IMDb > TRON: Legacy (2010) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
TRON: Legacy
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
TRON: Legacy More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 66:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 658 reviews in total 

353 out of 502 people found the following review useful:

The most visually appealing film of 2010

Author: chrismsawin from United States
16 December 2010

TRON: Legacy has been one of the most promoted films of the year. With a monstrous budget (around $200 million) and reports saying that Disney is worried that the film isn't tracking as well as they'd hoped, the initial thought process from these rumors is that the TRON sequel will open to a disappointing first place weekend much like the most recent Chronicles of Narnia film. As of this writing, I haven't gotten around to seeing the original film. I wanted to, but thanks to Disney it was pretty much pulled from every retail store imaginable whether you wanted to rent or purchase the film at least until next year. The urge to see TRON: Legacy didn't really sink in until around the time the third trailer was released. While the Daft Punk score has interested me from the beginning, TRON: Legacy just seemed like another overrated piece of eye candy that fan boys were getting excited about. The thing about first impressions though is that they always have the opportunity to be wrong.

The glorified TRON sequel is getting a lot of mixed reviews from most movie critics. The problem seems to lie within the way the film is written and its screenplay. To tell the truth, you don't see a movie like this for a great story alone. The special effects are the main attraction and boy, do they deliver. The way programs disintegrate when they're disposed of, the light cycle battles, airborne chases, and the many fight sequences in the film are just a small example of the dazzling display of some of the most exceptional and impressive special effects ever seen in a cinematic feature. As with most films that have been presented in 3D lately, the 3D effect probably isn't necessary to enjoy a film of this magnitude. It'll be just as entertaining if you save yourself the extra $4 and see it in a conventional theater.

The writing didn't seem as bothersome as much as other reports say. It certainly wasn't the best, but it seemed like enough to add just the right amount of depth to TRON: Legacy and give it more of a background than most films revolving around spectacular special effects. There were a few lines that bothered me. The main one being when Alan first visits Sam and Sam says something about his father probably either being dead or chilling in Costa Rica...or both. Wait, what? It just gives you this Weekend at Bernie's flashback with Bernie being replaced with Kevin Flynn's limp carcass. Some of the lines Jeff Bridges muttered just made him seem way too much like The Dude from The Big Lebowski, which seems awesome but really has no place in the TRON universe. Saying things like, "Check this out," or, "Radical, man," followed by that stoner laugh of his really didn't help matters much. The weak points of the way the film is written are rectified with the way the film never lets your attention out of its choke-hold. You'll be drawn to the screen the entire film; that's practically a guarantee. The right mindset for a film like this can make or break your opinion of the film. If you don't have inflated expectations and don't expect much more than impressive special effects, then you'll probably walk away pleasantly surprised. I actually had a similar mindset during Avatar, which seemed to also suffer/take advantage of groundbreaking special effects being more consuming than the story and had a similar result.

The cast is about as developed as can be expected. The real star of the film is Garrett Hedlund, who does a pretty decent job of carrying the film and being generally astonished that not only was his father alive but the extraordinary world he always talked about actually existed. Jeff Bridges' performance isn't nearly as strong as his portrayal of Rooster Cogburn in True Grit, but he does have his moments. He seems to shine during his reunion with Hedlund and his strongest scenes are with Hedlund alone while being rather flat the rest of the time. Olivia Wilde's Quorra is interesting, as well. There's an intriguing twist to her character, but her fascination and curiosity revolving around the world Sam is from is what gives her character heart. Michael Sheen did seem a bit too over the top at times as Castor, but that may have been the point. The biggest surprise was seeing Cillian Murphy cameo. Given his strong outings in films like Sunshine, Peacock, and Inception, it just left me wanting to see more of his character in future installments assuming this film does well enough to warrant a sequel (or sequels).

