Slashdot Mirror


Tron 3 Is Cancelled

Dave Knott writes: Tron 3 won't be coming to a theater near you. Disney had been developing a sequel to Tron:Legacy since the movie, made for $170 million, grossed $400 million worldwide. But now they have chosen not to move forward with a third installment in the sci-fi series, sources say. "Disney has had strong success with its live-action properties recently, including Maleficent and this year's Cinderella, which earned $527.4 million worldwide. But it recently had a stumble with the $180 million live-action film Tomorrowland, which underperformed at the box office this past weekend with a $33 million U.S. debut."

205 comments

  1. Of course it bombed by cheesybagel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Too much money wasted on big name actors and advertising. Ludicrous story. It goes on and on.

    I do think it is too early for another Tron sequel though. If they had made one one year after the last one it would have been ok but not now.

    1. Re:Of course it bombed by iluvcapra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With regard to Tron 3, it's not so important that Tron 2 bombed-- what really matters is Escape from Tomorrowland bombed, and Disney has decided if it's going to make fantasy films, it'd rather plow money into it's wholly-owned subsidiaries, Lucasfilm and Marvel.

      America, you will be getting all your science fiction and fantasy in Avengers form in Galactic Basic. This is a win if you like big scifi movies that make billions of dollars, it's a loss if you liked a little bit of diversity in your movies. Disney will now double down on sequels and reboots.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Of course it bombed by JBMcB · · Score: 3, Informative

      Big name actors like... George Clooney. And that's it. Hugh Laurie is the only other recognizable name and, while wildly talented, the last big live-action US movie he was in was Flight of the Phoenix.

      I don't think they blew the budget on actors.

      --
      My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    3. Re:Of course it bombed by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      The first line I wrote was about Tomorrowland. The second about Tron. I guess I wasn't explicit enough.

    4. Re:Of course it bombed by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      It also has a kid as the main actor. Puke.

    5. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neh, Pizar will still be allowed to do new things. Of course, they'll be expected to make sequels.

    6. Re:Of course it bombed by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Too much money wasted on big name actors and advertising. Ludicrous story. It goes on and on.

      The same could be said of Pirates of the Caribbean, right?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Too much money wasted on big name actors and advertising. Ludicrous story. It goes on and on.

      I do think it is too early for another Tron sequel though. If they had made one one year after the last one it would have been ok but not now.

      Oh man, you realise Disney is bound to make a star wars film every other year ? So I seriously don't think they cancelled Tron 3 because it would have come to fast as a sequel to Tron 2. There must be some other reason.

    8. Re:Of course it bombed by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      > Escape from Tomorrowland

      Escape from Tomorrowland != Tomorrowland w/ George Clooney

      The former was filmed on Disney property guerrilla-style.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    9. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But..but did you see the kid in The Secret Circle? It makes every man feel like dirty old man. "Daddy!" Of course, one cant ever go wrong with the former mermaid, Ms. Tonkin.

    10. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also has a kid as the main actor. Puke.

      Worse, it has a 25 year old woman playing a kid as the main actor. I don't understand why Hollywood won't cast teenagers to play teenagers.

    11. Re:Of course it bombed by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

      I saw Tomorrowland. It sucked. The plot made no sense, and most of the special effects were pointless (other than helping to keep the audience awake). The moralizing "everyone should feel guilty" ending was anti-climactic. I am happy to hear that it is bombing, and I regret seeing it.

    12. Re:Of course it bombed by SeaFox · · Score: 2

      >I do think it is too early for another Tron sequel though. If they had made one one year after the last one it would have been ok but not now.

      You think it's too early for another Tron sequel to occur, and suggest it should have happened at an earlier time instead?

    13. Re:Of course it bombed by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Informative

      I felt tomorrowland was kind of a crap sandwich.

      It had a confusing sucky start- a decent not terrible not awesome movie with some cool visuals in the middle- and the a stupid pointless tacked on kid's movie ending.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    14. Re:Of course it bombed by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Informative

      it's not so important that Tron 2 bombed

      From the summary Tron:Legacy grossed $400 million from $170 million - that's a success even by Hollywood "hide the profits to avoid royalty payments" maths. Walking away from a franchise where the last installment gave a greater than 100% return isn't sound fiscal sense, it's a straight-up chickenshit cop-out. This is why the Music and Movie industries need to die -- no risk takers too many assholes looking for a "sure thing" and will rehash the "sure things" right into the fucking ground till they have nothing left.

    15. Re:Of course it bombed by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't understand why Hollywood won't cast teenagers to play teenagers.

      There are numerous reasons. The look of adults will remain more consistent throughout the filming of a movie and between sequels (not to mention a TV series), while no amount of contractual obligation can stop a child actor from growing. I heard on a director's commentary of a film (can't remember which one) that said that they had problems reshooting parts of an earlier scene because the child had changed between the start and end of the movie; probably no so noticeably as you watch the film sequentially, but when it they intercut shots into the same scene then it could be obvious.

      Child actors also have limits on how long they can film and require schooling during the shoot. It's possible that trained actors are easier to direct and put in better performances, but that is just speculation and there are definitely examples of children doing some stunning work. Finally, teenagers can be right pricks sometimes (although so can some prima donna actors too).

    16. Re: Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are referring to the series based on a theme park ride that prints it's own cash?

    17. Re:Of course it bombed by westlake · · Score: 1

      This is a win if you like big scifi movies that make billions of dollars, it's a loss if you liked a little bit of diversity in your movies.

      Disney took a chance on Marvel properties as original, eccentric and obscure as Guardians of the Galaxy and Big Hero 6.

      It did rather well by Wreck-It Ralph.

      Which was rooted in character and story, not special effects.

    18. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's means it is.

    19. Re:Of course it bombed by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      America, you will be getting all your science fiction and fantasy in Avengers form in Galactic Basic. This is a win if you like big scifi movies that make billions of dollars, it's a loss if you liked a little bit of diversity in your movies. Disney will now double down on sequels and reboots.

      That's everyone, actually. Sci-Fi is hard, and original sci-fi even harder.

      It's so bad that the reason Hollywood avoids original stuff is because it usually does badly. Either it doesn't click, or other thing. Either way, original stuff is risky, and despite everyone's call for "More originals less sequels!", that is not translating into asses in seats. Which is the only factor that matters.

      Now, sometimes it's just bad (like Tomorrowland), but it's original. And it's probably Disney's attempt at trying something new to see if it works. Since it bombed, that just means more Avengers 3, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, and other stuff. Stuff original - that doesn't make money and is far more risky. Or in general, the people who request "original" films generally don't belong to the set of people who buy tickets.

      Even a rather decent movie like Edge of Tomorrow (rebranded as Live Die Repeat) failed to do "well" - which basically means the death of anything original.

      It's useless to call for more original films - Hollywood believes that the two groups (people who call for original films instead of sequels and rehashed plots. and movie goers) are two distinct sets.

    20. Re:Of course it bombed by Pubstar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, to counterpoint your Edge of Tomorrow - Pacific Rim did pretty damn good ($190mil budget, $441 Gross). That was en entirely new IP. Could just be that Edge of Tomorrow sucked... or people (like me) don't care to see Tom Cruise in movies because all I can think of is "That dude is a crazy scientologist".

    21. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pacific Rim did pretty damn good ... That was en entirely new IP

      Was it really?

    22. Re: Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fact: POTC was originally supposed to be a Monkey Island movie.

    23. Re:Of course it bombed by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Well "Edge of Tomorrow" is the Hollywoodized version of the JAPANESE light novel "All You Need Is Kill".

