WorldOutWest Wrote: It all really just boils down to perspective and preference. I saw the original TRON when it was first released in theatres -- and it immediately resonated with me, and has remained one of my favorite films ever since then. The linear, real time approach that the sequel is taking -- that approximately 28 years have elapsed since the events of the first film -- is an excellent and smart approach. With that, technology has evolved, style and designs have also evolved, so it's only natural to see and expect either variations or changes in the look and design of the digital world, as well as its inhabitants. It all feels very much like a natural progression in the digital world of TRON to me -- without being redundant or constricted, rather, it's innovative and progressive. - Jay

In most of what you say we agree. My one contention (embracing the "make sense of it all" side of things) is the notion that the world must have "evolved" alongside changing technology. The "universe" Flynn found himself in was (by my perspective) never a literal tangible thing. It was a universe of pure information, shaped largely by Flynn's own expectations and limitations. As he comes ot understand the world he has found himself in, he learns to manipulate reality, because the reality itself is entirely subjective. So while I could agree that the digital world might look 100% different depending on who was viewing it, treating it like it is a tangible universe that evolves in tandem with changing real world tech makes little sense to me.

To put it in a more direct manner: If a lightcycle as seen on the game grid was meant to represent the light cycle game, than given the advancements in modern technology the current universe should be so significant, that the digital universe should be indistinguishable from our own.

WorldOutWest Wrote: lurkinghorror Wrote: WorldOutWest Wrote: It all really just boils down to perspective and preference. I saw the original TRON when it was first released in theatres -- and it immediately resonated with me, and has remained one of my favorite films ever since then. The linear, real time approach that the sequel is taking -- that approximately 28 years have elapsed since the events of the first film -- is an excellent and smart approach. With that, technology has evolved, style and designs have also evolved, so it's only natural to see and expect either variations or changes in the look and design of the digital world, as well as its inhabitants. It all feels very much like a natural progression in the digital world of TRON to me -- without being redundant or constricted, rather, it's innovative and progressive. - Jay In most of what you say we agree. My one contention (embracing the "make sense of it all" side of things) is the notion that the world must have "evolved" alongside changing technology. The "universe" Flynn found himself in was (by my perspective) never a literal tangible thing. It was a universe of pure information, shaped largely by Flynn's own expectations and limitations. As he comes ot understand the world he has found himself in, he learns to manipulate reality, because the reality itself is entirely subjective. So while I could agree that the digital world might look 100% different depending on who was viewing it, treating it like it is a tangible universe that evolves in tandem with changing real world tech makes little sense to me. To put it in a more direct manner: If a lightcycle as seen on the game grid was meant to represent the light cycle game, than given the advancements in modern technology the current universe should be so significant, that the digital universe should be indistinguishable from our own. I agree -- I think we basically look at things the same way... another factor to keep in mind of course is the approach that the TRON: LEGACY filmmakers have utilized in fashioning the sequel - whereas both Kosinski and Bailey have said: TRON is its own discreet universe. It's been a world sitting on its own for the past 20 years . . . like the Galapagos Islands -- which I think is an excellent analogy to sum it all up. - Jay

True. I'm very interested in seeing how that aspect affects things.