TRON: Legacy is certainly the special effects extravaganza it's been made out to be all year. Its fantastic effects certify the sequel as being the most visually appealing film of the year. While the writing of the film isn't quite as polished as the special effects, there certainly seems to be a good enough balance to keep the film afloat and deliver an extremely entertaining way to kill two hours. As far as eye candy goes, TRON: Legacy is an incredible and all around awesome experience.

Was the above review useful to you?

368 out of 551 people found the following review useful:

I've been waiting 28 years for that....

Author: DigitalWitch from United Kingdom
17 December 2010

And it was worth it.

I was 9 years old when I saw TRON in a dingy cinema in Fareham, I was hooked then, and I always dreamed they would make a sequel.

I was seriously worried though, I mean, Escape from New York was another of my favourite movies and I got all excited about the sequel to that... and left the cinema mortified...

Not this time.

This was like an old friend coming home.

There are a lot of comments about this movie having a poor story, personally, I disagree. It was a father and son story, any more on top of the other sub plots going on would have been too much.

It's a hell of an experience for the sences... when those Recognizers flew overhead the cinema shook... immersive, entertaining... everything a good movie should be.

Roll on Number 3.

Was the above review useful to you?

203 out of 314 people found the following review useful:

A spectacular visual experience to be taken with a pinch of salt!

Author: Anais (alwaysbwithu) from Leeds, England
5 December 2010

Kevin Flynn (Bridges) is the CEO of Encom and the world's best video game developer. One night he simply vanishes without a trace and leaves his company in chaos and his young son. Fast-forward 20 years, Sam Flynn (Hedlund) is a rebellious 27 year old and a thorn in the side of Richard Mackey (Nordling), a suit trying to take over his father's company with the help of a software designer (an uncredited cameo from Cillian Murphy). Though Sam is the heir, he refuses to play an active role in the decision-making process. Alan Bradley (Boxleitner) meets him one night with the news that he has received a page from Kevin Flynn's arcade - a number that has been disconnected for 20 years. Thus ensues the inevitable investigation into his father's whereabouts and Sam's transportation into the world his father has created and been trapped in for decades.

Where to begin? Tron: Legacy is a visual feast for your eyes and an auditory pleasure thanks to Daft Punk and Joseph Trapanese. The soundtrack feels ethereal almost and fits perfectly with this new world we have been introduced to for the first time (or the 2nd time if you've seen the 1982 original).

3D, for me, is a recent scourge that has been infecting and affecting the movie industry. Yes, maybe it is a more lucrative avenue for the movie industry after the setback of heavy piracy but enough is enough! Joseph Kosinski, however, had a vision (and an architectural degree behind him) to give us a mouth-opening, simply beautiful world with the correct blend of 2D and 3D! It is quite simply worth it just to go for the visuals.

What the movie makes up for in spectacular imagery, it lacks in storyline. Maybe I should have watched the 1982 version as so many people have pointed out to me but even without it, the plot seems a little disjointed. The underlying connections to the real world are numerous such as The Holocaust, God complexes, evil doppelgangers and more. You are left with more questions than answers as it is never revealed just what it is about this world that would "change everything" in the real world.

Jeff Bridges is great as both the villain and hero and his computer animated self is simply amazing although at the same time off-putting (this might be the Uncanny Valley hypothesis at work). The acting overall is not anything to write home about (no Oscar winners here) but Hedlund as Sam Flynn holds his own against a more charismatic Jeff Bridges. Quorra (Wilde) provides a potential love interest and the key to changing our world and a doe-eyed innocent view of life that is endearing.

This is a movie that should be simply taken for what it is, a pandering to the original fan base whilst garnering new ones, one not to be over- analysed but simply to be marvelled at with a group of friends. The actions scenes are just jaw-dropping with light cycles (that I wish I owned!) and deadly Frisbees amongst other things. Disney took a risk to continue a series almost 3 decades later rather than going for the easy option of re-imagining it. A wise move.

Was the above review useful to you?