      Not that this makes it a bad movie though.

      It probably bombed because it had Cruise in it. Or they just couldn't get the message out. I dunno.

    24. Re:Of course it bombed by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      It's a matter of timing. The sequel came at a good time when there wasn't anything quite like it out. Now there's just too many sci-fi movies around.

    25. Re:Of course it bombed by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      I was actually quite enthusiastic about the movie. Remember all the early promos we saw of the movie, people even made their own light bikes and the like? The original Tron had a lot of fandom despite not doing so good on its original screening. The guys who worked on the movie exploited this brilliantly. Especially their promo on Comic-Con. They also made a movie that fans liked. You could also tell it was done by people who actually liked Tron.

    26. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tomorrowland was basically an AfterSchool Special. It's always painful when anyone tries to portray "The best and the brightest", or the idea of "building a new society" -- but this was particularly painful.

      The criteria for "best and brightest" seemed laughable, and the "Utopia" had already failed because... what happened? Oh right... Some rich, douchebag politician took it over.

      So after they *kill* him (nice, Disney) they repopulate with liberal, creative-types and no apparent legal structure, and attempt again. What could possibly go wrong?

    27. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      George Clooney's (childhood) character gets chosen for Tomorrowland because he invents a jetpack that doesn't work.

      It's kind of like Ali G's hoverboard... except it's not supposed to be ridiculous.

    28. Re:Of course it bombed by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Tron, Star Trek, Star Wars...
      These were from different times, rebooting and adding sequels wile makes money, hurts the brand over time.

      The charactors and plots become less relatable to newer generations.

      Let's take Star Wars, today we relate more with the empire then with the rebels. With terrorist following extremist versions religions, the idea of a small band of Rebels fighting a winning against an army is more scary from our current point of view. We are no longer worried about the Communists with big nations sucking up other ones. We have a new sets of issues where we need a new set of science fiction universes to explore.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    29. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Because remaking the same IP year after year is taking risks.
      Got it.

    30. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I turned 30 I finally realised I had grown up - I was too old to play a teenager in a film...

    31. Re:Of course it bombed by necronom426 · · Score: 2

      I don't see how Tron 2 bombed:
      "...made for $170 million, grossed $400 million..."

    32. Re:Of course it bombed by Hodr · · Score: 1

      I am fine with sequels and reboots. I have been waiting a long time to see what happens to Jasper et. all after the Gnome Mobile.

    33. Re:Of course it bombed by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually I loved Tomarrowland. The extreme left hate it and says it is full of Ayn Rand references and the extreme right says it supports the global climate change hoax that alone makes it worth watching for me. Anything that drives those two groups into a tizzy must be good.
      Actually it is a fun movie that is beautiful to look at and the story is pure fantasy. Of course it is hated by a lot of people because it actually attacks the current love of dark depressing "gritty" movies and frankly culture. It was also an ode to Walt Disney's dream of what EPCOT was supposed to be, his gift to mankind and not what it because a place to eat.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    34. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Historically, statistically, sequels released within 1 year of each other perform worse than expected, 100% of the time.

      Waiting longer than 1 year, say 2 years, gives a better yield, because it allows people to "forget" about it, and then get hyped up about the next movie. Also it prevents the feeling that "the previous movie JUST CAME OUT"

    35. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did it fail to do "well"? According to Wikipedia...

      Budget $178 million[3]
      Box office $369.2 million[3]

    36. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, nothing screams intelligence like blindly following traditions and "adages".

    37. Re:Of course it bombed by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      At some point, everything was original. Well, not really 100% "original", but at least the first of its series / variation-on-the-theme. Without taking a chance now and then, there's nothing worth sequel-izing.

    38. Re:Of course it bombed by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I can understand Disney's need to make more and more money; especially in an economy that has embraced Tickle Down Theory. What I find comedic is that the villainous behaviors found in the Tron movies are in parallel with the Disney's business models.

    39. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please point out where in l0ungeb0y's post such a claim was made.

    40. Re:Of course it bombed by TaliesinWI · · Score: 2

      From the summary Tron:Legacy grossed $400 million from $170 million - that's a success even by Hollywood "hide the profits to avoid royalty payments" maths.

      Eh, it's closer than that. Studios see 50-55% of the domestic box office and anywhere between 15-50% of the foreign box office (depending on how much of a cut the distributor in a particular country takes.)

      Tron 2 did $172 mil domestically (so figure the studio got $86-$95 mil) and $228 mil internationally (so that take isn't going to be any higher than $114 mil MAX, and probably a lot lower.) So that's $209 million at the very top end, against a production budget of $170 mil. If that $170 mil includes marketing costs (everyone reports that differently) then you're looking at anything from a mild profit to a mild loss overall. If you figure an additional $10-20 million was spent on marketing, we're a lot closer to "losing money no matter what" territory. Yes DVD sales will help them profit in the long run, but a success or failure is generally measured at the box office.

      I can see them doing this - there's no indication that Tron 3 would make _more_ money than Tron 2 did at the box office, and it could very well make less. They've weathered the nuclear bombs of John Carter, The Lone Ranger, and now Tomorrowland all in the past couple of years - it makes sense that they're going to stick with franchises where they can print money.

    41. Re:Of course it bombed by Piata · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But that's where you're wrong. Edge of Tomorrow is fantastic and if you don't like Tom Cruise you get to watch a cowardly version of him be shot, burned, sliced, crushed, ran over and die in more ways than I can remember for the first 2/3rds of the film. The problem with Edge of Tomorrow was the marketing. They never really got across what kind of movie it was or why it was worth watching. They also should have kept the original name (All You Need Is Kill). The exo skeletons may have also been a hard sell as they just appear cubersome and awkward.

    42. Re:Of course it bombed by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      Its the stupid reboots that is hurting the movies. I don't want to pay to see how Spiderman got his powers...again, Ive been reading the comics forever.I know it by heart. They should take a clue from James Bond a new actor just jumps right in. That's how is should be IMO.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    43. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Live action and animation are two separate departments. Animation knows WTF it's doing, live action not so much.

    44. Re:Of course it bombed by Migraineman · · Score: 1

      Well there's your problem - marketing a Fantasy film as Sci-Fi. You'll annoy the Sci-Fi folks, who will openly pan the movie, and the Fantasy folks won't attend because they don't do Sci-Fi.

    45. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the reason's aren't actually financial. I mean. How old are the two left over actors from the first one?

    46. Re:Of course it bombed by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      huhhh?
      Star Wars is pure fantasy.
      Sorry but the majority of people think sci-fi = shiny space ships and fantasy = elves and knights.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    47. Re:Of course it bombed by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      You are going to have a rough time with current demographic trends plus the entire "republican party leadership seems to all be bisexual or gay" explosion taking place right now. Seriously- the republican party is starting to look like the catholic church.

      Currently, conservative voters are dying over 1 million per year faster than replacement. It's a shift of almost 3 million votes for the 2016 elections.

      liberals can be softheaded- but conservatives can be short sighted. Unchecked conservatism often leads to bloody revolution.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    48. Re:Of course it bombed by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Because remaking the same IP year after year is taking risks.

      That's the sad part. Compared to what Hollywood typically does, making Tron 3 is a risk even though it's basically printing money. They could split the soundtrack between two artists (give one of them the bad guys and the other one the good guys and make it a vs.) and a big portion of the fans of both would show up...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    49. Re:Of course it bombed by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Star Wars is pure fantasy.

