Tron Legacy

¿Se imagina lo que podría haber sido esta joya del diseño tecnológico si cumpliera con ciertos criterios que de alguna manera exigimos automáticamente a las películas? Lo que sería una película con una historia densa y profunda si igualara a Tron en imaginación, diseño imaginativo y visionario futurista. Fíjese en los detalles (cuadros de instrumentos de las naves voladoras, diseño de las motos, curvas luminosas en los bordes del vestuario o desmontaje/dispersión de las «figuritas» cuando les da el disco), ubicación de estos detalles en la fluidez de la corrida, ballets voladores y de combate, y sincronizando esta elegante danza visual con la majestuosa *MÚSICA* electrónica («Daft Punk quisiera agradecer a Hans Zimmer, John Powell y Harry Gregson-Williams» ;-). Simplemente ignore las frase como «Tienes que estar bromeando» y déjese seducir por la respuesta «¡Abróchate el cinturón!» a la pregunta «¿Cómo te llamas?» Tron Legacy puede ser una tontería o no, pero es un evento cinematográfico, la única película de su especie y será imitada. (17.12.2010)

The bearded Jeff can be nice. Computer Jeff is Guignol (almost like the Nordic model from the luxury perfume commercial in the lead role). To his detriment, Tron has a lot more Guignol in it than bearded men. As a visual story full of reflections and light contrasts, it is watchable, but unfortunately, in terms of the technical design there is only a pile of boring copies of real masters of imagination. Tron doesn't have one of his own, just the one on loan. And also not very luxuriant. But in this year's competition "pass", not "fail". P.S. Compared to the original film a fail in all categories, except the technical ones, of course. (10.12.2010)

Visually amazing, no doubt, I recommend going to the cinema just for that. The soundtrack by Daft Punk is the other great thing. All the rest – the script, the performances – is rather average, and Garret Hedlund is awfully miscast as the protagonist, that guy doesn’t have a pinch of charisma. I don’t mind that the story is simple (you can see some attempts at depth, but they end up harming the film because they don’t work at all), but the way it is put together; there isn’t any gradual reveal of the reality of that cyberspace, like, for instance, it was very well done in Pandora last year. When Sam falls into the light, he doesn’t look particularly surprised, or even tries to find any answers, as a result, you never get to know the limits of that world, which makes it hard to root for the characters, because you get the feeling that if anything goes pear-shaped, the old creator Bridges will only have to push a button to make everything all right again. That sounds a bit too critical for a four-star rating, right? Just to be clear, TRON: Legacy is not a bad film, far from it. The reason I’m being critical is that this film only needs a few tweaks in the script to be a great gem comparable with Matrix. Fortunately, the lukewarm reception by the dear critics lowered my expectations significantly, so in the end I’m satisfied; I’d much rather watch another Tron sequel (and even with Kosinski behind the camera) than most of the upcoming comic-book adaptations (Green Hornet, Green Lantern, Thor, etc.). 80 % (18.12.2010)

At times the words about the triumph of film design come to mind, but the boredom reliably overwhelms everything. I, as a viewer, have long since sobered up from the 3D fascination and the new Tron has nothing new to offer. Neither story-wise nor narratively; adjectives like "riveting" or at least "interesting" have no place in Kosinski's world. I enjoyed the old Tron infinitely more, even with its simple 8-bit graphics. (10.01.2011)

Kosinski will (probably) remain a one-film filmmaker. Whoever watches his commercials on YouTube and then Tron Legacy will understand that this director is a design genius with a unique sense of visuals, which is perfectly emphasized by Daft Punk's music, but he is also an absolutely bland storyteller. The attempts to create something epic are very funny, whereas the rest of it is kind of dysfunctional. And yet, unless you might want a serious cinematic adventure, it doesn't let up because the primitive plot actually doesn't hurt the film at all. Regardless, there are two ways in which the film can be seen. Either just "watch" it (perhaps in HD over time), or "experience" it in 3D (and I say that whilst having quite an aversion to this technology as a cheap decoy from clueless filmmakers). (05.01.2011)