174 out of 277 people found the following review useful:


Author: Chalice_Of_Evil from Australia
15 December 2010

I have never seen the original 'Tron', nor do I really know much about it really. I've only heard the movie referenced on occasion (like that one episode of The Simpsons where Homer's trapped in the Third Dimension and he asks if anybody saw the movie 'Tron', and everyone says "No."). The previews for 'Tron: Legacy' looked visually stunning, and I'm happy to report it does not disappoint in that regard. Everything seen inside "The Grid" is a wonder to behold, a visual feast. But is this the only thing the film has going for it? Well...yes and no. As far as the characters/actors who portray them are concerned...

Garrett Hedlund is good as Sam Flynn. Yes, he has to utter some clunky dialogue along the way and is a bit stiff at times, but he serves the role well enough. At times he reminded me of Hayden Christensen as Anakin Skywalker (what with the pulling out of lightsabers...I mean discs, donning of cloaks, etc) - though not half as bad as him.

Jeff Bridges gives a solid performance as Sam's dad, Kevin Flynn. The only thing that detracts from his acting is his digitised clone, Clu. No matter how hard they have tried to create a youthful-looking Jeff Bridges using computer magic, he still looks like a "cartoon" (as someone in the audience put it). While it's annoying, it would have at least been tolerable if it had been limited to just the scenes inside The Grid. However, the movie starts in the the real world with a "young" Kevin Flynn telling his son the story of Tron/The Grid, and you can plainly tell the drastic difference between a real and fake Jeff Bridges. It's so obvious, and very distracting.

Olivia Wilde kicks butt and looks great doing it (in her skintight catsuit with neon highlights and her asymmetrical wig) as the warrior, Quorra. She seems to be having a lot more fun with this role than she does with that of Thirteen on 'House'. Quorra has a slight naivety about her in regards to some things, and displays a sense of childlike wonder on occasion (especially the end), which gives her some depth. Wilde and Hedlund share some good scenes together, and her character at least gets *some* development - which is more than I can say for the albino-like "Siren", Gem (Beau Garrett).

Michael Sheen is memorable as Castor. While he does tend to "ham it up" a bit, it's nonetheless a delightful performance.

Apart from the animation of Young Kevin Flynn, there are a couple of other 'minuses' of the film, like the dialogue (which is oftentimes average) and the fact that the film itself does seem to drag in spots/go on for a bit too long.

However, the visuals *do* almost manage to make up for most of the film's faults (almost). The movie looks stunning - after we get past the kinda boring beginning and are transported along with Sam inside The Grid. Light Cycles, Light Runners, all mode of "Light" transportation make for thrilling action/chase sequences. Then there's the "games", that mostly seem to involve throwing discs - which resemble Xena's round killing thing - at each other, causing those who are hit to "derez" (ie. cease to exist). Another 'plus' for this film is its excellent score. It adds SO much to the movie.

The film is entertaining enough, but probably not the non-stop action some people are expecting/hoping for. If you're looking to kill a couple hours watching something that's visually pleasing (but, at the same time, may give you a headache/sore eyes thanks to the 3D), then 'Tron: Legacy' is worth checking out. Fans of the original may or may not like this movie, I'm not sure, but I know that for someone like myself - who's being introduced to the world of 'Tron' for the first time - it was quite something.

Was the above review useful to you?

129 out of 200 people found the following review useful:

Muddled & Disappointing

Author: routier from Australia
1 January 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

WARNING: SPOILERS *****************

Visually, a feast, but a leisurely script leads to a muddled climax.

A fan of the original since 1983, I had been looking forward to this for a long time. The trailers & stills looked very promising. Sadly, while it looks good, some questionable decisions have been made, and the film doesn't seem to know what to do or where to go.

Some of the original concepts seem to have been dumbed down for audience acceptance. Programs, formerly living a uniquely digital lifestyle, sipping energy from pools, worshiping users, are now just like regular dudes with funny clothes. They work, sleep, eat, drink, and go to clubs.

Perhaps this dumbing down is why this film poses more questions than it answers.