      I would argue that Star Wars is scifi, commonly pronounced "skiffy" amongst the nerdiest of nerds, because it attempts to have scientific explanations for things — but they are crap.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    50. Re:Of course it bombed by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Of course the poor box-office of Tomorrowland is one data point, which the superstitious oracles at Disney have taken as an omen that any film which has certain factors in common with it will also fail.... rather than an indication that maybe this movie was specifically not very good, or not properly marketed.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    51. Re:Of course it bombed by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      but the uber nerds are a small % of the people that go to movies. For instance I objected to Gravity being called SciFi because it was no more SciFi the the Poseidon Adventure was. Space stations and orbital space stations are real.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    52. Re:Of course it bombed by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      I am waiting for the Goonies reboot with today's helicopter parents...

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    53. Re:Of course it bombed by StatureOfLiberty · · Score: 1

      Calling it Troff was the right thing to do.

    54. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Opportunity cost (if they could have invested the money otherwise and made greater profit)...

    55. Re:Of course it bombed by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      This is why the Music and Movie industries need to die -- no risk takers too many assholes looking for a "sure thing" and will rehash the "sure things" right into the fucking ground till they have nothing left.

      I suppose the alternative is better, where Netflix and Google front-run your concept and actor preferences within a millimeter of their mathematical certainty, and then regurgitate that back at you, until they run it into the ground etc. etc.

      I don't know, most feature films are original or original adaptations, you just don't hear about them because they get narrow releases or debut on VOD. Go to Apple trailers sometime and count the number of original films versus the number of sequels, you'll find the former easily outnumber the latter.

      Don't pin the crimes "studios" or Disney executives (and they're by far the worst offenders) on the "industry."

      From the summary Tron:Legacy grossed $400 million from $170 million - that's a success even by Hollywood "hide the profits to avoid royalty payments" maths.

      Profits are not used to compute royalties. Royalties are not dividends.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    56. Re:Of course it bombed by westlake · · Score: 1

      Live action and animation are two separate departments. Animation knows WTF it's doing, live action not so much.

      The distinction between live action and animation has been blurred for decades.

      Tron is the primal example. Rocket Raccoon is a fully realized character in Guardians of the Galaxy and not the comic relief or the blink-and-you'll miss it Easter Egg cameo of Howard The Duck.

    57. Re:Of course it bombed by TechnoJoe · · Score: 0

      I do think it is too early for another Tron sequel though. [emphasis mine]

      In one billion years, the Sun will swell up to a Red Dwarf that incinerates the Earth, and it will still be too early for another Tron sequel.

    58. Re:Of course it bombed by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      Let's take Star Wars, today we relate more with the empire then with the rebels.

      Um... what?? Star Wars is pretty plainly about good vs evil. The empire is evil. They blow up entire (peaceful!) planets to control the population through fear. That's not exactly a bunch of subtle shades of grey, is it? In fact it's the very definition of terrorism (an act of violence, against non-combatants, explicitly intended to create fear for political purposes).

      I identify more with the fight against "the evil empire" now more than ever.

      So please, speak for yourself, and not how everyone else "relates". If you relate more to a totalitarian dictatorship that murders billions of innocents, you have some serious fucking issues, and please don't speak for the rest of us.

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    59. Re:Of course it bombed by superdave80 · · Score: 1

      "Currently, conservative voters are dying over 1 million per year faster than replacement. It's a shift of almost 3 million votes for the 2016 elections." The election is 1-1/2 years away. At 1 mil/year, wouldn't that be 1.5 mil, not 3 mil?

    60. Re:Of course it bombed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could some people have been put off by a title that suggests promotion of the theme park?

      It may just be a particular edge-of-the-oil-slick ABC affiliate, but I find it offensive to see them touting films so much, mostly Disney films, when they should be doing news. When officials have a news conference explaining what's up with the oil spill, the tv folks from where it happened use it as a backdrop to ramble, neither carrying it live nor asking questions. There seems to be a thicker propaganda spin coming from them too.

      I'm put off by many of the shows on ABC. Disney ownership may have been good for profits, but I must not be getting enough drugs in the water supply to appreciate the scripted shows. But in fairness, modern U.S. commercial tv has so many ad minutes that it is hard to imagine many shows being able to have strong appeal. Does shallower violent, objectifying, materialistic tv degrade the audience? Over years, it seems so.

      The greedy corporation image isn't helped by their ALEC activities either, pushing for more H1B visas while laying off IT people, nor by bringing in a different flavor of musicians for the park. And they're behind all that 70 plus years rights business and SPOA-like stuff in the back-room deals of the TPP. Who wants to deal with companies that seem like growing evil? We can still vote with our wallets.

      When the best things a company offers are either from the past, or from some other company they swallowed up, maybe they are too big and are rotting at the core. Let's see more competing available outside-the-megacorp-distributed productions, and how about someone opening a couple of non-chain theme parks? Bring back Pacific Ocean Park. And something that inspires learning and science in people.

    61. Re:Of course it bombed by Pubstar · · Score: 2

      So what you're saying is the selling point should have been "We know you think Tom Cruise is crazy... watch him die in hundreds of ways in this great film!" Humm... Maybe I will have to go see it.

    62. Re:Of course it bombed by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      News flash: people don't want to be preached at by liberals who have a 3rd grade level understanding of the world

      I'll note that Tomorrowland was directed and partially written by Brad Brad, whose previous movies (the Incredibles and Ratatouille) were known for philosophy that sometimes branched into Ayn Randian Objectivism.

      Then again, I blame Damon Lindelof (screenwriter). It has his usual hallmark of interesting beginning, poor payoff.

    63. Re:Of course it bombed by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Compared to the 2012 elections. The rate started lower but it's been accelerating. You can find the details with google.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    64. Re:Of course it bombed by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      Tomorrowland was directed and partially written by Brad Brad, whose previous movies (the Incredibles and Ratatouille) were known for philosophy that sometimes branched into Ayn Randian Objectivism

      I don't think so. Both the Incredibles and Ratatouille had elements of humour, which is something entirely alien to Randroids.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    65. Re:Of course it bombed by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Well, to counterpoint your Edge of Tomorrow - Pacific Rim did pretty damn good ($190mil budget, $441 Gross). That was en entirely new IP. Could just be that Edge of Tomorrow sucked... or people (like me) don't care to see Tom Cruise in movies because all I can think of is "That dude is a crazy scientologist".

      If you refused to watch films based on the actors' beliefs, you'd pretty soon run out of things to see. John Travolta is undoubtedly a twat in real life, but that doesn't stop me enjoying Pulp Fiction.

      And it's not just scientology, there are a whole bunch of actors who believe in new age, pseudo-mystical self-improvement crap, not to mention imperialists, neo-fascists and vegans.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    66. Re:Of course it bombed by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Of course the poor box-office of Tomorrowland is one data point, which the superstitious oracles at Disney have taken as an omen that any film which has certain factors in common with it will also fail.... rather than an indication that maybe this movie was specifically not very good, or not properly marketed.

      Studio movies pay for each other. If one movie bombs, you may have to pull back from some others and be a little more choosy.

      But this is hardly the first Disney live-action bomb in recent memory. The incredibly expensive Lone Ranger last year, and John Carter before that.

    67. Re:Of course it bombed by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Worse, it has a 25 year old woman playing a kid as the main actor. I don't understand why Hollywood won't cast teenagers to play teenagers.

      A number of reasons, child labor laws being one of them.
      It's why twins are so popular in sitcoms. You can get two actors to convincingly play a young character while not exceeding the number of hours you're allowed to shoot with a young actor.

