Saturday, February 6, 2010

Should I watch Tron?


The long and short of it: Yes
When was it made: 1982

A film from back when Disney made actual movies, Tron is a cult classic famous for being one of the first films to extensively use computer graphics (which ironically got them disqualified from winning an Academy Award in special effects due to "cheating"). The movie uses computer graphics to create the digital world and backlit photography on all the actors to create a very surreal effect. The movie is not perfect by any means, mostly due to the inane framing device and obsolete graphics. Don't get me wrong, for being polygons the graphics are still pretty smooth and are used better than some of the dribble that gets produced today, but it suffers from the 2001 effect: because it was cutting edge back then it carried its own weight, but nowadays it goes so slowly and is unimpressive. At the same time, though, you do get to see The Dude act the epic sci-fi hero.

This movie is one of the few mainstream "videogame" movies to win an academy award, with the main character being a coder from back in the days when video games were still "cool." Many of the mini-games and the adventures from the movie have been remade as games in there own right, with their collective success far exceeding that of the original people. Chances are that even if you've never seen Tron you have seen one of the movies light cycles being parodied. And now with a supposed sequel on the way, it would be worth seeing the original to be in the loop, if not just to understand a lot of the references made in popular culture.

The movie itself is comprised of two parts: the real-world framing device and the main plot which takes place in the video-game world. The real world framing device is the weakest point of the movie, mimicking programming somewhat but with no accuracy of how computers actually work. Plus the process of taking something physical and turning it's matter completely digital is a technology so pointless that it baffles the mind even as a plot device. These trappings of programming carry their way into the digital universe in kind of a fun way, but even so, I got through the movie by squinting my eyes and pretending this was happening in space. But the story is fun and has some interesting elements which makes the complete and total inaccuracies durable. It follows a very "chosen one saves the day" formula, but tackles it in a unique perspective. It is definitely not too heady, just mindless fun. If you are looking for an in-depth look into the human soul or a cutting edge digital masterpiece, than this movie is not for you. But if you want a little fun with some interesting visuals, than this is for you.

I personally enjoyed the digital part of the movie, which fortunately takes up the majority of the action, but at the same time the concerns with the real-life portion really did drag me down. The ending is so nonsensical it hurts: a printed piece of paper saying "yeah, the bad guy did it" would not be enough evidence to solve anything. If that's all he needed, why didn't Flynn print it out at home? But the digital world carries it out for me. Being produced by a major studio allowed them to get some great actors, and David Warner was fantastic in all three of his roles. I loved how Sark was a real character, showing fear at having to take on a "user" and acting as a competent henchman defeated by an actually superior foe, as opposed to most movies where the hero is an idiot and wins by sheer measure of the villains even lower intellect. All in all if the digital portion of the movie had been a stand alone project (in the same setting or even a space setting) it would probably be one of my favorite movies. As it stands, it is still a pretty good flick worth watching.

No comments:

Post a Comment