Anon Wrote: lurkinghorror Wrote: WorldOutWest Wrote: It all really just boils down to perspective and preference. I saw the original TRON when it was first released in theatres -- and it immediately resonated with me, and has remained one of my favorite films ever since then. The linear, real time approach that the sequel is taking -- that approximately 28 years have elapsed since the events of the first film -- is an excellent and smart approach. With that, technology has evolved, style and designs have also evolved, so it's only natural to see and expect either variations or changes in the look and design of the digital world, as well as its inhabitants. It all feels very much like a natural progression in the digital world of TRON to me -- without being redundant or constricted, rather, it's innovative and progressive. - Jay In most of what you say we agree. My one contention (embracing the "make sense of it all" side of things) is the notion that the world must have "evolved" alongside changing technology. The "universe" Flynn found himself in was (by my perspective) never a literal tangible thing. It was a universe of pure information, shaped largely by Flynn's own expectations and limitations. As he comes ot understand the world he has found himself in, he learns to manipulate reality, because the reality itself is entirely subjective. So while I could agree that the digital world might look 100% different depending on who was viewing it, treating it like it is a tangible universe that evolves in tandem with changing real world tech makes little sense to me. To put it in a more direct manner: If a lightcycle as seen on the game grid was meant to represent the light cycle game, than given the advancements in modern technology the current universe should be so significant, that the digital universe should be indistinguishable from our own. True, although I'm not sure WorldOutWest suggested that its evolution is "in tandem" with the evolution of the real world, only that its evolution has continued to on its own for over 20 years (real world time). I think it's worth mentioning, maybe as a sidebar, that the digital world in the new film is not meant to be the same one in the first film. According to the story, Flynn has created something new and more advanced on a new server (hence various redesigns). It's not the Encom 511. And it is this other server that has been running on its own since 1989 or so. Edit: you guys have kept posting as I wrote this and now it seems redundant. lol

You're right Anon/Andrew, it is a different server -- actually, Kosinski and Lisberger addressed some of these story elements at a Q&A I attended last March in Los Angeles as part of the ARG event when the first trailer was revealed in select IMAX theatres -- here's the transcript of that event in one of the articles of my continuing LA Times coverage of TRON: LEGACY - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2010/03/tron-legacy-director-we-are-on-a-new-server-now.html - and here's a link to all of my LA Times coverage of TRON: LEGACY - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/jay-west/ - you can click the link and then scroll down to view all of my articles/videos - new ones will also be added there too.

- Jay

Just a quick anecdote about hair in cyberspace. Steve Lisberger said the only reason why hair doesn't show up in Tron is because it would have been impossible to matte. That's why they wear helmets so it would be easier to matte.

Lisberger: Yes, and I've never mentioned this to anyone. I just thought of it: hair. We could not put hair in the first movie because we couldn't technically matte it. People think, well, why does everyone have a helmet on all of the time? It was a technical problem; otherwise there would have been plenty of scenes where they had hair. But I am envious of their ability to matte characters in, I am envious of their precision in terms of – they have no idea how funky, I keep telling Joe [Kosinski] and Sean. It's a cliché, the old guy going, "you don't know back in the day how funky it was!" But it was seriously funky. It was so funky, I went up to Pixar and we showed both Trons up there, and when I would tell them stories about this, I might as well have been talking about the Wright Brothers.

Source: http://www.cinematical.com/2010/08/04/tron-creator-steven-lisberger-interview/
Basically, hair in 1982 cyberspace wasn't a visual choice, rather it was a technical one.

Dumont had a beard, the sexy lady Program in the "this town is full of live one's" scene, the Yori'squater's/the "love scene"; Yori had hair."

So the characters in Tron Legacy having hair doesn't bother me at all. I really don't see the point in nitpicking things.

The new digital realm that Flynn designed and then developed in 1988-1989 onward to me looks pretty darn awesome.
It was a slightly jarring to me at first, but the more I see of the movie itself, I see that it all "gells" together IMO, there's a sense of aesthetic symetry and a sort of synergy at play and I like it alot.

Hockey helmets and spandex suits, and lot's of bright glowing circuits are cool for the original Tron, but it's time to move on IMO.

People don't wear gladiator armor or toga's in modern times, so it'd be odd in my view if in the digital world that's been steadily, virtual growing and adapting for 20 yrs in an isolated computer system filled with semi sentient A.I. Program entities, it makes sense to me they are no longer would be wearing the same style of outfits or looking like they did over 25 human years ago, because for them 20,000 "digital years" have passed.
To them in the "Encom Seven One One", the "Encom 511" is like ancient Egypt or ancient Greece.

IMO, it would be odd if all the actors in Tron Legacy were wearing hockey helments all the time or had shaven heads.
They'd tend to look sort of alien and less relatable to audience members then I think.
The Abstract and surreal is fine, but push it too much and audience can't really relate to it.