      There are a lot of other reasons as well, and TV Tropes's Dawson Casting

      gives a pretty good breakdown of why this happens.

    68. Re:Of course it bombed by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      100% of the time?

      Back to the Future Part 3 did fine.

      The Two Towers and Return of the King did fine.
      The various Harry Potter movies did just fine.

  2. Yeah sure by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2, Funny

    Tron was a great sequel and I've heard good things about Tomorrowland, but they'd rather make things like princess movies. They're Disney, after all.

    When can we expect yet another cute puppy-centered live movie?

    1. Re:Yeah sure by captjc · · Score: 5, Informative

      You do realize that Disney is one of the largest multimedia conglomerates in the world, right? While the word Disney gives rise to images of cartoon princesses they also own ABC, Marvel, and the Lucasfilm properties, among many other things.

      To say they only make princess movies is like saying Kraft only makes crappy cheese products or Pepsi only makes cola.

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    2. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      F'n princess movies, like that damn Star Wars flick.

    3. Re:Yeah sure by russotto · · Score: 2

      F'n princess movies, like that damn Star Wars flick.

      PRINCESS Leia, PRINCESS Amidala...

    4. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You do realize that Disney is one of the largest multimedia conglomerates in the world, right? While the word Disney gives rise to images of cartoon princesses they also own ABC, Marvel, and the Lucasfilm properties, among many other things.

      To say they only make princess movies is like saying Kraft only makes crappy cheese products or Pepsi only makes cola.

      Disney makes only one thing : homogenised culture to be consumed around the world.
      It's the McDonalds of films. Insipid to the very core.

    5. Re:Yeah sure by bigfinger76 · · Score: 1

      Touche, King Whoosh.

    6. Re:Yeah sure by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      to be fair, there's a 50/50 chance that star wars VII could be pretty good...

    7. Re:Yeah sure by Brulath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Disney makes only one thing : homogenised culture to be consumed around the world. It's the McDonalds of films. Insipid to the very core.

      Remarkably, not everyone on this planet wants to spend all of their movie-viewing time on art-house pieces with complicated themes; sometimes you just want to be exposed to a universe that hadn't existed previously in your imagination, whether it's a reworking of an old story or not. Same as a good chunk of the population doesn't mind some McDonalds every now and then; sometimes you just want a cheap burger.

    8. Re:Yeah sure by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2

      That's like calling Casper a Ghostbusters movie because Akroyd had cameo.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    9. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't invalidate my point. Disney makes uncontroversial homogenised movies.
      I go once every couple of months to Mcdonalds, but I'm under now illusion that what I'm eating there is actually any good.

    10. Re:Yeah sure by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 1

      Disney makes only one thing : homogenised culture to be consumed around the world.
      It's the McDonalds of films. Insipid to the very core.

      And no one is sticking a pistol to your head forcing you to eat at McDonalds or watch Disney films. Like Devo says:

      "Freedom of choice
      Is what you got
      Freedom from choice
      Is what you want"

      --
      "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    11. Re: Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's QUEEN Amidala, peon.

    12. Re:Yeah sure by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      PRINCESS Leia, PRINCESS Amidala...

      You forgot Princess Jar-Jar.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    13. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a problem with this analogy though.

      When you go to McDonalds you know you will pay less for a meal, and the meal is satisfying in the frame of that value. Movies however, regardless of the craft, intended audience, and intellectual qualities all have the same price.

      There is no ticketing structure that would allow you to say "Yeah I don't expect much from Tomorrow land, so a 5 dollar ticket is appropriate". Other than to use your "voting power" to only watch said movie through Red Box or Netflix or any other rental/streaming option. This is inherently flawed since movie producers use ticket sales as a means to track what kind of content they should generate. A high-class movie experience has nothing to do with the product being consumed (the flickering image on the screen) and is instead sold as a value of the venue.

      If we could somehow convince executives that instead this kind of variable ticketing for value in content could exist, we might be able to broaden the general scope of movies. Honestly "streaming" seems the only way to create this model, since breaking from the existing model with all of its set ways in a brick & mortar box office sense is unlikely.

    14. Re:Yeah sure by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      a 50/50 chance that star wars VII could be pretty good...

      For some extremely generous value of "pretty good" that can coexist in a context that contains JJ Abrams, maybe.

    15. Re:Yeah sure by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      if it's a mix of star trek, mission impossible III and alias then we're in good shape.

    16. Re:Yeah sure by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I think I just had a stroke...

      I'm pretty sure that about the only thing he won't fuck-up about SW is turning it into the same "teenagers in space kaboom" that he made ST into, because he can't - that's what it was from the word "go".

    17. Re:Yeah sure by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      To be fair, the biggest complaint against the Star Trek movie was that they turned it into a rip off of Star Wars. But it was a great rip off!

    18. Re:Yeah sure by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      >Remarkably, not everyone on this planet wants to spend all of their movie-viewing time on art-house pieces with complicated themes

      You make it sound as though you have a movie-viewing quota that you have to fill.

      Crap music or TV in the background is one thing, but if you're paying to watch a movie choose a decent one. And if there aren't any around, read a book or something.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    19. Re:Yeah sure by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      When you go to McDonalds you know you will pay less for a meal

      Apart from the minuscule children's meals, I've always found McDonalds to be relatively expensive, since you need to have two or three burgers to feel reasonably satisfied. Their food appears to be mostly air and sugar to me.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    20. Re:Yeah sure by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      no one is sticking a pistol to your head forcing you to eat at McDonalds or watch Disney films

      You obviously don't have children.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    21. Re:Yeah sure by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      The most common complaint I heard was that, despite sharing some common proper nouns, it wasn't Star Trek. After seeing it, I see the point. It was like Galaxy Quest Jr, but without the self-awareness that it was a low-content parody.

  3. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let Flynn and Quora ride off into the sunrise, and let it be OVER. Stories end. How about you come up with new ones?

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because there are also commercial realities to contend with.

      Anyone can think of ideas. Anyone can come up with stories. Not everyone can fund their movie projects. The same applies to music, games, and many other forms of art and entertainment. When the scale of your ideas needs hundreds of millions of dollars of funding to achieve that's a big risk. Entertainment (and marketing) at this scale demands an audience to survive. You might then think why bother? They are companies operating for shareholders to make a profit, not donate public-domain art. If you think that a company like Disney doesn't have a list of ideas of their own and ones that are submitted to them that wouldn't stretch to the moon and back you're dreaming.

      Ask nearly anyone working at a games company about ideas and they probably have all sorts of aspirations of making their own games based on their stories and ideas. What are they working on? Someone else's ideas with someone else's funding. Ideas are simply not the problem. Economic realities are.

      But you probably know this.

    2. Re:Good by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of opportunities for original stories in the Tron setting. The short lived CG cartoon series was actually quite interesting, for example. It's a compelling world and I'd like to see more stories set there.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  4. this sucks by Limitless_Potential · · Score: 3, Funny

    guess I'll just have to wait another 30 odd years for another one

    1. Re:this sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because this one was really worth the 30 year wait.

    2. Re:this sucks by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Funny

      guess I'll just have to wait another 30 odd years for another one

      That will be an exciting movie. Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner will be in their mid nineties. They can do battle with the MCP pushing around their "light-walkers" and tell the younger cast how their identity disks were the size of a Frisbee instead of these new dime sized ones.

