‘TRON: Legacy’ Review

Published 3 years ago by , Updated December 21st, 2010 at 10:13 pm,

tron legacy review TRON: Legacy ReviewScreen Rant’s Vic Holtreman reviews TRON: Legacy

TRON: Legacy has to be one of the most hyped, if not highly-anticipated movies of the year. It’s been teased at the San Diego Comic-Con for three years in a row – where the footage shown wowed the crowd. It’s obvious how much hard work and dedication went into the visual aspect of the film, but unfortunately that’s about all it has going for it.

The original TRON was released way back in 1982, and at the time was considered groundbreaking for its use of computer graphics in a live-action film. If you’ve never seen the film and watch it for the first time today, you’ll probably find yourself laughing at the “hokey” visual effects – but remember that back then they didn’t have the advantage of being able to create virtual worlds via CGI motion-capture that could be translated into a computer-based character, etc.

Those who love the original film (myself included) may be infected by a bit of movie nostalgia – it’s not a great film, but it’s entertaining enough and actually managed to explore some interesting concepts at a time where computers were still “new” to most people.

Legacy is a sequel that starts out about seven years after the end of the first film. Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges) has taken over Encom and with the help of Alan Bradley (Bruce Boxleitner) has made the company wildly successful. Flynn has a young son named Sam, who he’s regaled with stories of his exploits “on the grid,” and he promises to take his wide-eyed son there one day. Flynn is also on the verge of bringing a “miracle” to the world that will redefine everything – science, religion, medicine, etc.

After sharing this with his son, Kevin Flynn disappears – never to be seen again.

Cut to Sam (Garrett Hedlund) at age 27, now a loner bad boy who’s only involvement with Encom (despite being the majority shareholder) is to hack into it once a year in an attempt to disrupt the now greedy corporation (as opposed to the wonderful, benevolent company it was when his father ran it) in one way or another.

Sam is led to a secret lab at Flynn’s Arcade, where he repeats his father’s last computer command on the dusty console – which transports him into the cyber-universe of the grid. Director Joseph Kosinski makes this universe seem even more “special” in an effective way: The “real world” scenes are in 2D, but once we move into the computer world the 3D in the film finally kicks in – and it really makes for an effective transition. Think about the scene in The Wizard of Oz where Dorothy emerges from her house into Oz – on steroids.

Once in the cyber world Sam is understandably overwhelmed, but adapts quickly being the athletic guy we met in the real-world scenes. Sam soon meets Clu, the program his father created to run the system, who looks like a much younger Jeff Bridges (more on that, later). It seems Clu has turned into a dictator in search of perfection, and is not satisfied with pursing/enforcing it only in the computer realm.

Eventually a program named Quorra (Olivia Wilde) brings Sam to see his father, who has been trapped there since he vanished so many years ago. Of course Sam wants to return to our world with his father, but dear old dad is reticent because his “identity disc” contains the information that Clu needs to invade our world – and he doesn’t want to risk that. The trio race to find a way to stop Clu, and escape the cyber world, before Clu can execute his terrible plan.

tron legacy the grid TRON: Legacy Review

TRON: Legacy is a visual treat – at least until you get used to it. Visually, the highlight of the film takes place not long after Sam’s arrival in the computer world. The scenes in which the battles take place on the grid, both the hand-to-hand and the lightcycle racing, are truly amazing. As I watched that part of the film I thought “this is the techno answer to Avatar.” The 3D here is used to excellent effect, including a multi-level, transparent race track where the lightcycles do battle.

The musical score by Daft Punk is an excellent match for the film. Being an old guy, the first time heard of them was in reference to this film, but their techo-rock, pulsing soundtrack matches the otherworldly look of the film. As a bonus, they actually appear in the film (the club scene).

This world is much more detailed than that of the original film, reflecting the increase in computing and graphics power we have today compared to the vector graphics of almost 30 years ago. Updates to the ships and the suits worn by the programs are all well done and are visually impressive – there are also some new designs introduced  to keep things fresh.

