Steve Wrote:As for the flaw, there have been several "video game franchises" that have enjoyed considerable popularity without a single frame of film stock. The DOOM franchise, the QUAKE franchise, EVERQUEST, the ULTIMA franchise, WARCRAFT, COMMAND & CONQUER...

Easy . . . those are franchises (ugh, I hate that word) that have been recently (for the most part) established, with fans that are old enough to remember them. That is why they are still popular. In twenty years, I think the picture will be different.

As for this sure-fire formula that "A movie will make it more popular," that is unproven. The latest TOMB RAIDER movie failed. The RESIDENT EVIL movie failed. Does anyone still remember STREET FIGHTER : THE MOVIE? If anything, a movie's failure would bring down a franchise, not raise it.

I'd like to think they failed, simply because they were bad movies . . . irrespective of whether they were based on video games, or not.

I have no idea as to what the sales figures of TRON v2.0 eventually were. I'm glad that you know of something & I would be delighted to see those numbers.

As much as I hate to say it, sales weren't that good. Despite "glowing" (pardon the pun) reviews. I recently found out that was only in the North American Top 10 for at most two weeks, when it debuted. Then it sank like a rock. It fared somewhat better in Europe, though.

In other words, only die hard fans who had seen the film or played the arcade, bought the game. No other explanation can account for this. See my point?

TRON started out as a movie because it had no other choice to properly represent itself; Now there is a choice. Why not take that choice seriously?

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a game. I'm just being realistic. A film would boost Tron's popularity dramatically. Until then, it will remain a cult property.

Besides, as long as a sequel does justice to the original, who wouldn't want another film? No one complained when The Godfather II came out, and even felt it was better than the original.

Trace Wrote:It's important to remember, too, that not all of us die-hard Tron fans are video game players. I have yet to see the game, as I don't play them, and I can't help but feel a little cheated. Trust me, I've been on the hunt for someone who's good at playing the game so that I can just sit and watch the storyline unfold. No luck so far. I would far prefer a sequel in the original format...the big screen!

This is a very good point, and my buddy is also not much of a gamer. I tried last night to intall 2.0 on his computer but his is not as powerful as mine, so after fifteen minutes of fussing we gave up.

I think about what many of you hqve said, and here are my thoughts:

- As long as Buena Vista has rights to the title I am reasonably confident they will put development in capable hands, as proven in good faith with TRON 2.0

- Moden cgi will not contrast the two films, because of recent, not all use of cgi is crisp and clear. Many applications in today's films ar intentionally fuzzy to blend in with film footage, mostly due to complaints in early cgi days of visibly obvious enhancement and f/x. If anything, CGI could allow for a smooth transition from the look and feel of the first movie into a more modern clanliness, again citing TRON 2.0 as an example.

- The original spirit of the first film can visually be preserved while representing modern computer and network concepts, yet again as witnessed in the visual representations found in TRON 2.0


I think that people should make some video clips of landmark scenes in TRON 2.0 to share on the net for those of you not playing the game, such as the firewall scene, for instance. I work with netowork equipment and modern machines regularly and I was amazed how seamlessly they presented new IT concepts within the visual parameters etablished inthe first film.

One of a multitude: Bytes vs. bits.

Point is, if what is efinitely a very cinemati game can do it, so can a mfilm. Hell, the game's plot alone is movie material. I normally think ame plot are weak but this one is far from such.

If anything, It's inspired me to use level editors to create my own "server" world, in the spirit of my own PC... I would like to incorporate my computer's case geometry:
http://www.hardware-rogge.com/bilder/g092.jpg
http://www.aria.co.uk/mainimages/CSE-MID-TTV1000+.jpg

(i have the black one, very TRON-esque whih is why I bought it)

But anyway I digress, I say do the movie. Makes it really easy for them to market new promotional items (wooo hooo!) that a game won't justify.

In other words, only die hard fans who had seen the film or played the arcade, bought the game. No other explanation can account for this. See my point?

Mmmm, I'd have to disagree that there was no other explanation. The percentage of people who bought the game AND were TRON fans was almost certainly not 100; some people bought the game without necessarily ever having seen the movie, even.

The game (which is my favorite FPS ever, and I'm a big fan of FPSs) had some problems, especially in these crucial areas:

• System compatibility (as someone - perhaps you - recounted, it's a beefy thing to install)
• Limited multiplayer (No Lightcycle Internet matches, and most damagingly, no DeRez matches in the retail release)
• Competition (Half-Life 2 and Unreal Tournament both grabbed a bunch of attention, and they weren't the only ones)
• Price issues ($50 is a premium price, however much TRON 2.0 was worth it.)

Of course, it ain't over until the fat lady's sprite goes into the singing animation. The XBOX version might be a nice boost (especially for those with standard SUB-standard graphics cards... ) An expansion pack for the PC version would be most welcome (I hope the boys at BVI are building more levels as we speak!) And this is turning into a whole 'nother topic.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a game. I'm just being realistic. A film would boost Tron's popularity dramatically. Until then, it will remain a cult property.