      The entire plot will end up being them trying to get their stolen identity disk back from the evil megabit or something. But then they discover that they accidentally used it in a soda machine by mistake. Everyone will get a good laugh out of it. Then when they return to the real world, it'll be completely destroyed because of a decompression error that will cause their oxygen tanks to explode upon materialization.

    3. Re: this sucks by MTEK · · Score: 2

      ^^^spoiler alert

    4. Re:this sucks by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Work it up. We shoot on Tuesday.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    5. Re:this sucks by phorm · · Score: 1

      Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner will be in their mid nineties

      Or dead, which will be even better for the studios which by then will probably just be using CGI representations of their younger selves for a small licensing fee from the estate...

  5. All four people who watched Tron 2 by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    will be highly upset.

  6. Nooooo! Not Tron 3! by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wait... there was a Tron 2?

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re: Nooooo! Not Tron 3! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. There was this Legacy movie, but calling that a sequel to Tron is like saying Takedown is a sequel to Hackers.

    2. Re:Nooooo! Not Tron 3! by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Wait... there was a Tron 2?

      Yup. It was better than Tron 1.

      Tron 1 was a product of its time; that is, it was way ahead of its time. Unfortunately, that's all it really has going for it. Plot was ok, acting was pretty bad throughout (except for Jeff Bridges. He -carried- the movie). Soundtrack was terrible, effects were decent in some ways, poor in others. Even at the time, I would say it was a mistake to rotoscope light into the costumes in post.

      Unless you have super-nostalgic-blinders, Tron 1 was visionary, but like many other 'visionary' movies, it wasn't great on its own merits.

    3. Re:Nooooo! Not Tron 3! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tron wasn't a great film by any means, but it was unique. Despite the hackneyed plot, it really tapped into the 'zeitgeist' of the video game scene in the early '80s.

      I think the biggest problem with the sequel was that it took itself too seriously. The target audience here is 12-15 year-old boys, so they should have set their sights appropriately.

      I wish Hollywood would come up with a more interesting adventure plot than "bad guy seeks to take over the world, lone wolf has to stop him."

  7. Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

    I got it for two bucks at my local Grocery Outlet :p

    I thought it was an excellent music video, with some slow parts.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      found one...

    2. Re:Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by mysidia · · Score: 2

      Seeing as Tron: Legacy grossed $400 million and was considered a success, as 11th highest grossing film in 2010, then I would say more than "four people" watched Tron 2.

    3. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It made $400 million world wide, but only $170 million domestically, and wasn't super frontloaded. It had a budget of $180 million and that was before marketing. It probably still made money, but studios get less of a cut from foreign grosses, and less from non-frontloaded releases. The movie also scored poorly with critics and had a middling audience rating, which means another sequel will likely perform significantly worse. The director, Kosinki, dissapointed with Oblivion as well. It would be a bad business move on Disney's part now to give him another $180 for a movie.

    4. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 2

      Uhhh... repeat after me:

      Professional critics = shit;

      Paying public opinion = Is all that matters;

      North-american public = only likes "amerikacentric" films with many bimbos and car explosions sequences (with few exceptions), so do not take their opinion too seriously;

      And finnaly world wide public = paying public too, so they are as important (or more) as north-american public. And note that the global audience is much more numerous and diverse than the north-american public.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    5. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      North-american public = only likes "amerikacentric" films with many bimbos and car explosions sequences

      yes please!

    6. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by N1AK · · Score: 1

      And finnaly world wide public = paying public too, so they are as important (or more) as north-american public. And note that the global audience is much more numerous and diverse than the north-american public.

      No they aren't. Film studios care more about markets that make them money (or may in future make them more money), not about markets which have larger populations and which are more diverse.

      If a studio can keep 90% of ticket sales of a new release in the US but only gets to keep 50% of the much smaller number of ticket sales for a new release in Hungary then they clearly are going to give less of a toss about the Hungarian market.

    7. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      And why not? The north-american population is currently 321 million, more or less. The world population is 7 billion . Even if you sell tickets globally to 10% of the North American ticket, you still will earn more money. And moreover the global audience is more diverse, and therefore is more open to unusual films than the north-americans. So you are not obligated to do "amerikacentric" movies in order to succeed. For a recent example, see the "Chappie" film.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    8. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also plainly ignores the history of non-Americans consuming US media because of its "amerikacentric" qualities. There's a reason Tokyo and Paris have a Disneyland with the same American characters.

      And they also forget that Americans have a greater amount of disposable income than most of these markets, and despite what you may read on demonoid they tend to buy more media than pirate, and are willing to re-buy in multiple formats.

      China may be a good up and coming market for theatrical releases, but I bet they are much less likely to buy a movie on DVD, then Blu-Ray, then buy the digital version, and of course re-buy a version they are allowed to put on their portable device.

    9. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so Hollywood should take on Bollywood as they have a bigger market then all of North America?

    10. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Well... How I will even argue with you, if your very way of thinking is amerikacentric? You sound as if the only thing that matter in the world was the USA and the rest of the planet was shit, completely ignoring what I said about numbers (Tron is not the only movie to get more money globally than on USA). The world is a little bigger than you think.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    11. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by N1AK · · Score: 1

      And moreover the global audience is more diverse, and therefore is more open to unusual films than the north-americans.

      So. Fucking. What. I don't care if Sub-Saharan Africans are more willing to accept novel supercar designs if they can't afford to buy them. There's a pretty huge open and diverse audience within the US as well, from the Americans I know, but if that isn't where the studio thinks the big money is then they don't focus most of their effort on it.

    12. Re: Hey, it's the only Blu-Ray I own by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Uh... What part of "USA is not the center of the universe" you did not understand? Do you think that only north-americans can afford to buy things and therefore only they matter? I know that the studios focus on making films to please only the north-americans, but that in any way mean that they're right.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  8. One line review... by wheeda · · Score: 1

    I just watched the movie. It was preachy and moralizing. Other than that, it had more plot holes that San Andreas.

    1. Re:One line review... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, but what did you think about Tomorrowland?

    2. Re:One line review... by wheeda · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I meant that to be about Tomorrowland, but in hindsight the review works equally well for both movies. Tomorrowland was better than San Andreas in my opinion. Part way through San Andreas I started wishing it was over. I hope the copter pilot got fired for abandoning his post during a disaster.

    3. Re:One line review... by rwa2 · · Score: 1

      Aw, crap, you half had me hoping San Andreas might have been a GTA movie like Crank.

      Oh well, I guess I can appreciate the humor in an earthquake movie starring The Rock.

    4. Re:One line review... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      It was preachy and moralizing

      Translation: I disagreed with its politics.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    5. Re:One line review... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      While the whole time Tomorrowland was happening, I was hoping for the payoff. The payoff that would make it all worth it.
      Nada.

  9. so this might mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tron gets reworked into a Once Upon a Time plot. gratuitous cleavage costumes and all

  10. Dammit, Clooney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quit f'ng up franchises that don't belong to you!

  11. There was a TRON 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That says it I guess. I really didn't know.

    1. Re:There was a TRON 2? by Livius · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe there'll be a TRON III - The Search for TRON 2.

      I might actually go see that.

    2. Re:There was a TRON 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It probably just didn't register for you - the latest film was a sequel, not a reboot. Nobody really understood why they wanted to make another tron movie in the first place, nor why they cribbed the plot and villain design from Santa Clause 2's B-story.

  12. Tron Legacy was awesome at IMAX in 3D! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tron 2 was one of the best, if not the best 3D movie I've seen. In an IMAX cinema, it ruled.