There are many nods to the original film – I’ll leave them unmentioned so you can discover them as you watch the movie. However, there are also many things taken from lots of other films that came before – some so similar that it’s difficult not to think “rip-off” instead of “nod.” Those films include Star Wars, The Matrix, 2001: A Space Odyssey and more. In fact, in one scene I thought Garrett Hedlund was channeling Hayden Christensen as Anakin Skywalker.

The world of the film is filled with many perfectly pretty people – and I felt little connection to most of them. If I had to pick one person who generated a sense of connection above the others, it would be Bruce Boxleitner reprising his role as Alan Bradley – and he was barely in the film. Michael Sheen as Castor had an excess of personality that made him seem like he was far more advanced than “just a program.” Olivia Wilde generated no connection and her character was no better. With a collection of the greatest written works of all time having been read by her (as provided by old Flynn), she professed her favorite author to be Jules Verne. Nothing against Jules Verne, but compared to the other books there and her apparent hunger to understand the real world, it seemed like an odd (lame) choice.

Then there was the quest to get home – was old Flynn’s data disc required or not? Was it important enough to guard with one’s life (because at one point it seems like an “oh well”), and do we even care?

tron legacy jeff bridges1 TRON: Legacy Review

Finally we get to the CGI recreation of Jeff Bridges as a young man. Have we finally gotten past the “uncanny valley” (where the mind/eye discerns that something is just not quite “real”)? Sadly, no. As long as young Kevin Flynn wasn’t talking, the face looked great – but as soon as he spoke, the creepy factor pops up. He looked like he had a face full of Botox – think Joan Rivers as seen recently on The Apprentice. One could argue that Clu was a computer program and should have been “stiff” compared to a human, but even in the opening scene of the film where we see the real-world young Kevin Flynn, the same effect is present.

Really, if you’re going to see the film, try to make it to an IMAX theater if you have one available – and if there isn’t one you really should see the film in 3D, as TRON: Legacy is an example of 3D done right. It was shot in 3D and there is use of both subtle and overt 3D in the film, an overall effect that looks impressive and adds to the feeling of being in a world that is not ours.

But if you’re looking for characters and a story that will draw you in, wait and go see that other Jeff Bridges movie: True Grit.

Here’s a trailer for TRON: Legacy:

[media id=272 width=570 height=340]

-

[poll id="105"]

If you want to talk about the film without worry about spoiling it for others, head over to our TRON: Legacy Spoilers Discussion.

Our Rating:

3.5 out of 5
(Very Good)

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: 3 star movies, tron legacy

172 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. This is a movie I wont miss :D

    • From the person who didnt realise this was a sequel…

      • *sigh*

        • Is that sigh directed inwards? At yourself?

          I hope it is…

          • No its directed outwards acrually.

            • Yes. I had gathered that. I just couldnt quite fathom why…

              • Well i cant comment without someone….. Nevermind ill just drop it here. Meh idc anymore i must learn to ignore some comments.

                • WHOA!

                  Calm down there slick.

                  Wasn’t being serious, I just find your lack of having seen classic movies odd sometimes, but I still love ya!!!

                  • I have to admit, sometimes I wonder if you are kidding with Ricky or not. I would hate to see either one of you leave.

                    • Well sometimes I am kidding. Others I am not. I can see how it may get confusing for both him and others.

                      I certainly wouldn’t want him to leave at all, he’s got the fresh eyes of unspoiled youth, we need that around here, as much as his relentless cheer and optimism grate on my cortex sometimes, I also enjoy seeing someone who always has something posetive to say.

                    • Well thanks Sam those are kind words indeed. :)

                  • DOn’t fret Rick, Dr Sam just gets cranky sometimes, what with falling through time and all, fixing peoples problems that he doesn’t give a crap about. I can see how that could make one grumpy. :)

                    • Putting right what once when wrong, hoping that my next leap, will be the leap home…

            • Don’t fret Ricky; we all love you, dude. :-D

              • we love ya too :)

                • Ricky…not to worry…we gotcha back!!

