Flynn: "You fucked it up! Her code was in our hands, program!" -- Tron: Nothing is fucked here, Flynn. Come on, you're being very un-Flynn. They'll log back in."
bugramps is one of those people that thinks the world is suppose to be up to the standards set in his own little head, that world he lives in where even the best film makers aren't up to his standards. he goes to the theater and watches something so incredibly complex to create, things that are on the cutting edge of technology, and then walks out complaining that it wasn't as cool as he thought it should be. if you think it should be better, don't complain about it. make it better yourself.
@MrBigrhino76 Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should. If your standards are that low, fine. Don't expect everyone to follow likewise. The crap in the Matrix sequels and Superman Returns are examples of bad use of technology. Underdeveloped and unnecessary. Again, just because it's "cutting edge" doesn't mean you do it. You do it if it's good. Not just good enough. Look at Pixar. They don't settle. If this technology is not ready. Don't do it.
@bugramps man, you seriously don't understand the concept of improving technologies through practical aplications. This idea of yours of never using a technology until it is perfect is absolutely absurd. inventing and refining tech is a working process and a long process. Look at what Lucas did. Made his first trilogy and then waited until the tech was 'perfect' for the next triology. that was 20 years later! no director/producer would ever work on a time table like that!
@bugramps add i'd like to add the obvious, your opinion on this topic is not shared by the majority. you might want to impress upon people why your opinion should be more widely accepted by using more appropriate supporting evidence- i.e. something that is not opinion based- and perhaps stay more close to the subject matter your speaking about. For example, what Pixar has done for animation is not really relevant to live-action movies. the technology is not in question there, because the...
@bugramps ...viewer already accepts that animations ISN'T real. From there it is easy to feel that any small improvement is impressive. that is simply not the case for live-action film. it's easy for our eyes to see something that isn't real, and therefore it is much more difficult to produce the equivalent effect with the same technology.
Ultimately, the technology will never be 'perfected', because viewers will always demand more. So.... like it or leave it.
Tron -> Tron 2.0 -> Tron Legacy -> Tron 3G -> Tron: I.S.A. -> Tron Quad-Core -> Tron: Legend of the Great Transistor -> Tron Pentium -> Tron: Adventure in a Vacuum Tube -> Tron Hexacode -> Tron: Operation Punch Card. ... Then it'll get "Rebooted" as 'TR0N' in 2030.
Hope so. I'm afraid you're giving them more credit based on hopeful assumptions. I've not seen any trailers even recently where CGI was improved noticeably when the movie was released. And if it's so unfinished, it's a bad idea to show it so predominantly in your advertising. I'm afraid this is what we're going to get. More often than not, filmmakers don't care if things aren't up to par. The only thing that matters is will people buy tickets and will they make money. It's not about integrity.
@bugramps Enough with this "It's only for the money" stuff. Not everyone is out for just a buck. This a sequal to a movie that bombed at the box office. There is no garantee that this movie will make alot of money. This movie was made because of fans. If the test footage they shown a few years ago wasn't well recieved by fans and none fans, this movie wouldn't be happening. You say you haven't sen a movie with improved CGI. Well I've see many, and this will without a doubt be one of them.
@GOFLOinc Uh, how old are you and what fantasy world do you live in? A high-budget film is not funded by charitable organizations dedicated to the arts. They're funded by people who want to make a major buck. There's never a guarantee, but that doesn't stop them from throwing millions and millions at "blockbuster" projects hoping for a big pay day. This is about the money. To your other point: tell me a movie that had improved its CGI drastically from trailer to release.
@bugramps When did I say this wasn't trying to be a movie to get money? That's the goal of ALL major movies, I know that. Like said, it's bo guarantee that this movie will make money since it's a sequal to a box office bomb. They know just pytting tons of money in the movie is not going make people go to see it. It's budget is $150 million, which is the average and small about for big action movies today. Like I said, if the movie didn't get a good response 3 years ago, it wouldn't be happening.
@bugramps And also it's not a bad idea to show the unfinished footage i as long as it and the overall trailer still looks good to the viewers, and based on the reaction the vast majority of people are giving it, it still looks great. The reasons you're not seeing many people complain about it iare because the CGI Flynn is not that bad, escpecially when CLU reveals himself to same, and they know the special effects aren't finished, like in most trailers these days.