  13. The Trailer Was Astoundingly Awful by Nova+Express · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I have to agree with this decision, since the trailer they did release looked amazingly bad and amateurish. They leads don't seem to be good actors, have no charisma and no chemistry, what little dialog seemed uninteresting and full of cliches, and the scenes seemed badly done.

    I watched this with a friend, and at the end she went "Wait, that was a real trailer? I thought it was some sort of ad!"

    If that was what the film was going to be like, then best it's dead.

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

    1. Re:The Trailer Was Astoundingly Awful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhhh that couldn't possibly be a real trailer for it - looks like some terrible fan film. I'm not sure if you've seen many movies, but huge budget Disney films like Tron would never use terrible cameras like that and have such terrible audio recording.

    2. Re:The Trailer Was Astoundingly Awful by pr0t0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It looks amateurish because it was made by amateurs. It's a fan-made trailer. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt40...

      --
      I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
    3. Re:The Trailer Was Astoundingly Awful by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      at the end she went "Wait, that was a real trailer? I thought it was some sort of ad!"

      Context is everything.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:The Trailer Was Astoundingly Awful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Trailers are ads. For movies.

    5. Re:The Trailer Was Astoundingly Awful by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Filming was originally supposed to start in October 2015, so it would be impossible to have a trailer that contained scenes from the movie.

  14. Is it all about the Chinese box office these days? by jphamlore · · Score: 2

    Here's another movie that was said to be a disappointment in its first weekend US domestic box office and that never reached number one in that market. But it did fine overall, helped considerably I suspect because it managed $121+ million USD in China. What is also interesting is this movie actually removed all references to China's space program between the rewrites of its script, and at least in the version shown in the US, had multiple displays of the US flag on the astronauts' space suits, and even showed in the final scene a US flag flying over the new settlement's base camp.

  15. The Tron 2.0 game was the real sequel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That game got Tron much better than the 2nd movie did.

    Having the "grid" be this walled garden didnt explore how the whole world is interconnected now. It was a terribly missed opportunity.

    1. Re:The Tron 2.0 game was the real sequel by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      That game got Tron much better than the 2nd movie did. Having the "grid" be this walled garden didnt explore how the whole world is interconnected now. It was a terribly missed opportunity.

      To add insult to injury, the game is a Disney property. Disney owns the plot of Tron 2.0 that they ignored in favor of flavorless eye candy.
      *SPOILERS*
      *
      *
      *
      The game's plot includes features like the internet, making the Recognizers into network packets (train cars) for some nice nostalgia, bits*, trying to survive in a PDA with limited RAM, email scripts being corrupted into virus spewing zombies, and an evil mega-corp planning to use the digitization tech to digitize their own paramilitary operatives into the grid so that they can literally brute force attack their enemies' computers from the inside.

      *to me, the biggest example that the TRON Legacy writers were not TRON fans is that CLU2's yes-man wasn't a bit. A bit that just says yes, reluctantly says no, is destroyed, and another bit takes it place to say "yes" would satisfy nostalgia, show us CLU2's personality, and provide a little color to an otherwise bland movie.

  16. Tron is now reality by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    the target demo doesn't pay to watch reality.

  17. It's Disney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...destroyer of culture and creator of consumer culture. This news makes no difference, I for one will never give money (knowingly) to anything financially connected to Disney. Disney deserves to burn.

  18. Properties by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Yes, movies are now called properties, and people who watch them are inventory for the demand-side (advertisers). Welcome to dystopia.

    I understand that there are reasons in the advertising world to use terms like 'inventory' to mean people, but can we keep that out of the real world, please?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Properties by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Yes, movies are now called properties, and people who watch them are inventory for the demand-side (advertisers). Welcome to dystopia.

      I don't go to movies any more, Since they're almost all sequels or reboots - I've seen them all already.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:Properties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, movies are now called properties, and people who watch them are inventory for the demand-side (advertisers). Welcome to dystopia.

      I don't go to movies any more, Since they're almost all sequels or reboots - I've seen them all already.

      +1000

      How many fucking times can you do an origin story anyways ? After that it all goes downhill pretty fast.

  19. Tron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1 was funny and nifty back in the day. 2 was pretentious, dull, half baked.

  20. Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by RubberDogBone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was another Tron mostly nobody saw, an animated series called Tron: Uprising which ran on various Disney cable networks.

    It was.. excellent. Beautiful art, great music (improved versions of Daft Punk plus new stuff), really good casting and decent writing and plotting. All in all, one of the best animated anything that the American animation industry has yet produced. It was rather similar to an anime. Nobody would have been surprised if it had in fact come from Japan, but it didn't: it was Disney.

    And of course a show like this made no sense to Disney so they killed it after one season. Boom.

    Highly recommended viewing. Only 19 episodes so go for broke and watch them all at once. It will probably make you sad this was the last Tron, perhaps forever.

    --
    Sig for hire.
    1. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by firex726 · · Score: 2

      Yea, I have been rewatching uprising in light of this news. If they had let it keep going it likely could have been a another hit animated show on par with Avatar.

      Seems it had everything going against it. From the cost, to the demographic, to corporate wanting things to remain "kid" friendly. FFS you had Tron being tortured and being left with life altering disfigurements, makes for great storytelling but five year olds and the advertisers are not going to be interested in "PTSD Mutilated Tron Action Figures".

    2. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      All they had to do was re-run Tron Uprising after Star Wars Rebels, and they would have had two hits on their hands. What a programming block that would be. Introduce the SW audience to how good Uprising is, and the Tron franchise would have a chance to become more valuable. Someone at Disney hates Tron. Uprising is the best animated show to come out of the USA in... I can't remember a stronger show with such stunning design, voice actors etc. To think the fate of Tron as a franchise is somehow tied to the success of Tomorrow Land is just the type of logic I would have expected of Disney before they began to understand the goldmine of franchises like SW and Marvel. Maybe after the next regime change at Disney, Tron will get another chance, but I won't hold my breath.

    3. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by Pubstar · · Score: 1

      Star Wars: The Clone Wars series was amazing as well. Probably wont be seeing any more of those now...

    4. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

      I totally agree! If people like TRON and want a deeper exploration of that universe, they need to check it out ASAP. T:U was far more of an anime than a cartoon, people should watch it.

    5. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by antdude · · Score: 1

      I wasn't impresed with its pilot episode. Did it get better? Did it have a good finale even though it got the axe?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    6. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by rsmith-mac · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'd say it got better. As for the finale, it was a soft cliffhanger, so not everything is resolved but it doesn't end on a bad place.

    7. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 1

      Plus all the "blowing program to little bits" thing. Man this show was awesome.

    8. Re:Not surprising after Tron: Uprising was gutted by antdude · · Score: 1

      Thanks. :)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  21. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1


    # sudo ps -ef | grep tron | grep -v grep | awk '{print $1}' | xargs kill -9

    1. Re: Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or
      pkill -9 tron

  22. Re:Is it all about the Chinese box office these da by firex726 · · Score: 1

    Well also consider they only get like 1/4 of that money from China; and unless they want their movie to count against the foreign import quota they need to hire a Chinese production team to add in Chinese actors.

  23. Oh well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I liked Tron: Legacy but I don't think a 3rd movie ads value. I saw the preview for Tron 3 and the script looked shitty.

    IE. Nobody wants to see Tron costumes LARPing in the real world. If I want to see girls wearing(non-revealing) EL wire catsuits in real life I'll go to DEF CON 23.