I agree; with the continued popularity of sci-fi movies these days, a big-budget CGI-heavy sequel could be a major success. After all, look at the cultural memes that powered the first movie: video games were hot, and computers were poised to take over the world, and there was this whole technology that nobody really understood that was both frightening and alluring, and it was just waiting for someone to mythologize it. Well, it's the 21st century now, and we're all frantic acolytes of this giant computer network we call the Internet, which nobody really understands (bear with me), and it's full of viruses and "trojans" and scam artists and streaming this and file-sharing that and it's a little bit scary and very alluring and IT'S WHERE TRON LIVES...how the heck could it miss?

"It is a subject on which I get chatty."

Well, for some reason, in your mind the movie and video game have to be mutually exclusive. I don't feel that way, and I'm pretty sure the majority of others also feel the same.

I'll say it again for the umpteenth time, I'm not saying there shouldn't be a video game. But having a game doesn't mean there can't be a movie, either.

Your argument is based on the notion that a game would be less expensive to produce, and therefore more likely to be made, and make a better profit. That, since a movie is so expensive to produce, a game makes much more sense.

Well, there are absolute trash and drivel movies being spewed out of Hollywood every year. They cost millions of dollars. And somehow, they get funding. So if that crap can get funding, then so can a new movie. It's just a matter of time, before someone finally gives the green light.

I'm tired of arguing over this now, so this is where I'll stop. You have your opinion, and I have mine. And it's not likely either of them are going to change.

Let's just hope something new is done with , and soon . . .

This thread is from 2004! damn, talk about digging up a long dead thread..

IMO Tron Legacy turned out pretty damn good.

Heck, imagine if Joel Schumaucher or Michael Bay was allowed to make the movie!
With man pointys on the suits, over-the-top cheezy lines, too many pop-music and pop-culture references, goofy hip-hop "urban" comedy relief characters, Shia LaDouche as Sam, George Clooney as Flynn, Steven Segal as Alan Bradley, and Paris Hilton as Quorra speaking in a "im so hot sh*t*" of an attitude. With Adam Sandler as a human MCP that acts goofy and insane...where to buy abortion pill http://blog.bitimpulse.com/template/default.aspx?abortion-types buy abortion pill online

Whatever they do, I would like to see them write a set o rules and keep to it.

The biggest dissapointment between #1 and #2 was that #2 broke a number of established rules from the original, and appeared to do that for no other reason than immature ignorance or a disregard for the importance of such things when handling scifi / fantasy material.

It simply is not good enough to do things "because they look cool". At the end of they day you're trying to tell a story and anything you do with a film that detracts from that will get the critics vitriol flowing (as it has done with T:L).

The story is always No. 1 and it was a tribute to #1 that the story remained entrenched and the rules were established - although the rules were framed more by what was possible with technology at the time rather than any conscious attempt to restrict the movie to keep it on track.

T:L fell victim to the 20th Century tendency to let the technical limitations of production set the rules. This "because we can" tendency worked fine when you could only do so much with budget and technical ability acting as a straight jacket to define what tools a filmmaker could use to tell the story and what they couldn't.

However here in the 21st Century those limitations no longer exist. On a film with virtually limitless budget where you can do anything at all, letting the production set the limits doesn't work. It's the tail wagging the dog.

Instead (from the start) you have to sit down and create a set of hard rules that the production must not break- if your film is going to stand up to scrutiny when finished. Properties such as Star Wars, Star Trek and even Spider Man, did this long ago and have reap the benefits today. T:L did not do this and has paid the price in the lackluster performance of the film.

Its not too late to repair the damage. The next step for this property will be to take a long, hard look at itself, sit down and write a rule book which sets out how all the various parameters of the property work together, listing what can and cannot be done and giving story reasons as to why.

Only then will it be able to move on (most likely under a new team, I think the current one have had their day and need to hand the property onto the next generation now) and evolve into a successful franchise.

ZM

TronFAQ Wrote: Compucore Wrote:That would be nice. Using our Digi-icons on the movie at least in the beginning or at least somewhere within the movie for a cameo. At least we'll have opur 15 minutes of fame in TRON. LOL, if that were the case, I'd have to make a real Digicon just to get it into the film. Couldn't pass up an opportunity like that. DaveTRON Wrote:"I write a lot of stuff on and about Tron that makes Disney scratch their heads. Which makes me scratch mine. I write more anyway. - Steven" Sigh . . . yeah, that's just about what I expected of the current situation on a Tron sequel. Trying to get the executives to understand why a new Tron film is a good idea. Even now, they still don't quite "get it", do they? Even after all these years, and even though computers have become a facet of everyday life. They're still hesitant to take the plunge. Well, I guess there's hope. We did get after all, and now there's the Xbox version coming up . . .