Why has the digital world taken on analogue characteristics like dust, atmosphere & functionless water?

Why do the digital Recognizers, previously smooth, humming machine menaces, now have exhaust flames & jet engine noise?

Why do light cycles sound like they have gasoline engines?

How can a totalitarian digital society have "homeless" programs (who drink from brown paper bags yet)?

Why do all the programs now leap around and pose exactly like Asian martial artists? Just, why??

How were the Isomorphic algorithms going to change the world?

How was CLU going to conquer the world with a bunch of computer programs who were good at throwing disks?

When young Flynn switched off the server, was the world destroyed? (if so, shouldn't he have waited, since (a) the threat had been stopped, and (b) in case there were still some of those useful ISOs surviving, especially since he (and the audience) have no clue as to how to use them?)

If hours in the digital world were minutes in the real one, and in the real world it's been 20 years, does that mean that old Flynn had been trapped for up to 1200 years? (which might explain why he's channeling The Dude from "The Big Lebowski")

The biggest disappointment for me was the almost complete absence of the title character. By the end of the film, I still wasn't sure where Tron was. I had to read some summaries on the Internet to find out.

I would have preferred it if Tron, in his last act, saved the day. Sadly, when he did (briefly) appear, he was ineffective and pointless.

I was a fan of the original Tron. Original ideas and logic have been dropped for populism & eye candy. The subtle humor & in-jokes are absent. This is a disappointing followup.

Was the above review useful to you?

120 out of 190 people found the following review useful:

A dazzling and spectacular special effects extravaganza, despite its flaws.

Author: dvc5159 from Penang, Malaysia / Chicago, USA
16 December 2010

Right off the bat I'm going to say that I didn't see the first film. Obviously I've heard from a lot of people saying that they need to see the first film before watching this one, seeing as this is a direct sequel to a nearly 30 year old cult sci-fi film. But, seeing that I didn't have time, I decided to watch the sequel anyway.

Now keep in mind that Disney took a HUGE risk in making a sequel to a movie that is not very often talked about when it comes to movies as opposed to many blockbusters today. The first TRON had no famous franchise to speak of (apart from the real games inspired by it). Adding to the danger is the film's budget - reportedly between US$ 200 - 300 million. With that kind of money you'll wonder what exactly was Disney hoping for with this film.

Nevermind the fact that the story is a bit unfocused and could be rounded up in a more polished way. Nevermind too that the fantastic world and great ideas aren't expanded upon some more, as well as the fact that the script could use a little bit more originality.

Also, not forgetting some good (in Jeff Bridges' case, great as always as he plays two very different characters with perfect emotional resonance - proving that he still has the chops to carry a big movie) performances by the cast - with Garrett Hedlund showing great leading man potential and Olivia Wilde looking great and cute to boot. Michael Sheen, Beau Garrett and Bruce Boxleitner (apparently returning to his role from the first film, so it seems) all give good support.

No sir-ee, what you pay for - and what you get in spades - are the special/visual effects. Goodness me, this is quite possibly the best special effects I've seen all year, and that's saying something. I have to admit though, the CGI that makes Jeff Bridges young look jarring, but that is overshadowed by the compelling, groundbreaking special/visual effects that really bring you into the cybernetic world. Who doesn't want to take a ride on one of those fantastic, futuristic vehicles? Who doesn't want those awesome light-cycles or one of those dueling/data discs? It is possible that, like "Avatar" a year ago, this film can be a game-changer for special/visual effects alone.

It's a real treat for the eyes, and it's even better in 3D which is splendidly used to flesh out the dimensions and graphics of the cyber world bring you even deeper into the world instead of things merely flying out to you and post-production conversion like in SO many 3D movies (Note that in the 3D version, there's a disclaimer before the film starts, saying that parts of the film are filmed in both natural 2D and 3D as they way they should be. Just so you know, this shows that the filmmakers care for what they want to give you).

