TRON: Legacy (2010)

 "Life has a way of moving you past wants and hopes.

TRON is not, on its merits, a particularly good film. It just benefits from the early Cyberpunk zeitgeist, released two years before William Gibson published Neuromancer. The film caught a wave, and gained a reputation beyond what it deserved, aesthetics aside.

And now we have a sequel. And, despite Jeff Bridges being superb; despite an impressive performance from Olivia Wilde;despire a nice little part for the great Michael Sheen... the film really is utter pants.

Partly, I suspect, it's the dull cinemtography and sleepily blue colour palette, that does the film no favours. But the script isworkmanlike and predictable and, moreover, the Cybrpunk themes just don't have the futitistic resonance in 2010 as they did in 1982. The entirety of not only the aesthetics but the concepts look both retro and quaint. It so doesn't work, however much Michael Sheen may evoke Ziggy era David Bowie in his scene-stealing appearances which certainly manage to liven up a dull film somewhat.

The narrative is fairly exciting, and I'm left suspecting that the workmanlike script, while not setting the world on fire, may have led to a significantly better film if the visual style for this sequel were not so tired and derivative.

A poor and disappointing sequel, but then again a late sequel to a film so very much of its time was always going to be a doubtful proposition.

Tron (1982)

"I took a wrong turn somewhere..."

This is a strange film to see for the first time in 2018. It’s groundbreaking. It’s unique. It’s triumphantly of its time. And it’s utter pants.

Oh, it looks great. Unreservedly so; it captures the aesthetics of 1982 vintage computer graphics with perfection but is also, importantly, good to look at and of utility foretelling the story- although characters can be hard to tell apart in cyberspace. Then there’s Jeff Bridges’ rakish charm and David Warner’s desperate baddie.

There’s ever a surprisingly metaphysical side, as the baddies dismiss programs who have faith in “users” as religious fanatics. This line of thought may not be taken very far, but it’s indisputably there. I also don’t mind the total lack of realism in showing 1982 vintage computer programming in this almost proto-cyberspace way. Realism is boring, and this is a fascinating bit of the zeitgeist two years before William Gibson writes Neuromancer.

Unfortunately, though, the script, plot and characterisation are poor, and not even a generally high standard of performance can save them. Yes, the visuals are amazing and the look of the film is justly Famous. But I’m the end what we have is a turd which has been polished to a legendary standard. No wonder the visuals are all that ever gets talked about.