The original Tron, as much as I love it, has an alien-ness to it that I think is part of why it didn't "gell" well with mainstream audiences like E.T. did.
E.T. may of been an alien creature, but he was basically a lost puppy/baby-ish child with magic powers and the characters where very human, character's that people could relate to. People in spandex, glowing hockey helmets talking about circuits, Users, grids and such; that's kind of hard for Joe and Jane Q Public to relate to back in 1982.

If the characters in Tron Legaccy all had shaven heads or always wore strange headgear; in my view it would make them look less human and maybe even more "robotic" and thus perhaps a lot less relatable.

I really like how the visual design of Tron Legacy takes Syd Mead's early conceptual designs (and the early concept art by other artist on Tron) for original Tron, then extrapolated foward to have a sleeker, streamlined, post modern style to them,
While aestheticall it's sort of a stark change from the original, it still looks great in my opinion, they have a much more techno-futursitic cyberpunk, meet's stealth jet vibe to them and that's all good in my view.

IMO, the characters having hair give them a human-ness to them so they don't feel as "alien" in my opinion.
This I think helps accentuates the humanistic aspects of the film, which can help people to connect better to the film instead of it feeling/coming off as too akward/strange to those watching it.

lurkinghorror Wrote: ShadowDragon1 Wrote: Dumont had a beard, the sexy lady Program in the "this town is full of live one's" scene, the Yori'squater's/the "love scene"; Yori had hair." So the characters in Tron Legacy having hair doesn't bother me at all. I really don't see the point in nitpicking things. The new digital realm that Flynn designed and then developed in 1988-1989 onward to me looks pretty darn awesome. It was a slightly jarring to me at first, but the more I see of the movie itself, I see that it all "gells" together IMO, there's a sense of aesthetic symetry and a sort of synergy at play and I like it alot. Hockey helmets and spandex suits, and lot's of bright glowing circuits are cool for the original Tron, but it's time to move on IMO. People don't wear gladiator armor or toga's in modern times, so it'd be odd in my view if in the digital world that's been steadily, virtual growing and adapting for 20 yrs in an isolated computer system filled with semi sentient A.I. Program entities, it makes sense to me they are no longer would be wearing the same style of outfits or looking like they did over 25 human years ago, because for them 20,000 "digital years" have passed. To them in the "Encom Seven One One", the "Encom 511" is like ancient Egypt or ancient Greece. IMO, it would be odd if all the actors in Tron Legacy were wearing hockey helments all the time or had shaven heads. They'd tend to look sort of alien and less relatable to audience members then I think. The Abstract and surreal is fine, but push it too much and audience can't really relate to it. The original Tron, as much as I love it, has an alien-ness to it that I think is part of why it didn't "gell" well with mainstream audiences like E.T. did. E.T. may of been an alien creature, but he was basically a lost puppy/baby-ish child with magic powers and the characters where very human, character's that people could relate to. People in spandex, glowing hockey helmets talking about circuits, Users, grids and such; that's kind of hard for Joe and Jane Q Public to relate to back in 1982. If the characters in Tron Legaccy all had shaven heads or always wore strange headgear; in my view it would make them look less human and maybe even more "robotic" and thus perhaps a lot less relatable. I really like how the visual design of Tron Legacy takes Syd Mead's early conceptual designs (and the early concept art by other artist on Tron) for original Tron, then extrapolated foward to have a sleeker, streamlined, post modern style to them, While aestheticall it's sort of a stark change from the original, it still looks great in my opinion, they have a much more techno-futursitic cyberpunk, meet's stealth jet vibe to them and that's all good in my view. IMO, the characters having hair give them a human-ness to them so they don't feel as "alien" in my opinion. This I think helps accentuates the humanistic aspects of the film, which can help people to connect better to the film instead of it feeling/coming off as too akward/strange to those watching it. Like I said earlier, for every argument supporting hair on the characters there's an argument to counter it. A beard on Dumont? I seem to recall hearing that the actor refused to shave. Hair during a cut scene? It was cut. A one off character you barely see? Easily dismissed as outside the norm, as it clearly was. In regards to the new designs making the inhabitants of the digital world feel more "human". That pretty much articulates one of my primary problems with the alterations. It's a matter of personal tastes and aesthetics. For me, the look doesn't click at all. For some people, it does. Your mileage may vary. Though I wouldn't call the suggestion that it does not meet individual tastes "nitpicking". As for there being any "point" in discussing individual likes or dislikes, are we only here on this forum to sing praises? Or are we fans gathered to discuss our preferences?

