![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tealinWe just had a screening of TRON in-house tonight and I am here to report –
What am I here to report? I knew there was something ... there was, like, a movie or something in between the beginning and end, but the beginning and end occupied most of my mind because
IT WAS SHOT IN VANCOUVER! And how. I mean, it wasn't even trying to be anywhere else. And it was evidently shot by someone who really likes Vancouver, knows what makes it great, and also has the power to shut down Georgia St.
I went into the theatre expecting a visual tour-de-force and possibly some interesting music: on that scale the score is 10/10. I've never seen the original TRON and was curious to see if I would understand anything of what was going on. Luckily, I did! In fact I understood a lot more than I was expecting to, not just backstory but frontstory as well. My expectations were low, as I'd heard about them calling upon the mighty Pixar brain trust to help them fix their movie after they'd finished principal photography, which doesn't bode well. I don't know how much of what is on the screen today is the result of this intervention, but whatever they did seemed to have worked, because I managed to keep on top of what was going on most of the time. This can mean one of two things:
1. The plot is actually intelligible if you concentrate hard enough
2. I was too distracted by personal delights to notice when I was missing something
The reason I bring up #2 is not just because of the Vancouver thing. I'm sure I missed most of the beginning because I was too busy staring at the background, but after a while inside game space the warm glowy glow of that most wonderful city began to fade away, supplanted by some very exciting and well-choreographed game play. But that too came to and end, and it started to get talky and rather slow, and just when I was starting to get bored, who should arrive on the scene but Michael Sheen.
NO ONE TOLD ME MICHAEL SHEEN WAS IN THIS MOVIE!
It was the most pleasant casting surprise I've had in a long time. Not just was he Michael Sheen, and therefore awesome by definition, but he was Michael Sheen playing a crazy showboat character, which is like awesome2. I am eager to see hordes of internet fangirls suddenly learning his name and digging up his back filmography as happened with Johnny Depp after the first Pirates. [SPOILER ALERT!] Unfortunately stupid Disney scuppers the franchise possibilities but I'm sure they'll find a way to work around that if they really want to ... [/SPOILER]
Aaaanyway, as regards the actual movie, it's definitely an action-packed thrill ride through virtual space. Don't go expecting your life to be changed, but it's entertaining, in that loud zoomy way. I'm sure it will make an exciting ride and video game. The music was actually really good – good for the movie, I mean; I'm not going to rush out to buy the soundtrack – in fact it was so good that it maintained the drama of the film when self-indulgent flashiness and headsmackingly hokey dialogue might have pulled it under. There are still some moments of severe eyeroll, dialogue-wise – I suggest the board hire a consulting cynical teenager in the future to point out when their writers are getting hopelessly lame, because wow, someone's lame-o-meter was on the fritz in this case. Luckily the movie is really not that dependent on dialogue, except for exposition and setting up the rather enjoyable action sequences. And when I was bored (which tended to be more likely during the talky bits between action pieces and Michael Sheen's scenes) I could just sit back and marvel at how much Sam Flynn looked like Teddy Evans.* But that might not be so entertaining for everyone.
*By the way, is that not the most hilarious postcard ever? The look Scott is giving him! And the smirk! I love it.
The production design was fantastic, as tends to happen when you take away the confines of the 'real world' and tell production designers to go crazy. It recalled how the 80s were crazy for trapezoids but kept that modern edge as well, which was nice to see. The CG for the most part was excellent, though they still don't have the completely realistic human face down yet. It worked for the Young Jeff Bridges for the majority of the time he was onscreen, in the context of the story, but when the context was otherwise it was still a bit too plasticky, like he was wearing a latex mask. I suppose time will solve this problem, but it seemed just a little bit premature in this film ... then again, maybe only animators would notice.
I guess it comes down to this: if you've been looking forward to this movie you'll probably like it. If it's not the sort of thing you're usually into, and the trailer didn't get your heart racing, you might want to see The Illusionist instead.