              • Speak for yourself Kahless LOL :)

                • :(

  2. Hmmmm

    Well, the orignal film is great fun, it is hardly an acting/story fest, it was always about the visuals. And so is this, so I see little difference, it looks great and I will see it next week.
    Everyone seems to critisise the youngified Bridges, but it is still a monumental effort, it a CGI creation of an actor that resembles the man incredibly closely.

    No mention of the awesome Daft Punk score though?….

    • DSM,

      Dammit, forgot to mention the music, which was, indeed great. I was (and still am) sick as a dog when I was writing the review and was concerned that I wouldn’t do a good job.

      Vic

      • Don’t worry about Vic.

        I haven’t seen the film yet and I still know the music is one of the best parts, ive been walking around listening to it constantly for about a week.

        Get well soon sir.

    • I agree completely. I love the original, but it’s not a great “story” piece by any stretch of the imagination. The visuals in both are absolutely stunning in their time frame. Legacy really pushed the visuals and CGI to a new level. It was a truly stunning world. While the uncanny valley hasn’t quite been crossed, this is certainly the best effort to date. There are a few places in the film where it really works. And when he isn’t talking, the effect is VERY convincing. The fact that they were able to get it to this level is quite impressive indeed.

      And the Daft Punk score was epic. The score for this film really deserves an oscar. It was unique, different, a risk and fit so perfectly I can’t imagine any other music working but what they wrote. They really stretched and grew artistically to do this, working with a full orchestra for the first time. It really is a tour de force of musical goodness.

      • I’m so blown away at the way people are fawning over Daft Punk’s score. It’s NOT THAT GREAT. Holy smokes. I’m listening to it right now… It’s -okay-, but the orchestrations are painfully derivative of Hans Zimmer (Thin Red Line and Dark Knight). The most interesting few minutes of electronica were used in the non-stop TV ads.

        I’ve known of Daft Punk for years – ever since their yak of a song “Around the World”. “Technologik” is little better. These guys and their brand of pop junk are part of the reason more musically complex artists drifted into the listener-assigned label “Intelligent Dance Music”.

        In their favor, I have to confess that they demonstrate a lot more musical complexity than I was expecting… just not enough to warrant all this gushing!

        There are so many other artists I would have loved to see create the Tron soundscape: Optimally: Juno Reactor, Orbital, or Paul Oakenfold… FSoL, Aphex Twin or The Orb for more edge.

      • You spoke my mind Adam. Couldn’t agree more.

    • Well, I adored the previous film. At time I had no personal computer but it sure inspired me to save up for one. I liked the characters (especially RAM), and the idea of the digital world worshipping the Users, not knowing one was among them. When they find out, they assume he can fix everything. What if it were that way with our concept of God?

      The musical score was awesome too so waiting to hear the new score.

  3. Was that surprise cameo fun, vic?

  4. Recently watched the documentary “The Pixar Story” and a private screening of Tron for Disney pen & ink animators (one of whom was John L.) launched the idea that became Pixar.

  5. I’ll be seeing it tomorrow. This movie seems to do what I look for in a sci-fi/action movie. Transport me to another place and have kick-butt effects.

  6. saw it last night, completely agree, music and visuals were great, but it treats the audience like they are stupid, because as soon as they mention something, we know it’s going to happen later (eg the sunrise scene), and then it also has huge things like genocide and biochemical-digital programs, but barely talks about them

  7. Haven’t seen it yet (next week maybe).
    Do they still believe in USERS ???

  8. Is Tron actually in this movie too?

    • Since the character TRON was played by Bruce Boxleitner, I doubt it. I guess they could put Bruce’s face on another guys body.

      • He was in the movie, but you had to catch on that it was Tron because he wore a mask the whole time. I’m guessing the original Tron was too old to be doing all of those stunts.