  24. Party line... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All Obama's fault.

  25. Tomorrowland is excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saw it Saturday, loved it, but I think it did badly because its a positive movie and that doesn't work in sci-fi. This idea of a future that could be positive is the opposite of what people who watch science fiction expect.

    How many sci-fi movies contain the word "dystopian" in their description!?
    Now compare that to how many contain the word 'uptopian'!

    So the audience that want to see positive things, is not the sci-fi audience, its more the cartoon audience.

    1. Re: Tomorrowland is excellent by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      No, it bombed because there was very little Tomorrowland in Tomorrowland. The entire screentime TL gets is what, maybe 15 minutes? Simply put, the trailers were completely at odds with what the film actually does.

    2. Re: Tomorrowland is excellent by meerling · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Don't forget that Avengers:Age of Ultron is still in theaters, and Mad Max opened the same time. Too much known competition for an unknown property unless it's something that will totally blow peoples minds, which are exceedingly rare.

    3. Re: Tomorrowland is excellent by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      Or the less then 10 minutes screen time in a 2:10 minute movie the last Godzilla got. Hell The mutos got more screen time??lol

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    4. Re: Tomorrowland is excellent by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      And the Kids are still in school, at least here they are.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    5. Re: Tomorrowland is excellent by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      No, it bombed because there was very little Tomorrowland in Tomorrowland. The entire screentime TL gets is what, maybe 15 minutes? Simply put, the trailers were completely at odds with what the film actually does.

      The only two good sequences in the movie (The Tomorrowland pin "commercial" and the home invasion at Clooney's house) are in two trailers. Everything else is seriously, seriously flawed.

    6. Re: Tomorrowland is excellent by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      That may be a case, but Godzilla had just about the right amount of total monster smash. Monsters smashing things over and over for hours on end... not interesting. You need a lot more than that.

    7. Re: Tomorrowland is excellent by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      I disagree. reason? Godzilla is the star of the movie. And the 10 minutes was more then the actual amount of screen time. It was a total ripoff. the only thing making it worth while was they did a great job recreating him this time, the last Godzilla movie was a joke as well, just an over grown T-rex.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
  26. Tron Sequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't need a Tron 3, 4, or 5.
    We didn't need a Pirates 4 or 5 either.

  27. I have zero interest in Marvel. Or Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd rather watch my old Brainstorm DVD over and over until my eyes bleed than give another dollar to the mouse. They can suck it.

  28. Preachy and Moralizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps, or maybe it was a bold move to address the consequent ethical and philosophical questions implied by the first film and in a way accessible to a younger audience. Grown geeks (and I count myself in that number) were a built-in audience for the nostalgia value. Tron: Legacy was not just an attempt to get those dollars but to re-boot the franchise with a younger audience. While I rather enjoyed it despite being flawed, I do tend to agree with the earlier statement that the timing was off and the third may be just too late to market (to achieve the goals of re-booting).

  29. Because of Tomorrow land? by Karmashock · · Score: 2

    ... Sigh. Read the synopsis of Tomorrow land and you'll see that whomever greenlit it was tripping balls when they okayed that project.

    Terrible. That was Batman Forever levels of stupid.

    Tron 3 could be good. The tron movies are simple action fun.

    Preach at me in the dumbest way possible though... and I'm changing the channel.

    I don't know... I think a lot of the people that write these scripts should just write art house movies that no one watches. Just fill your movie with more kids with cancer-aids and crying puppies.

    We don't need any more Day After Tomorrow bullshit. Just make me an action movie with some big Michael Bay explosions and shut up.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:Because of Tomorrow land? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      I was going to say, "the Tomorrowland that's still in general release?"

      To base the overall profitability on the first two weekends and call it a stumble when it made 3/4 of what tron made at the same time (with a huge build up and cult following of the original), while there are several other major summer blockbusters going head to head with it. (note: I haven't seen tomorrowland)

      Sounds like an excuse to me. And thank goodness, imho. We definitely don't need another Tron.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:Because of Tomorrow land? by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      read the trades.

      Whatever you think about it, Hollywood has already marked this movie as a dud.

      Everyone is talking about what a mistake it was and whether Clooney's career is in trouble.

      Read the trades.

      As to Tron, it made a lot of money.

      If you're in the business of making movies to make money, then you'll want to make movies that make money.

      Do I need to connect these dots?

      *gets out sharpie*

      *connects dots*

      It makes a duck. :)

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    3. Re:Because of Tomorrow land? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      To base the overall profitability on the first two weekends

      ... is usually pretty accurate. Tomorrowland is not a My Big Fat Greek Wedding sort of movie which starts semi-slow but never drops off. You can predict fairly well how well a movie will do overall based on the first two or three weekends. It lets you plot a curve that is surprisingly predictable.

  30. Tron could be a very good series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think people hated Tron because they expected more of it. Graphics & soundtrack were beautiful and it had so much potential. Acting...well it tanked. I think we all wanted more speed bikes and more disk battles and Jeff Bridges being the zen master was a bit more like the Dude (from the Big Lebowsky). However, if Disney would actually give it to a good director and writers and take it darker with humor similar to like what Ben Browder did in Farscape, Tron could be a very good series but maybe they should just send it to Starz to make a 10 part series. Seems like no one wants too actually work at making movies anymore especially good scifi because they are afraid it costs too much. Seems like Disney's plan is if they can't sell the merchandise then it is not worth making the movie(s) since that is where they make their money. You can't really sell too many Tron costumes like you can with Marvel or Starwars.

    1. Re:Tron could be a very good series by mccalli · · Score: 5, Insightful

      " However, if Disney would actually give it to a good director and writers and take it darker..."

      No. No. No.

      Enough with the silly darker trend. Have you actuallyseen the original Tron? You know with the talking silly Bit in it? It's adventure certainly, but it's not dark. Tron 2 went more philosophical and arguably darker as well, and I happen to really like the film, but I would argue that's also part of what killed it.

      Everyone time I hear of a reboot it's "we'll take the original and make it grittier", or "we'll take the original and make it darker", or sometimes we're treated to both gritter and darker at the same time. Bah. Enough of this - it's an adolescant's version of what makes a grown-up film. Give me varied films with a mix of emotions in them please. Relentless dark and misery is not what I want to be offered all of the time.

    2. Re:Tron could be a very good series by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Everyone time I hear of a reboot it's "we'll take the original and make it grittier"

      Actually, Tron is the one place where that might actually make sense. All their technology is vector-based, right? What if they got infected by a bitmap virus? You could have some really bitchin' visuals.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Tron could be a very good series by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Everyone time I hear of a reboot it's "we'll take the original and make it grittier"

      Actually, Tron is the one place where that might actually make sense. All their technology is vector-based, right? What if they got infected by a bitmap virus? You could have some really bitchin' visuals.

      Tron is interesting because the "look" of the world, that is how much you can see, how clean it is, and the complexity of the objects, are reflections of how powerful the running computer is. In the case of Tron, the world was based on the 1982 hardware it had available. For Tron 2, it was a 1989 computer running the grid.

  31. Against San Andreas? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    How good did they think it was going to do against San Andreas? I mean, I know everybody here likes to pretend they hate action movies and CGI flatulence, but lots of lowest common denominator people are more likely to see San Andreas than Tomorrowland.
    As it happens, I went and saw a matinee with a friend, and watched San Andreas, and it actually wasn't bad. I suggested he call his wife (who was in L.A.) and tell her to go see it.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    1. Re:Against San Andreas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lots of lowest common denominator people are more likely to see San Andreas than Tomorrowland.