Very ambitious architect-and-designer-turned-first-time-filmmaker Joseph Kosinski hit a home run with this film, crafting an extraordinary and spellbinding world of escapism that looks slick, stylish and extremely cool to watch. Kosinski and the production team fill the cyber world with heaps of imagination and the result is what you see on screen. And here I thought Hollywood would recycle certain design patterns (plot patterns still need work though). Kosinski is a truly visionary filmmaker that one really has to keep an eye on.

The production design is on par with the special effects, it is nothing short of spectacular and perfect. The cinematography which is big and wide and best of all NOT shaky allows you to savor every moment of SFX goodness. The superb sound effects serve to complement the visuals and the electronic world, and all for the better. Daft Punk's varying but atmospheric electronic/orchestral score all but suits the film's mood perfectly with its techno beats and soaring string during moments.

Overall, this is perhaps a fine way to end the blockbuster season of 2010, and this is a definite must watch for all looking for an escape. The special effects alone are worth the price of TWO movie tickets, and with that I say, give this one a try, even if you haven't seen the first one. It aims to entertain and to dazzle the audience, and it succeeds brilliantly. Excuse me while I rent the first one now.

Overall rating: 75/100

Was the above review useful to you?

131 out of 238 people found the following review useful:

A Cyber-Epic Film With an Amazing Rendering of the Digital World

Author: Prince AJB
17 December 2010

A science fiction movie made by Disney seems interesting enough especially when it's live-action and targeted for kids (Disney targets its movies for kids, right?). And there it is, "Tron: Legacy", a science fiction movie, Disney science fiction movie, live-action and targeted for kids. And yet, 3D.

"Tron: Legacy" is actually a sequel to the 1982 revolutionary film, "Tron" and marks the directorial debut of Joseph Kosinski. "Legacy" sets Kevin's son, Sam Flynn, 27 years in age as the main character who gets a message from Kevin (or so it is) from the world of Tron. He then goes to Flynn's arcade, enters some sort of mysterious room and plays with a computer which digitized him and entered him to the world of Tron. Then, he fights with other programs trying to find his father, Kevin Flynn who disappeared years ago. On the way, he meets Quorra, some cool machines and of course, Clu (Kevin's program).

I watched "Legacy" and found it to be really good. The rendering of the world of Tron was really breathtaking and got me in awe. All of the world is definitely going to make "Tron: Legacy" one hell of a blockbuster film and surely, one of the best films on the year 2010.

The acting had no problem. Jeff Bridges, after all those years since the first film is still fresh as ever. Garrett Hedlund was also not a problem in the film. Olivia Wilde as Quorra was stunning. The acting was definitely perfect. Everything.

The 3D effects. This was one funny thing. In the beginning of the film, it was noted that some parts of the film were in 2D and some were in 3D and you were asked to not take your 3D glasses off. I did broke the rule several times and saw something unique. Parts that were set in the real world, not in the world of Tron were displayed in 2D and parts that were set in the world of Tron were displayed in 3D. Anyways, the 3D worked pretty well. The Lightcycles in the film and all the things in the world of Tron, displayed in 3D were awesome.

The score of the film was also exciting. (The soundtrack was also great as it reached number 10 on the Billboard 200.) It was very awesome and thrilling with all the bass and everything.

Overall, "Tron: Legacy" is worth to watch. 3D works pretty fine in watching this film. Young kids would not really like this but maybe aged 8 and above would do. I believe this is the best film for December 2010 and is a good way to end blockbuster movies of 2010. Great job, Kosinski.

Prince AJB's Score: 85%

Thank you for reading my review on "Tron: Legacy" and hope it's useful.

Was the above review useful to you?

68 out of 115 people found the following review useful:

enjoyably stupid

Author: Johannes Hogebrink from Netherlands
22 January 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Tron is on it's way to become the most over-rated movie of 2010. It's a candy-wrapped insult to intelligence, as well as to the original.