  9. Thanks Vic for all the insights. Satisfying to know that my “Clash of the Titans” idea, using the 3-D to transport the audience into another realm, would have worked for it. A pity the story suffers but not unexpected, we seem to be witnessing the slow death of the true Science Fiction story. Whether it will come back once all the excitement over effects has waned is another question. A great opportunity for the next generation of analytical/expressives if they’re prepped just right…

  10. off topic but is there going to be an open discussion thread for Friday Vic? Strange it is not up..

    • GK, I’ll set it up now.

      Don’t know what the heck is going on recently – I *thought* I set it up in advance.

      Bloody hell, I hate being sick…

      Vic

      • Hope you feel better Vic!! Wouldn’t have bothered you if I’d known..and THANKS!! :)

  11. This review sounds just like what I’m expecting when I see this movie. Having not yet seen the original are there plot points I’m going to miss or just the brief nods to the successor?

    What did you think about the score? I’ve heard great things…

    • Jessie,

      Oh, they’ll fill you in on the original. Plenty of story exposition given via conversation.

      Score was great.

      Vic

  12. got tickets booked for this tomorrow in the IMAX, cnt wait, been buzzin about this film all year =)

  13. yes to who asked TRON is indeed in this movie.

    annnd I thought it was good..the best things about it were the visuals and the music but thew story was pretty cool too and the acting was decent. as a movie goer i’d give it a 4 out of 5, as a tron fan i’d give it a 5 out of 5.

    • Really? The character TRON is in it? Played by Boxleitner?

    • Maybe it wasn’t a good idea to ask that question. The impact of seeing him without knowing he was in it is gone.

  14. I just saw the movie sadly in 2d a couple of hours back and absolutely loved it. I know ya its 2d but we don not have a 3d theater over here. The action ain’t there much, but still great nevertheless. Daft Punk just killed it!
    Also I saw the 1982 Tron a couple of days back and that movie is a laugh riot albeit pretty advanced in time.
    When people get all gaga about stuff like Inception I would recommend Tron to them. Tron is the real deal.
    Watch it for Jeff Bridges and the Light Cycles if not for anything else.

  15. I have been reading many reviews this morning, some less than kind. One thing about the first Tron people seem to not be mentioning, beyond the SFX, is the underliying theme of the programs wanting to communicate with their creators, or The Users. TRON just wants to speak with Alan Bradley, the man who wrote him, so that he can get information to defeat the MCP. When he discovers Flynn is a User, he thinks Flynn can fix everything, while Flynn is like, “sorry to disappoint you”. It’s like a search for God, in the digital world.

    The film also spotlights the dangers of hacking in a time before most people had home computers. The MCP wanting to hack into military databases, amongst other ones, is something that happens now. This is worse than ordinary corporate greed.

    So sorry, Tron is not just about dated SFX.

  16. For all who have see Tron: Legacy

    As I said earlier I plan on going tomorrow, with my wife and 9-and-a-half year old daughter. Is there anything inappropriate or too scary in it? She doesn’t scare easy.

    • “easily.” Good grief.

    • INK,

      Your 9yo should be fine.

      Vic

      • Thanks, Vic!

  17. Perfect review Vic, I’d thought it was more 2.5 but you sum up the pros and cons really well.

    For all the hype the end result was disappointing and quite underwheliming.

    The obvious sell was the effects which are lush and stylish. What I liked was the fact that the action had a seamless ebb and flow, never at one time did sequences get chaotic or out of control (e.g Speed Racer) Producers clearly wanted a sophisticated, almost poetic feel to the motion as opposed to hardcore mecha style action. I was worried that it would be all in your face flashing neon lights but I never felt that once whilst watching.

    Daft Punk’s music perfectly captured the feel of the film. It did lack cinematically though, never creating any sense of feeling, emotion, or tension. The score did get repititve at times and some parts continously reminded me of the music for Batman Begins.