      As it happens, I went and saw a matinee with a friend, and watched San Andreas [...]. I suggested he call his wife (who was in L.A.) to see if she'd made it out or he'd won at life insurance bingo.

      Edited for internal logical consistency. You are welcome.

    2. Re:Against San Andreas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saw San Andreas and was pleasantly surprised they didn't moralize it or make it the Republican's Fault.

    3. Re:Against San Andreas? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Saw San Andreas and was pleasantly surprised they didn't moralize it or make it the Republican's Fault.

      Yes, it is nice to know that Hollywood understands that occasionally natural disasters just happen and it is not always mankind's fault.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    4. Re:Against San Andreas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all about economics. I've got a +55" TV in my home. I don't need to pay >$8.00 to see a tight little character piece. I can see that just fine on my own video screen. That means I go to a cinema for the experience I can't get with my own entertainment setup. That means huge CGI mash-ups, special effects, and sound that is great enough to annoy my neighbors.
      Tommorrowland failed because it had unfulfilled potential. People wanted it to be wonder-ful and it lacked wonder. Even so I tend to agree that it would have done better as a spring or fall movie rather than being positioned to compete with summer blockbusters.

    5. Re:Against San Andreas? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Saw San Andreas and was pleasantly surprised they didn't moralize it or make it the Republican's Fault.

      Yes, it is nice to know that Hollywood understands that occasionally natural disasters just happen and it is not always mankind's fault.

      The last "world blows up" film, 2012, made it pretty clear that it wasn't mankind's fault. It wasn't even a topic that came up.
      And the closest thing it had to a villain, Chief of Staff Anheuser, is the only person in the movie who makes any sort of sense.

  32. Disney Hates Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tron 2 only made them $230 M plus profits, Clearly not enough. Wish I could buy Disney and start firing people. A profitable franchise ignored, J.J. Abrahams set to ruin another one, Marvel's comics left to have their sales halved. There are a lot of things going wrong at Disney right now and even their lack of competition won't be enough to stop them from feeling it eventually.

  33. Re:Is it all about the Chinese box office these da by rwa2 · · Score: 1

    Yep, Disney is betting big on China becoming a huge emerging market for their entertainment. It's almost as if they were about to...

    Oh yeah... next year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

  34. Re:Will be highly upset? by CaptQuark · · Score: 2

    "will be highly upset." What's that?

    Oh, I get it. Another user that thinks the subject and incomplete comment make up a complete post. I don't know who started that practice, but it should stop.

    ~~

  35. Tomorrowlands' message is horrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whole premise is that the Earth is unsavable and only intelligent people are the ones that can save us. Seriously?? GTFO!

    Both messages are horrible and just plain disgusting.

    1. Re:Tomorrowlands' message is horrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the unsaveable part certainly seems likely. Not so sure that the intellegent people can save, but it's pretty clear that the dumb bunnies aren't going to get us out of our mess.

  36. Must be due to piracy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make new laws to punish things that might be hiding all the piracy!

    But where else would you spend 180mil and get 33mil back in two days when you start selling?

  37. New Daft Punk Album? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really couldn't care less about another Tron movie, but could we get another soundtrack from Daft Punk, please? That was really the only good thing that came from Tron Legacy.

  38. Thanks a lot Clooney! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Now how are we going to ride off into Valhalla all shiny and chr^W neon?!!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  39. Re:Will be highly upset? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I don't know who started that practice, but it should stop.

    YMBNH: It's been happening since time was time. It's really only a problem because the subject is not shown directly above the comment, so when you C&P you get a header you have to excise. You are right, it should stop, but since the practice of doing it here is probably about as old as the subject line... give-u up.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  40. $180M? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why should it cost $180M to make a fucking movie? When it costs so much to make, no fucking wonder it so easily becomes a losing dud.

    Stop spending $180M making fucking movies already.

    What a fucked up society we live in where "celebrity" is king and real heros (the STEM people that actually productive and amazing things for society) get jack fuck all. No wonder we are going to hell in a handbasket.

  41. Forget the film, just give me the soundtrack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given how good the soundtrack is, just leave the concept with the Daft Punk boys and I'll take a new album any time. That said, I definitely enjoyed Tron Legacy but the soundtrack really made it.

      A third installment perhaps in a darker anime series akin to the Batman DC comics would be a refreshing take on the concept, or actually a full reboot. Too soon maybe.

  42. passing Tron on the the next generation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know how many other parents did this, but we showed our daughter the original Tron when she was a pre-teen, and she loved it so much that she was really looking forward to the Tron sequel, once it was announced. She kept track of when it was supposed to come out and made us promise to take her to see it. Then, we took her to Disneyland when she was around 15 and was so thrilled that she got to ring in the new year "on the grid", thanks to Disney having a Tron based section of their park that wasn't part of Disneyland proper. When she got home, she told absolutely everyone she knew, very proudly, that she had been there, and had even played video games in "Flynn's Arcade", which all of her friends thought was really cool, as they also knew about Tron. She's grown up, now, but if Tron 3 came out, we would make sure to see that one together, too. So, not only was my generation filled with Tron fans, so were some of the next generation, and if Tron 3 did come out, you can bet that some of those from the 90's generation would share it with their own kids, giving them three generations of fans. Unfortunately, she just texted me about how upset she was with the cancellation of Tron 3. With technology the way it is, now, it had the potential to be one of the best sci-fi movies of this era. Personally, I'm extremely disappointed myself, and if they cancelled it because some other movie they made didn't do well at the box office, I have to admit that I'd find that a complete bulls#!& excuse. Tron is a separate franchise, with its own following. I really hope that Disney changes its mind about this.

  43. Tomorrow Land is a rave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone knows that Tomorrow Land is a rave. It was a let down when I saw the movie :( no beatz!

    I would watch Tron3 it it was just for the music.

  44. Disney didn't understand why Tron had a following by rhyous · · Score: 1

    Tron 2 bombed because the writers and producers understood that the original Tron had a following, but they don't understand why. They still don't. They left out most of the details that made the original Tron awesome. They completely failed to appease the Tron fans, and they failed to please the general populace too.

    Computers were new when Tron came out. It was intense to even be a "user" and many computer users were also computer scientists, which is why in the game a "user" was revered like a demigod. The society in Tron reflected the geek society in the real world.

    Now the "user" is anybody. The demigods would be the computer scientists, Network Engineers, and Administrators. The users would be pretty much drones now, controlled in most ways by the demigods.

    Where was this in Tron 2? It was just absent. This is just one example of how they completely missed by lack of understanding.

  45. Corelation != Causality by DiEx-15 · · Score: 1

    What does Tomorrowland eating a big one in the box office got to do with Tron 3?

    I mean come on! Tomorrowland has George Clooney! He raped the Batman series and it took a few years before the public recovered from the shock and enjoyed Batman Begins without much PTSD. So why should it come as a shock Tomorrowland was going to flop? Why punish us who liked Tron?

  46. Re:Is it all about the Chinese box office these da by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    Yep, Disney is betting big on China becoming a huge emerging market for their entertainment. It's almost as if they were about to...

    Oh yeah... next year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

    Disney, like every major studio, is looking to expand into new or underserved territories, partly to make up for the loss of revenue from the home video market.

  47. And some family recently named their dog Disney? by nensondubois · · Score: 1

    This is unfortunate news. I'm still going to keep my fingers crossed for the new Star Wars. We will see.

    --
    http://gamehacking.org/vb/threads/12747-nensondubois-codes http://twitter.com/nensondubois_