Totally agree -- I think it's cool for everyone to discuss their perspectives and thoughts on the TRON franchise as you are lurkinghorror/Landry -- analyzing and bashing/nitpicking are completely different things (and you're not doing the latter) -- I think your observations are valid -- and as we chatted about prior, it just really boils down to perspective and preference. - Jay

ShadowDragon1 Wrote:Nothing wrong with expressing one's prefrences or opinion, or having a discussion. I wasn't saying or implying that. I'm just expressing what I think is the reasoning behind the shift in aesthetic style. In my opinion it make sense. I think the the designs for everything from suits, vehicles, enviroments all "gel" together creating what to me is a nice, sleek and streamlined symetry of design, I feel there's a nice synergy of form and function in the design and aesthetic style. I know it's a matter of preference, but it seems like some people overly focus on what they don't like and seemingly only focus on that, and bring it up often. (*Not refering to you or anyone in particular.*) It's disappointing that ever so often some random, new member pops up and posts their first thread and it's only to complain about some IMO minor aspect from the new movie they've not seen in it's entirety. Giving one's opinion is fine, but it's the overall vibe of negativity coming from some people and the haters that post the most inane and childish comments on other message boards and in the comments section under the Youtube posting of the trailers, and sometime things comes off as nit-picking, that is kind of disappointing to me and others. We're not saying a person can't have a differnent opinion or preference. It gets disappointing when some people overly focus on what they don't like and usually don't balance that out with what they *do* like of what they've seen of the new movie in the trailers. If they find nothing they like about it, well that's unfortunate. Ah well. Do I think everything is perfect and has no room for improvement? No I don't think it's 100% "perfect." I would of liked few more glowing circuit trace designs on characters' suits sure, I would of prefered Flynn not have a beard, and I would of liked to see more floating objects and objects and structures that are looking like semi-transparent "holographic" objects. But I choose not to dwell on those minor things. For example, while I really liked the story of Tron: Ghost in the Machine alot, I wasn't to crazy about the artwork or the art style over all, I could write a diatribe complainging about all the stuff about the artwork I didn't like. But I don't; why? Because overall it was a very good story and I like the premise/theme of the comic. I don't come into Tron Sector posting a treatese on each little thing that went against my preferences and blurt out stuff like "oh I found this ugly and useless!" or whatever. My gripes are on minor things, so I don't bother with going over them out of respect to the staff of people that created the comic which I pretty much enjoyed overall. Again, not saying people can't express there preferences or discuss things.

True. Haters gonna hate. The people who just pop on just to complain... they're not even worth worrying about. Sorry if I seemed overly defensive. I've been a position many times before where I express my opinion and get told that I'm just being negative. Not talking about anyone here (or even Tron specifically), mind you. Just some general experiences. So I jump a bit when I shouldn't. Again, sorry.

Anyway, we agree on most everything. Including that there is some interesting internal logic that helps justify a redesign for Legacy and that Ghost in the Machine was not perfect.

I may not like the choices made with Legacy, but that doesn't mean I dislike it overall or that I won't see it. I mean, let's be realistic... no way I'm going to miss it!on line abortion pill misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill online

ShadowDragon1 Wrote:I think the armor & helmet is like sort of "firewall" shell (being that they are digital constructs like many things in that world are). A basic helmet and armor is perhaps like basic level protection shell code constuct to prevent minor fragmenting (i.e. minor damage to a program), and upgraded helmets and armor are far better at preventing fragmenting or corrupting of a Program's internal code.

I think that's a very cool theory. order abortion pill abortion pill buy online where to buy abortion pill