    As ever the biggest problems were the lack of story and characterization. It’s amazing how filmakers invest so much time annd money into technology without realizing that a movie’s greatness is giving us people that we care about in an engaging story.

    The characters should have been as strong as the effects were. It’s not as if there is a big multitiude of characters who all eat up to much screen time. Sam is just such a charlmess, nondescript hero and Hedlund plays him completely devoid of any personality. And hie voice just sounded weird at times Olivia Wilde was a bit better in her role. She’s a strangely attractive woman, with sharp facial features. Reviewers have raved about her character being kick-ass but I didn’t really see it.

    Bridges was good as Flynn and did command certain attention. Clu had very little impact as the villain. I didn’t really care about what he was trying to achieve and he never carried any sense of threat about him.

    The 3D was good but not great. It will draw inenvitable comparison with Avatar but it’s a bit of a non contest. Avatar had the advantage of widespanning landscapes, floating cliffs and dense environments full of wildlife and vegetation. With Tron’s concept, you’re limited to circles, squares triangles, all in either bright blue, yellow orange or red. So that sense of awe is never truly there.

    Whilst far from being the worst film this year – Tron Legacy is a letdown which is a shame cos I really wanted it to be good. I guess it’s just another example of great hype and trailer – disappointing movie

    Just hope we don’t say the same about Thor next year.

  18. I’m a teen, so I have not seen the original ‘Tron’, I’m going to see this one primarily for the 3D effects.

  19. Sounds great.

  20. I was lucky enough to see Tron a couple of weeks ago, the day before the Official World Premier, and it was very well received. I was looking forward to seeing it again today on the first day it went on general release. I went to the early evening screening, and was worried that it might be sold out. But in the event there were only ten or so people there. Perhaps this was because of the snow, but it doesn’t bode well for Disney. I enjoyed the movie even more this time, not least because I’ve been listing to the Daft Punk soundtrack all week. I think this movie has a visual flair approaching that of Avatar, without the trite dialog and simplistic message. I’m sure I’ll go see it again, it’s a very enjoyable immersive experience.

  21. As much as I love this site and respect your opinions, I’m completely disregarding your review of this movie.
    I loved the original tron, for various reasons but overall because it was just a good, albeit dated, sci-fi flick.
    However, going to the midnight showing in IMAX with tons of high expectations… I was completely blown away.
    Sometimes making the movie feel too epic works: and it did. The visuals were great, sound great, acting was solid, and the story was an awesome sequel. Add in killer IMAX sound and good 3D and this movie isn’t just a experience. It was an event.
    Honestly, I’m ranting right now, and I’m going to say this movie was amazing.
    And I do hope it fares well in money. Can’t wait to see a sequel.

    • Got back from an IMAX 3D showing a bit ago. Movie was much better then expected. The 3D was a dramatic and shocking letdown though. It was barely noticeable throughout the vast majority of the movie, save a couple scenes. Not sure why everyone’s saying the 3D is great. It isn’t. It’s far FAR too subtle for the vast majority of the movie.

      Tron: Legacy is, however, a better movie then I see most people saying in reviews. I think it’s worth a look.

  22. loved the movie, and i to agree that it is another ‘eye candy’ fest like avatar but this future is more then plausible (at least in another 200+ yrs).

    i don’t see why you gave it a 3/5 when is clearly should get a 4, the score was amazing, action scenes where great and the acting was good (though the main could have done a better job at times). the only noticeable issue i had much like yourself was the digitisation of bridges face, it stood out to much at the beginning and a little through out the rest of the movie (though it wasn’t as annoying) and there where some weird wtf moments throughout the film, but overall a very sexy movie.

    btw i couldn’t really see any ‘stand out’ 3D moments in the film so watching it in VMAX would be just as effective.