First, the visual effects. Although they look stunning in their all-black-and-neon style, there's not much original about them. It's chases and fights like we've seen a zillion times before. The worst thing is that most original idea from the original Tron is dropped. In the 1982 version, the light bikes were making sharp 90º turns without losing any of their phenomenal speed, really like electrons moving over the grid of a computer chip. It gave them an unpredictable and dangerous feel, and the impression of an eerie universe where normal laws of physics don't apply. In the new Tron, however, everything looks much more realistic. The bikes ride like normal bikes, planes fly like normal planes, and people die like normal people. Except for the fact that they disintegrate into little square pieces... Whoo, surprise! What is supposed to be a world of competing digital programs, is just a dark street with people walking around in funny dresses and plastic umbrellas. Yes, it even rains, and there's bums with (how modern!) plastic bottles. The good guys are white, the bad guys are red. Except for that eccentric (read; gay) disco owner who turns out to be a traitor... No, I can't say I've been visually surprised once.

Then the story. It's the kind of script that does away with reason. Facts are stated in sentences like "My disk is the key!" or "The portal is only open for 8 hours!" or "It will change the world! Science, quantum mechanics, religion, everything!" without explanation. The most ridiculous are the "ISO's", some tribe of digital people who 'just appeared out of nowhere', whose last surviving chick becomes of major importance because daddy says she must -at all costs- become human. All for no apparent reason, other then filling a void script. But our adolescent hero doesn't need reasons or explanations, because all solutions to his problems are handed to him on a silver platter anyhow. When the going gets rough, there's always a car or a train or some pretty girl appearing out of nowhere to take him exactly where he has to go. All he has to do is comply. It's no adventure, it's plain boring.

But sometimes it looks nice. And the abundance of little stupidities in this film, like the paper pig they're having for digital dinner, make it funny. So I guess you could say it provides an enjoyable evening!

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 45 people found the following review useful:

Fails to capture that special something TRON had

Author: Francisco Huerta ( from Mexico City
27 December 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I wouldn't call myself a TRON hardcore fan - I couldn't even crack a single message from their website during their "Flynn lives" viral campaign. Still, I know the movie perfectly well - I watched it on a movie theater when I was 8 years old, and I simply could never get out of my head the Recognizers and Lightcycles. I did master the Intellivision Tron Deadly Discs game, and the movie jump-started my love for all things computer related. I've watched the 20th Anniversary DVD and all the extras far more times than I can care to count. Guess I'm a TRON hardcore fan after all.

I had mixed feelings about this movie. On one hand, a sequel to TRON made all the sense in the world - the original movie correctly predicted plenty of concepts that we now take as granted (the importance of a network, transports, I/O ports, security, etc.), so a sequel could do something similar. The script could basically write itself; back then, writers had one very difficult time trying to convey the inner workings of a computer network to an audience that was not as computer saavy as today (I'd say they sort of failed - TRON's weakest part was its story). Also, Disney couldn't just hire everyone; they weren't the powerhouse they are now, so they had to do with a scrappy team of visionary but amateurish people. Now, with $300 million dollars at their disposal, any actor they could ever want, all the technology they could ever need, Pixar and their creative team, how could Disney make Tron a failure?

If you want an answer to this question, just go watch Tron: Legacy. It IS a failure.

Why? I believe that TRON, as näive and silly as it sometimes is, has its heart in the right place - it always strives to tell a story, and uses technology as both a backdrop and a principal character. It's not technology for its own sake, either - the Lightcycles, tanks, recognizers, and the complete universe of Tron really made you feel as if you were somewhere else. It was completely unlike anything you had ever seen before. The art depicted on the movie was so striking I think it'll be remembered for years to come just because of it. And, as I said before, it correctly guessed at the future of computing. I wouldn't hesitate to call it a landmark movie, even considering all of its problems.