Well, it doesn't look too bad, perhaps that's what they were going for (yeah yeah, I'm too forgiving). I suppose one has to start somewhere. I agree with Wesleech that such movie-making technology is really starting to take off. Films like this one, Avatar (despite whatever you can say about it's plot and whatnot), and Inception (or even the more "subtle" ones like Two-Face in The Dark Knight) really show the flourishing and technical leaps and bounds we're making!
Well, we can hope. They never did improve it in the Matrix and Superman Returns where they made Neo and Superman look like video game characters. They looked fake in their trailers and no better when the movie came out. Hope they improve it, but that's a lot of work to be done between now and the release date. Here's to hoping.
@bugramps The reason why the special effects in those movies you mention didn't improve in the movie is because they weren't as advance as they are today. Back then that was the best they can do and most people were fine with it. In the past two years I've seen many movie trailers where the CGI weren't as good as they were by the time the movie comes out. It's already been said the movie is still being worked. The CGi will get better.
am so watching this in digital 3d damn its good looking.
inr21sevier 1 year ago
AWWEESSOMMME!!!!!
not going to enjoy olivia wilde, i guarantee that but Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner with Garrett Hedlund!?!? Can this movie get any awesomer!?
luvjwtyt11 1 year ago
@luvjwtyt11 Daft Punk is doing the music and being cameos in the film as MP3's? :D
sparx401 1 year ago
I love Garrett Hedlund since Troy!!!!!!!!of course I´m gonna see this movie:for him!!!!
vanaiel 1 year ago
trailer 2 was cooler
Soundwave952 1 year ago
@Soundwave952 shit!!!
banx757 1 year ago
@banx757 hell ya it was better no offense
Soundwave952 1 year ago
Can't wait to see this, it looks so cool and all the music is done by Daft Punk which makes me even more excited.
noahw66 1 year ago
did real fashion designers design those suits? looks very stylish, looks like something we would wear in 2030
mastergradeone 1 year ago
Holy Testical Tuesday! i think i just pooed my pants in excitement
J2thaEFFY 1 year ago
Flynn: "You fucked it up! Her code was in our hands, program!" -- Tron: Nothing is fucked here, Flynn. Come on, you're being very un-Flynn. They'll log back in."
mintchocolatebear 1 year ago
bugramps is one of those people that thinks the world is suppose to be up to the standards set in his own little head, that world he lives in where even the best film makers aren't up to his standards. he goes to the theater and watches something so incredibly complex to create, things that are on the cutting edge of technology, and then walks out complaining that it wasn't as cool as he thought it should be. if you think it should be better, don't complain about it. make it better yourself.
MrBigrhino76 1 year ago
@MrBigrhino76 Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should. If your standards are that low, fine. Don't expect everyone to follow likewise. The crap in the Matrix sequels and Superman Returns are examples of bad use of technology. Underdeveloped and unnecessary. Again, just because it's "cutting edge" doesn't mean you do it. You do it if it's good. Not just good enough. Look at Pixar. They don't settle. If this technology is not ready. Don't do it.
bugramps 1 year ago
@bugramps man, you seriously don't understand the concept of improving technologies through practical aplications. This idea of yours of never using a technology until it is perfect is absolutely absurd. inventing and refining tech is a working process and a long process. Look at what Lucas did. Made his first trilogy and then waited until the tech was 'perfect' for the next triology. that was 20 years later! no director/producer would ever work on a time table like that!
MrBigrhino76 1 year ago
@bugramps add i'd like to add the obvious, your opinion on this topic is not shared by the majority. you might want to impress upon people why your opinion should be more widely accepted by using more appropriate supporting evidence- i.e. something that is not opinion based- and perhaps stay more close to the subject matter your speaking about. For example, what Pixar has done for animation is not really relevant to live-action movies. the technology is not in question there, because the...
MrBigrhino76 1 year ago
@bugramps ...viewer already accepts that animations ISN'T real. From there it is easy to feel that any small improvement is impressive. that is simply not the case for live-action film. it's easy for our eyes to see something that isn't real, and therefore it is much more difficult to produce the equivalent effect with the same technology.
Ultimately, the technology will never be 'perfected', because viewers will always demand more. So.... like it or leave it.
MrBigrhino76 1 year ago
Tron -> Tron 2.0 -> Tron Legacy -> Tron 3G -> Tron: I.S.A. -> Tron Quad-Core -> Tron: Legend of the Great Transistor -> Tron Pentium -> Tron: Adventure in a Vacuum Tube -> Tron Hexacode -> Tron: Operation Punch Card. ... Then it'll get "Rebooted" as 'TR0N' in 2030.
mintchocolatebear 1 year ago
is it me or is the young Kevin Flynn look like a CGI?
johnholland1987 1 year ago
@johnholland1987 digital domain did the same thing they did in benjamin button. They Replaced jeff bridges face with a younger cg face.