  23. As another old guy….your review is spot on.

    • I have to agree with both you and the writer. My husband and myself went to see it in full Imax3D. We are both big Tron fans. We were in agreement. You are warned in the beginning that some scenes are 2D and are ment that way. Unless it was a “in your face” 3D it was hard to discern at times. The plot was slightly hard to follow. Unless you watched the original, you might be lost at times. When it was a full 3D fight scene it was great, when it wasn’t… It’s not the old Tron but a new script. I mean, come on, FULL genocide? The end was a big let down. Left MANY questions. WHY was the disk soo important among other ones. I agree, 3 stars. And that’s only because of the 3D.

  24. I have to disagree with the review.
    Just before watching in IMAX 3D, I watched the original Tron (as a real geek) and find myself surprised by the connections between the two films. It works perfectly as a sequel (Clu is the program we see in the first Tron, for example). It uses 3D in a clever and not invasive way (even waits until “you get in”) and the actions sequences doesn’t make you feel 3D-sick (like in Avatar, when you don’t understand what’s going on). It shows some clever and unespected choices (those lonely tv screens, low-res flashbacks), badass soundtrack, updates on designes and costumes.
    The story itself, despite its sempicity, hold some important elements (good son/ evil son, forgiveness, creation/creator) and I fell simpathy for the character; Flynn is cool, Sam is the imperfect hero, Quorra is funny (and damn hot).
    CGI Bridges is a bit creepy, but it works when it’s Clu, a computer program, a digital copy (…) of Flynn/Bridges.
    Probably I would have changed something in the ending and having somebody else intervein at last moment (yea, you know who I’m talking about), but I think that Tron:Legacy is one of the most exciting and well made 3D blockbusters.
    END OF LINE

    • I saw didnt agree with the review just suprised like M4RCO says that you know who didnt save the day at the end. Alot better movie than what people are giving it credit before. My wife never saw the first Tron movie and says she loved it. And yeah i kinda figured out when it first started it wasnt in 3d and told my wife it would probably when he was brought into the grid.

  25. From http://www.thewrap.com, via IMDB.com:

    “In second place amid a crowded market for 3D films, Warner’s Hanna Barbera adaptation “Yogi Bear” grossed an estimated $4.6 million Friday, putting it off track to meet studio hopes for a $20 million start.

    Also missing its mark, which was set in the low teens, Sony’s James L. Brooks-written and -directed ensembler “How Do You Know” grossed just $2.6 million Friday and probably won’t break double figures this weekend.

    That’s a tough start for a $100 million, A-list-driven movie, which stars Jack Nicholson, Reece Witherspoon, Owen Wilson and Paul Rudd.”

    Hey Boo-Boo…I’m thinkin’ that the suits @ H-B were doing pic-a-nick baskets of ganja when they greenlighted our movie!

    Right, Yogi!

  26. Sorry Vic,but I just watched this in IMAX 3D,and yet again,another movie that proves that 3D really doesn’t add anything to the overall viewing of live action films.

    First of all,a good chunk of the movie isn’t even in 3D,and secondly,I have to say that the IMAX was very lackluster as far as the sound goes.

    I saw Inception twice.Once in IMAX and another time non IMAX,and if there is one thing that that movie gave you in IMAX,it was absolutely heart pounding,incredible sound.Whether or not you can blame it on IMAX or not,the sound was very underwhelming for it to be in IMAX quality.

    3D is a novelty that really should only be used for animated movie or slight atmospheric effects,like dust floating or lighting effects,stuff like that.While it wasn’t as terrible as some other movies that are in 3D these days,had it not been,it wouldn’t have made a bit of difference.

    In all,Tron was my absolute favorite movie when my brother took me to see it when I was 7 years old,so it was nice to see a newer version of it on the big screen.

    • why in the world would you want to see someone’s bedroom in 3d??They did it right-the 3d effect doesn’t start til they entered the grid..duh..

  27. After seeing the 3 out of 5 rating, I didn’t read too much further into the review. “Tron: Legacy” beats the hell out of “The Matrix” a thousand times over. I have complete respect to everyone who thinks otherwise, but I will not allow online review to kill my perspective of the movie. I will head over to the spoiler article, so I can hammer out my reasons why.

