lisberger said. 1982, right? Did I miss something? There were no PCs in 1982? WTF was DOS being put on? Bill Gates' ass? Or the Apple side? An Apple Timeline (timeline, not jobs reality distortian field, don't confuse them.) I'd call the Apple ][ a pretty much 'personal computer'... June 1977. I hate executives and marketing people who talk out of their ass.

By: Ptrin

Ptrin — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:28:16 -0800

What makes Star Wars bad is Mark H.'s saying "Carrie!" instead of Princess L. That's quite possibly the dumbest mistake in the history of time. Also, its just not a good movie. Moreover, most movies aren't really worth the price of admission, unless you are passing the time caressing the smooth, supple thigh of the girl sitting next to you... oops, looks like I need to be arrested by the thought police. :)

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:12:01 -0800

Aw, it looks like a jockstrap! Lightcycles, damn you, I want a lightcycle. I just saw Tron, it held up great. A total stand out. Star Wars is a good movie because people still give a shit about it 24 years later. It's pop culture, don't over think it. Critters II was good simply for having Lee the shapeshifting bounty hunter turn into a playboy playmate, and having to remove a replicated staple from his/her torso because s/he used a centerfold to pattern his/her metamorphosis on. Big Trouble in Little China is okay, but Kurt Russell has repressed homosexual urges that he still hasn't dealt with, and it's tearing Goldie Hawn up inside no matter what she says. Evolution did happen, just not in the way most people think. God does exist, and is a big black woman with braces and a lisp. The egg came first because the lizard-like dinosaur thing that chickens evolved from laid eggs. People who reject multi dimensional theory will never figure anything out. That splooge in Slim Jims is never less than 40% capucine monkey. Snake meat doesn't really taste like chicken, but gator does. No matter what she accomplishes, the best Janet Reno can hope for in life is compromise. Nikola Tesla got ripped off. Wint-o-Green life savers really do make sparks in the dark. And finally, no, Mariah Carey isn't putting you on, she's really that vapid and dumb. Who wants pancakes?

By: riffola

riffola — Sat, 28 Jul 2001 00:14:30 -0800

NortonDC: Have you heard Def Leppard's 1996 release Slang? You ought to give it a try to just see that they are not really stuck on the '80s sound.

By: dhartung

dhartung — Sat, 28 Jul 2001 00:51:42 -0800

Argh. Star Wars is a great, seminal film. It virtually singlehandedly reinvented the summer blockbuster (okay, Jaws helped, and CE3K provided the rebound). The special effects, in its day, were second to none. The movie made Harry Ford a star. The score by John Williams helped spawn a new market for blockbuster movie theme album sales. The licensing ... oh, God. The licensing was everywhere. Didn't diminish the quality of the film, though. What Star Wars is not is complicated or deep. It is also not science fiction. Lucas has always, always correctly labeled it as fantasy (long time ago, galaxy far away, etc.), lack of elves and dragons notwithstanding. What's bad about it are a few inconsequential things. Hamill's putty-like acting skills. A few goofs that would be overlooked in any other film. Is it a "good film" such as a Scorsese or Rafelson or Kubrick or Altman might create? No, it is not that kind of good film. It is more a good film such as D.W. Griffith might create (q.v. Titanic). But for what it is, it is very good indeed, and watching it again (particularly not the special edition), it is clear that Lucas didn't so much make it as birth it. The plot arcs from the grandiose to the personal to the fantastic with breathless accuracy and efficiency. It is probably one of the best popular entertainments ever made, and I have no qualms about defending it as such. Note that The Empire Strikes Back is arguably a "better" film in terms of story, character motivation, interaction, and dialog (thank you Leigh Brackett). But it isn't as perfect an entertainment vehicle. Without the Ewoks, ROTJ might not be as much of a let-down. Nothing need be said about Episode I, alas.

By: gluechunk

gluechunk — Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:23:37 -0800

1982, right? Did I miss something? There were no PCs in 1982? He said "When we created (the character) Tron..." Tron was released in '82. They finished shooting it in '81 and spent until early '82 on post-production. Obviously the creation of the character (and of the script) came before the shooting. So figure they created it in '80 (or earlier). Yes, PCs were being sold in the late '70s, but there was a big difference between PCs in '79/'80 and PCs in '82 (when the Computer was made Time's man/machine of the year).

By: Opus Dark

Opus Dark — Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:39:21 -0800

Star Wars. The Beatles. "Mainstream", right out of the box. Lite darkness, no grit.

By: Cavatica

Cavatica — Sat, 28 Jul 2001 03:53:45 -0800

That's messed up. The C64, not a real pc in the early 80's? dhartung, I agree with you there about Empire.

By: NortonDC

NortonDC — Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:01:49 -0800

Star Wars being a bad movie: First off, enjoy the hundreds of hits you get with this google search: whine power.converters (I especially liked this one.) Specifically addressing your comments, dhartung: It virtually singlehandedly reinvented the summer blockbuster (okay, Jaws helped, and CE3K provided the rebound). This is solely a business concern, hardly the measure of greatness in an artistic endeavor. The special effects, in its day, were second to none. This is largely a technical concern, rarely the measure of greatness in an artistic endeavor. The movie made Harry Ford a star. You might not think so at first, but this is another business concern. The score by John Williams helped spawn a new market for blockbuster movie theme album sales. Another purely business concern. The licensing ... oh, God. The licensing was everywhere. Didn't diminish the quality of the film, though. Do even need to say it? I don't think bad acting is "inconsequential," dhartung, and I really don't believe you think so either. And, as Spike lee once said when explaining why he now hates watching She's Gotta Have It, bad acting is always the director's fault. The poverty of the acting extends far beyond Mark Hamill's instant ability to grate on nerves at the slightest parting of his lips. What the Hell is going on with Carrie's accent? She alternates between a laughably bad English accent and whatever non-descript American accent is native to her at random. Any director that gave a damn would have stomped all over that on day one. Okay, enough about the acting. How about Lucas's complete inability to maintain momentum? How many times in the lead up to the Death Star battle does the film just fall over, stopping dead in it's tracks? This inability to build momentum across scenes directly undercuts the movie's basic entertainment value, and, more so than its myriad other flaws, directly limits it's achievement even as measured on the permissive scale of "popular entertainment." And again, this lands at George's feet, because not only did he direct it, he also editted it. Star Wars is a deeply flawed movie, and it is worse now in it's "final" form, with redundant scenes and the candy-assification of Han re. Greedo. Thanks again, George. Does that mean you can't love it? Certainly not, since even I have previously declared my own love of it. However, love it with your eyes open and you will see that your feelings do not make it a good movie, just a beloved movie. Can a bad movie be entertaining? Yes. Can a bad movie be innovative, even innovative enough to earn the appellation "seminal?" Yes, but that won't stop it from being a bad movie. And really, shouldn't the "seminal" comment have come from dong_resin?

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:44:50 -0800

You said come.

By: joaquim

joaquim — Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:37:59 -0800

It is also not science fiction. Let's see...a princess trying to get something valuable across enemy territory aided by cynical professionals, naive youngsters, and two whimsical servants. Sounds like a samurai movie to me.