Tron: Legacy is just another product Disney marketing decided to sell. It has no soul whatsoever. It's not innovative or inventive - most of the things you'll see come from other, more successful movies. Examples? The aerial pursuit near the end of the movie is lifted directly from Star Wars. The bar scene is a near perfect copy of the one on Matrix: Reloaded. The attack scenes are also lifted from the Matrix. Jeff Bridges is The Dude in a cybercostume. The rebel kid hacking computers seems like a copy of Terminator 2. At no time did I think to myself "this is something I had never seen in my life", as I did with Tron.

Furthermore, there's no story of any importance whatsoever behind all the CGI. The original TRON dealt with issues we face nowadays in any computer network (well, at least if you are a geek and work with computers). Tron Legacy doesn't even make any effort to predict the future, or to point out at any risks technology poses to people in the XXIst century. It's a completely disposable product, which is sort of enjoyable when you watch it, but can't bear to think about it afterwards. Because it really makes no sense and it doesn't make any important points.

I cannot believe Disney couldn't get someone - anyone - capable of writing a good script, hiring decent actors (Sam Flynn was TERRIBLE) and getting a director with at least a couple of good movies under his belt. The only reason why I give this movie a 7 is because, even though you've seen everything before, it does look great on the big screen. I especially liked CLU - I never noticed I was looking at CGI. Awesome technology.

I'm completely positive this sequel will go down in history as others, such as Blues Brothers 2000, the Star Wars prequels, and Matrix: Revolutions as one of the worst ever made. Sad. It had so much potential it's incredible they actually blew it.

Was the above review useful to you?

39 out of 64 people found the following review useful:

Thank God for Bruce Boxleitner.

Author: RamblerReb from United States
29 January 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I say this because he is the best part of this film. He is the only one who actually gives a performance worth watching and the only reason I gave it three stars instead of one.

Now for the rest of this godawful mess: The first film had an actually interesting and sustainable premise, namely, a formerly free system, steadily being corrupted by an increasingly bloated AI Master Control Program, with dual protagonists in the form of the fish-out-of-water Flynn and the heroic security program Tron. The film dabbles with theology, philosophy, and the nature of existence without ever becoming ham-fisted or preachy, and, while flawed, manages to tell a cracking good story in (for the time) ground-breaking style.

Legacy, on the other hand, manages to take that once-sturdy premise and twist it into some sort of muddled Hitler allegory, with no clear motivations for the heroes *or* villains, no clear explanations for exactly why Clu went bad, and, most of all, no clear explanation for just what the hell Clu thought he was gonna do in the real world. I mean, he did know the light cycles and light jets and stuff wouldn't work, right? He did realize that bullets would be perfectly capable of killing his solidified programs, right? He did know that his plan was the most *idiotic plan in the history of idiotic plans, right*?!!

Moving on to the extremely sloppy plotting, a sleazy chairman of the board and Ed Dillinger's son are introduced early in the film and never seen again. *Ed Freaking Dillinger*! Think about that for a minute. The son of the man whom Flynn presumably sent to prison at the end of the first film is introduced as working for the company of the man who sent his father to prison. He "fixes" something Flynn's son does as a (lame) prank, concocts a solution to the prank, and is *never freaking seen again*! This is only the first of many plot threads which are introduced and left unresolved in the finest Disney potboiler tradition.

I will not even get into the complete asspull represented by the "ISOs," whatever the hell they were, since I couldn't follow the gobbledy-gook Bridges was forced to spout in that scene. Let's just say that they're an anvilicious Jew analogy and leave it at that.

All of this complete mish-mash of utter crapola leads up to one of the worst, most anti-climactic endings in recent cinematic history. I took time out of the retching I was doing at Bridges' awful performance (one minute he's playing it straight, the next he's The Dude-- make up your mind and stick with one, willya?) to marvel at the sheer hateful lameness of this blatant sequel set-up.

There is so much more I could say about this waste of time, money, and opportunity, but I will end by saying that this film left my childhood memories like a Saturday night after Atilla the Hun hit town: raped and murdered.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 66:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history