I can’t remember (or even if I saw) the first Tron movie, but perhaps it was just as forgettable as this installment. Sure – the effects, particularly in one scene, are amazing … but if you’re like me effects just don’t do it for you. Jeff Bridges does the role justice (as do the supporting actors), but nothing can rescue the vacuous script from itself.
What movie did I see again? Honestly, it’s that forgettable. Great to watch (in as much as it’s a fun ride), but certainly not a good ‘date night’ for you and your brain. Whilst there’s a fairly heavy expectation placed upon the watcher to know something about the original story, it was probably fairly thin in the first place, so this installation feels [curiously and perhaps aptly] just like another frame of a meaningless, albeit visually stimulating and interactive, console game.
The film is presented, buy its own admission, in a mix of 2D and 3D by design (they say). If you decide to give the movie a go, I highly recommend removing your 3D glasses during the 2D scenes in order to properly appreciate properly the full colour depth (3D glass really suck the life out of the average cinema gamut, don’t you think?).
Oh, and ‘young Jeff Bridges’ is good , very good … but still falls into that uncanny valley territory – almost, but not quite.
While we’re Talking 3D …
It’s just not worth the bother – is it? I mean, sure it adds a extra layer of depth, but the glasses frames, the loss of colour and extra cost seem to cancel out the any benefit provided by the 3D gimmick.
I first saw Toy Story 3D, after which I was convinced that my brain was full capable of interpreting the implied depth of any scene without the aid of glasses – I mean, isn’t that the whole point of depth-of-field (and focal planes)? – to cue the brain to the depth dimensions of any given scene. In Toy Story 3 particularly, it was as though the 3D glasses were obscuring some of that subtle ‘background’ content for which Pixar is so famous (what hints of future Pixar installments did I miss?).