What am I here to report? I knew there was something ... there was, like, a movie or something in between the beginning and end, but the beginning and end occupied most of my mind because
IT WAS SHOT IN VANCOUVER! And how. I mean, it wasn't even trying to be anywhere else. And it was evidently shot by someone who really likes Vancouver, knows what makes it great, and also has the power to shut down Georgia St.
I went into the theatre expecting a visual tour-de-force and possibly some interesting music: on that scale the score is 10/10. I've never seen the original TRON and was curious to see if I would understand anything of what was going on. Luckily, I did! In fact I understood a lot more than I was expecting to, not just backstory but frontstory as well. My expectations were low, as I'd heard about them calling upon the mighty Pixar brain trust to help them fix their movie after they'd finished principal photography, which doesn't bode well. I don't know how much of what is on the screen today is the result of this intervention, but whatever they did seemed to have worked, because I managed to keep on top of what was going on most of the time. This can mean one of two things:
1. The plot is actually intelligible if you concentrate hard enough
2. I was too distracted by personal delights to notice when I was missing something
The reason I bring up #2 is not just because of the Vancouver thing. I'm sure I missed most of the beginning because I was too busy staring at the background, but after a while inside game space the warm glowy glow of that most wonderful city began to fade away, supplanted by some very exciting and well-choreographed game play. But that too came to and end, and it started to get talky and rather slow, and just when I was starting to get bored, who should arrive on the scene but Michael Sheen.
NO ONE TOLD ME MICHAEL SHEEN WAS IN THIS MOVIE!
It was the most pleasant casting surprise I've had in a long time. Not just was he Michael Sheen, and therefore awesome by definition, but he was Michael Sheen playing a crazy showboat character, which is like awesome2. I am eager to see hordes of internet fangirls suddenly learning his name and digging up his back filmography as happened with Johnny Depp after the first Pirates. [SPOILER ALERT!] Unfortunately stupid Disney scuppers the franchise possibilities but I'm sure they'll find a way to work around that if they really want to ... [/SPOILER]
Aaaanyway, as regards the actual movie, it's definitely an action-packed thrill ride through virtual space. Don't go expecting your life to be changed, but it's entertaining, in that loud zoomy way. I'm sure it will make an exciting ride and video game. The music was actually really good – good for the movie, I mean; I'm not going to rush out to buy the soundtrack – in fact it was so good that it maintained the drama of the film when self-indulgent flashiness and headsmackingly hokey dialogue might have pulled it under. There are still some moments of severe eyeroll, dialogue-wise – I suggest the board hire a consulting cynical teenager in the future to point out when their writers are getting hopelessly lame, because wow, someone's lame-o-meter was on the fritz in this case. Luckily the movie is really not that dependent on dialogue, except for exposition and setting up the rather enjoyable action sequences. And when I was bored (which tended to be more likely during the talky bits between action pieces and Michael Sheen's scenes) I could just sit back and marvel at how much Sam Flynn looked like Teddy Evans.* But that might not be so entertaining for everyone.
*By the way, is that not the most hilarious postcard ever? The look Scott is giving him! And the smirk! I love it.
The production design was fantastic, as tends to happen when you take away the confines of the 'real world' and tell production designers to go crazy. It recalled how the 80s were crazy for trapezoids but kept that modern edge as well, which was nice to see. The CG for the most part was excellent, though they still don't have the completely realistic human face down yet. It worked for the Young Jeff Bridges for the majority of the time he was onscreen, in the context of the story, but when the context was otherwise it was still a bit too plasticky, like he was wearing a latex mask. I suppose time will solve this problem, but it seemed just a little bit premature in this film ... then again, maybe only animators would notice.
I guess it comes down to this: if you've been looking forward to this movie you'll probably like it. If it's not the sort of thing you're usually into, and the trailer didn't get your heart racing, you might want to see The Illusionist instead.