    • Marcus,

      “After seeing the 3 out of 5 rating, I didn’t read too much further into the review.”

      And that, dear sir is the NUMBER ONE reason I’m actually considering doing away with star ratings on reviews. That’s ALL some people focus on – completely ignoring what the review has to say. That’s very knee-jerk and makes anything you have to say about the movie in a counterpoint irrelevant, since you didn’t bother to read the review.

      Vic

      • I thought the review was quite fairly written. It’s a shame how the youth of today, in our fast food, now now now culture, often miss the details of everything!

        • I had this friend who nick-picked about every movie under the sun. After the ten thousandth time he ripped on a movie, I stared to ask other people to join me for some pop-corn and a film. Once my friend realized what had happened, he became so infuriated that he march down to my house, knocked on the door, and ask, “Why have you ditched me?”

          My response, “Instead of walking out of the theater feeling fulfilled, you bashed every small nuance or inconsistency in the film. Regardless about considering what others may feel, you s**k the excitement out of the air.”

          ScreenRant.com is a fun place to ‘rant’ about movies. However, I started to see a trend where all the movies I loved were being rated low. “Clash of the Titans”, “Robin Hood”, “Mega Mind”, “Tron”, etc… Sure, they each have their small issues; however, the point of going to the movies is to forget about reality.

          ScreenRant gave “The Fourth Kind” four and a half stars, but then they gave “Tron” three stars? What?!?! “Tron” is was just as good.

          Doesn’t anyone here go to the movies to just have fun? Why are people taking this so serious?

          • Marcus,

            Well then perhaps you would be best served by IGNORING our star ratings and actually reading what we have to say.

            Vic

          • wow..they gave ‘the4th kind” what??really-naw that’s not true..!!lol

            • Actually, I just checked, and I gave The Fourth Kind 3 1/2 stars, not 4 1/2, so I don’t know where Marcus got that from.

              Vic

      • “That’s very knee-jerk and makes anything you have to say about the movie in a counterpoint irrelevant, since you didn’t bother to read the review.” ~ Vic

        ————–

        If you removed the movie ratings, ‘I will’ read the articles from top to bottom. When people see a good movie being rated low, they psychologically and immediately think the article will be an unfair and horrible review. Once I saw the three out of five stars, I drew the conclusion that the article was irrelevant to how I felt. You can’t blame people for making such a connection. Its only human nature to react in such a manner. Its a BIG red sign that says, “this review is not going to be good.”

        • Well I guess we have two options:

          1. Eliminate star ratings so people will actually read the reviews.

          2. Eliminate the reviews and just say “Hey, this movie gets 3 out of 5 stars.”

          Option 2 would certainly make my life a lot easier.

          Vic

          • Lol…

            • Marcus,

              Glad you saw the humor in that. :-P

              Vic

              • Vic,

                I like visiting this site. Some of the things you people reveal are very thought provoking. Please enjoy yourself always. Keep the humor alive. :)

                Marcus

          • A ScreenRant.com embracing moment:

            Did you happen to notice that one of your reviewers gave “Yogi the Bear” two and a half stars? Lol… Its a review made by an adult based upon a kiddies movie. Come on… Seriously? When I see something like that happen, I know someone is taking these reviews too seriously.

            I would hide the reviewer’s rating system, and allow them to participate in the visitor polls. It would appear as though the visitors have the final rave or burn on a movie.

            • Marcus,

              Again, this is why I hate rating movies. He gave that 2.5 stars because he thought that KIDS would enjoy it. Kids were laughing throughout the film at his screening. So you can’t give a movie 1 star and then recommend it.

              That’s why here you can’t say why did you give this movie 2 stars and that one 4 – it’s apples and oranges based on the genre, audience, etc.