18thSoul 1 year ago
@johnholland1987 Actually he IS CGI, technology this days...O.O
tfswfan29 1 year ago
Hope so. I'm afraid you're giving them more credit based on hopeful assumptions. I've not seen any trailers even recently where CGI was improved noticeably when the movie was released. And if it's so unfinished, it's a bad idea to show it so predominantly in your advertising. I'm afraid this is what we're going to get. More often than not, filmmakers don't care if things aren't up to par. The only thing that matters is will people buy tickets and will they make money. It's not about integrity.
bugramps 1 year ago
@bugramps Enough with this "It's only for the money" stuff. Not everyone is out for just a buck. This a sequal to a movie that bombed at the box office. There is no garantee that this movie will make alot of money. This movie was made because of fans. If the test footage they shown a few years ago wasn't well recieved by fans and none fans, this movie wouldn't be happening. You say you haven't sen a movie with improved CGI. Well I've see many, and this will without a doubt be one of them.
GOFLOinc 1 year ago
@GOFLOinc Uh, how old are you and what fantasy world do you live in? A high-budget film is not funded by charitable organizations dedicated to the arts. They're funded by people who want to make a major buck. There's never a guarantee, but that doesn't stop them from throwing millions and millions at "blockbuster" projects hoping for a big pay day. This is about the money. To your other point: tell me a movie that had improved its CGI drastically from trailer to release.
bugramps 1 year ago
@bugramps When did I say this wasn't trying to be a movie to get money? That's the goal of ALL major movies, I know that. Like said, it's bo guarantee that this movie will make money since it's a sequal to a box office bomb. They know just pytting tons of money in the movie is not going make people go to see it. It's budget is $150 million, which is the average and small about for big action movies today. Like I said, if the movie didn't get a good response 3 years ago, it wouldn't be happening.
GOFLOinc 1 year ago
@bugramps And also it's not a bad idea to show the unfinished footage i as long as it and the overall trailer still looks good to the viewers, and based on the reaction the vast majority of people are giving it, it still looks great. The reasons you're not seeing many people complain about it iare because the CGI Flynn is not that bad, escpecially when CLU reveals himself to same, and they know the special effects aren't finished, like in most trailers these days.
GOFLOinc 1 year ago
Well, it doesn't look too bad, perhaps that's what they were going for (yeah yeah, I'm too forgiving). I suppose one has to start somewhere. I agree with Wesleech that such movie-making technology is really starting to take off. Films like this one, Avatar (despite whatever you can say about it's plot and whatnot), and Inception (or even the more "subtle" ones like Two-Face in The Dark Knight) really show the flourishing and technical leaps and bounds we're making!
sparx401 1 year ago
If this movie is done right it could be the next Star Wars.... notice i said "if" and "could"
so dont kill my with replies. the movie making tech were in now is really just starting.
Wesleech 1 year ago
Well, we can hope. They never did improve it in the Matrix and Superman Returns where they made Neo and Superman look like video game characters. They looked fake in their trailers and no better when the movie came out. Hope they improve it, but that's a lot of work to be done between now and the release date. Here's to hoping.
bugramps 1 year ago
@bugramps The reason why the special effects in those movies you mention didn't improve in the movie is because they weren't as advance as they are today. Back then that was the best they can do and most people were fine with it. In the past two years I've seen many movie trailers where the CGI weren't as good as they were by the time the movie comes out. It's already been said the movie is still being worked. The CGi will get better.
GOFLOinc 1 year ago
@bugramps hey, why dont you try to make a movie then? lets see how cool your CGI will look, then we can talk. :)
merak777 1 year ago
Most of it looks good, but the facial stuff done on Bridges looks absolutely horrible!
bugramps 1 year ago
@bugramps It's still being worked. The CGI in trailers never look as good as they do by the time the movie comes out.
GOFLOinc 1 year ago
Damn that looks epic
Ineedahero94 1 year ago
Disney... why are your movies so... damn... good?
TOLFINTRY 1 year ago
This isnt happening it only thinks its happening....its happening
1moonraider 1 year ago
tHIS december will be GREAT!!!!
esdras124 1 year ago 2
k that looks good
Stallon66 1 year ago