DaveTRON, thanks for posting that quote from Steven Lisberger, our Master User. It's a shame that the suits and ties still don't completely understand the things that Steven comes up with. I mean, after hearing several interviews with Steven, from then and now, he's one of the most insightful and ahead-of-his-time thinkers today (in my opinion). This leads me to wonder the following, and I've wondered if anyone else has thought this:

Why hasn't Steven formed his own production company to produce, release, and distribute TRON, as well as all his other film and media projects? I mean, I know he had a much smaller outfit when he started out in Boston - with all the revenues that have been generated since 1982, I'm sure he could have his own independent enterprise, however, just like a recording artist working for a major label, Steven probably doesn't own his film "masters", as Disney does. Maybe, he could reformat his contract to stipulate and make such a move happen?

zordmaker Wrote:Whatever they do, I would like to see them write a set o rules and keep to it. The biggest dissapointment between #1 and #2 was that #2 broke a number of established rules from the original, and appeared to do that for no other reason than immature ignorance or a disregard for the importance of such things when handling scifi / fantasy material. It simply is not good enough to do things "because they look cool". At the end of they day you're trying to tell a story and anything you do with a film that detracts from that will get the critics vitriol flowing (as it has done with T:L). The story is always No. 1 and it was a tribute to #1 that the story remained entrenched and the rules were established - although the rules were framed more by what was possible with technology at the time rather than any conscious attempt to restrict the movie to keep it on track. T:L fell victim to the 20th Century tendency to let the technical limitations of production set the rules. This "because we can" tendency worked fine when you could only do so much with budget and technical ability acting as a straight jacket to define what tools a filmmaker could use to tell the story and what they couldn't. However here in the 21st Century those limitations no longer exist. On a film with virtually limitless budget where you can do anything at all, letting the production set the limits doesn't work. It's the tail wagging the dog. Instead (from the start) you have to sit down and create a set of hard rules that the production must not break- if your film is going to stand up to scrutiny when finished. Properties such as Star Wars, Star Trek and even Spider Man, did this long ago and have reap the benefits today. T:L did not do this and has paid the price in the lackluster performance of the film. Its not too late to repair the damage. The next step for this property will be to take a long, hard look at itself, sit down and write a rule book which sets out how all the various parameters of the property work together, listing what can and cannot be done and giving story reasons as to why. Only then will it be able to move on (most likely under a new team, I think the current one have had their day and need to hand the property onto the next generation now) and evolve into a successful franchise. ZM

I have to agree with a lot of things even though they did a good job with Legacy but with some noticeable flaws. It IS the writing that is the problem especially the shooting script as I suspect to be the weak link here. Not only that, the LOST writers probably got a 'big head' from fanboy-ism that wrecked it. The other problem is, of course, they had too many writers involved that could have caused a lot of creative differences and compromises to be made as in "Okay, if you inject that idea, you have to use MY idea as well".

Your mention of repairing the damage is not impossible. They certainly did make a little mess that will have to be 'cleaned up' in an intelligent manner. They need a real science fiction writer that understands the elements of story-telling, honoring the tradition of TRON's subculture. I'm going to be honest but the recent interview from the LOST writers was nothing but a very clever piece of 'spin doctoring' for damage control. One has to read between the lines to know that they are full of s---t.

Kozinski, however, is a consummate professional and should be given credit for his first foray into film-making. Disney needs to give him more time, get rid of the LOST writers and replace them with those who know what the hell they're doing. I do not want to see sub-culture influences creeping into Tron 3 with a half-hearted attempt to turn into 'eye candy' and crap story-telling from Matrix 2 and 3 (first film was brilliant, but the rest went to hell). I would'nt even want Disney to let the Wachowskis to touch TRON.

So, again, the only way to fix the mess is to create an intermediary story before Tron 3 (taking place between Legacy and Tron 3), that way, the writers don't have to feel forced to cram in a 'monologue back story' to explain things away like Flynn Sr did in Legacy.

I would love to do something about it just to smack Disney around and say "THIS is how you fix a mistake and THIS is how it should have gone down".

where to buy abortion pill http://blog.bitimpulse.com/template/default.aspx?abortion-types buy abortion pill online

I would advocate a sequel only, and I mean ONLY if they had most of the original cast and crew back together and willing to do it. Unless they can do that, let TL, as a masterpiece, stand on it's own. Most sequels, frankly, suck. Hard.

The thing about perfection is it's right in front of us. order abortion pill http://unclejohnsprojects.com/template/default.aspx?morning-after-pill-price where to buy abortion pill

My post was not meant to be "inflammatory" or as sarcasm.

It was just an expression that I am sick and tired of certain over stated talking points about Tron Legacy and the seeming disdain that some have flung at the writers.

IMO they did a pretty damn good job. Was their work perfect? No, not saying it was.
But for frak sake Tron Legacy did not turn out like Transfomers: Rise of the Fallen or frakkin' Skyline.

It just that some comments just boggle my fricken mind, that I have to face palm in response, or just say "wow.. just.. wow." It's not meant to be sarcasm or intended as inflammatory. I'm not calling any person an idiot or something ffs.