              Vic

        • @ Marcus:

          Doesn’t that mean the reviewer didn’t find the movie that good not that the review itself would be bad? You can have a good review about a bad movie as long justify the points they found “bad.”

          • @ Jessie,
            Within the ‘tradition’ of movie reviews in print and web, the movie rating accompanying the article reflects the tone of what is being written. Other words, when you see a bad rating, the review that follows will be negative. If you see a good rating, the review that follows will be positive. Its tradition.

            According to how Vic has organized his site, the rating system does not reflect what is written. “ScreenRant.com” functions in a different manner, which people have been conditioned through print and web.

            As someone who is not use to Vic’s type of system, I instinctively followed what I was accustomed to seeing. Rating System = Review Content. Like I said in my first paragraph. So, when I saw my movies getting horrible ratings, I skipped the article thinking it was going to be a horrible review. If I am drawing from what is considered ‘traditionally’ seen in print, an average and knowing visitor may draw the same conclusion. Negative Ratings = Horrible Review. Positive Ratings = Positive Reveiws.

            Get it?

            • Fixed: If I am drawing from what is ‘traditionally’ put in print, the average and unknowing visitor may draw the same conclusion.

            • @ Marcus: I’ve never gotten the impression that a review is badly written if the reviewer didn’t like the movie. Yes the review would be mainly full of the negative aspects they found in the movie, but that doesn’t mean the review itself is bad. It’s just negative.

              Maybe I’m not understanding your inter-changeable use of the words bad and negative. Or maybe I’m just giving the reviewer the benefit of the doubt that they’ll be able to justify their low rating in a well-written article that doesn’t attack but explains why they rated it low.

  28. It got boring at parts, and was a bit strange, but I was over all impressed with the movie.

  29. I think people expect way too much when it comes to a sequel.

    People, its a movie. Did you find it entertaining? I did. That is just my opinion I know. Hollywood is out to make money and and they do it these days with effects and lackluster stories.

    If you want a story, then stay at home and watch reruns of Gilligan’s Island.

    4/5 IMO

    • Jon,

      Wow. I guess you sure told us. Go ahead and pop in your copy of Transformers 2 now, and enjoy the heck out of it. 8)

      Vic

      • hahahahahaa!!!!!!!!!aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa..

    • Jon’s right. (except for the Gilligan comment. I never thought that show had any real thought provoking stories.)

      When it comes to sequels, nobody is EVER satisfied. Because if they don’t reference this, or reference that, or don’t answer some unanswered question at the end, it just angers people.

      Vic, your comment about Transformers 2 is unfair. The first film wasn’t even that good, so OF COURSE the second one was going to be bad. But with Megan Fox being absent from the third film, I have to say I’ll at least give it a quick peek when the film hits DVD/Blu-Ray in late 2011 or early 2012.

      • But on the topic of sequels, no one can ever say that they don’t bother with them. Because EVERYONE goes and see’s the sequels, no matter how much they liked or disliked the first film.

      • James,

        As Sully pointed out, there are plenty of great sequels that we acknowledge – heck, I consider “Aliens” my all-time favorite movie.

        As to the Transformers 2 comment, I was referring to his comment about “just a movie” and “if you want a story.” I could have picked any crappy, big VFX/explosion movie – I just happened to pick that one.

        Vic

        • Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen rules! enough said… now let the hate comments begin x)

    • Cause no writers/reviewers like sequels on this site like Toy Story 2/3, Aliens, T2, ect. *rolls eyes*…

      Sometimes sequels fail, and sometimes they exceed their predosessor. Either way it’s all subjective.

    • Problem is it was not posed as a sequel. I was under the impression it was a “remake”. Finding this out after the fact makes a little difference. Still, the plot was not there. So boring at times, I actually wanted to fall asleep! I went into this movie with an open mind. While it did have it’s moments, it failed over all. The sound was superb, as well as some of the scenes. Over all, nothing to write home about. I really wanted this movie to blow me away. All it did was give me two hours of rest.