MovieChat Forums > avortac4
avortac4 (3742)
Posts
If this movie was made today...
Asking for hand in marriage makes no sense
'A woman can do anything a man can do' makes no sense
Things I HATE about this movie
"Birds of a feather" makes no sense
C4 makes no sense
Critical Drinker makes no sense
John's message makes no sense
"Mystery Science Theater" makes no sense
Destroying the paper makes no sense
View all posts >
Replies
"Flock together" also makes no sense.
Dogs can move in a solid pack regardless of their size, breed, looks or other qualities. A dog is a dog, so you can see poodle, german shepherd, mastiff, a couple of terriers and a dalmatian running in the same pack smoothly and without problems, if they have a good pack leader.
Birds? I have never seen a flock that includes different species(es?). It would be a sight to behold to see a parrot, seagull, pigeon and a few swallows (European) flying in the same flock. They don't do that, but the stupid idiom (not gonna say 'idiotic idiom') basically implies that ALL birds that have feathers, flock together. This is blatantly not true.
So when you break all this down, in the end, the idiom should've said something like 'animals often form flocks, packs, herds and schools', and left it at that. What did we learn from this idiom in any case? Absolutely NOTHING.
You can also think about how it's usually the same breed (or whatever word you use for birds) of birds that 'flock together', but not ALL of them! They still form separate flocks, even within the same species - there are WAY too many birds in the world for them all to 'flock together', so what the heck does this even end up meaning? NOTHING!
To add, it's extremely redundant to say 'flock together', isn't it? I mean, 'flock' ALREADY has the implication, connotation and meaning of 'grouping of entities', so why the heck would the word 'together' even be added there? Is it possible for you to flock all by yourself? No.
It is possible to flock separately? Yes and no - depending on the context and such, but usually the word 'flock' requires more than a couple of entities together, so 'separate flocking' is just an irrelevant concept, rendering the word 'together' even more redundant.
Who the heck was insane and stupid enough to create an idiom that has this many layers of incompetence and lies? It makes absolutely no sense.
I know this will offend people, but.. the music is nothing special - it's not as bad as in some other movies, but if you listen to its chords, chord structures, melodies, and so on and so forth - even the pure energy side is not very energetic - and then compare to the BEST movie soundtracks ever.. you HAVE to admit the music of this movie could easily be composed by any amateur with some VST instruments and a tracker.
John Williams, Alan Silvestri, even James Horner on a good day - have people forgotten what good music sounds like? Ever heard Vivaldi or some Fusion Jazz? Even the best 1980s and 1990s computer and video game soundtracks trump this movie by far..
I think this movie has pretty much bad casting (besides the returning actors and maybe the woman, who was OK), bad story, bad acting, bad visuals, bad musics (that sometimes rise almost to mediocrity - WHY WOULD ANYONE WORSHIP THIS?!), bad ideas, overused 'holographic' visual style, bad family drama, bad hero's journey (he's already rich, hacker, motorcyclist, coolguy thug but clean.. what the heck kind of male Mary Sue is this?)..
The worst thing is, there's no content, no context, no coherence, there's NOTHING here to grasp, nothing to make you think, nothing to provoke anything in you but boredom.. I wanted to give this a chance, but I'd rather watch 20 episodes of the worst Babylon 5 episodes and movies in a row than this again. It's that boring.
(Yeah, B5 had its moments, but mostly it's pretty childish and un-spiritual despite having supposed 'religious classes' and whatnot, it's all superficial - even the mages have to be TECHNO-mages.. sigh)
This movie is meant for (and worshipped by) people who would never understand why I chose Babylon 5 specifically..
Well, the original movie had SO much to fix, I doubt even Mauler could make a thorough video about it, so yeah, there was potential to make an actually GOOD 'Tron'-movie, maybe with less ridiculous a premise.
I hate these movies that are made by people who don't understand how physics, computers, souls or life works, and just make up whatever they want to happen.
So you can somehow be sucked into a computer game and be made digital. Yet you need to eat, drink and have no problems in adjusting to the digital way of doing things. This does not happen in real life.
A computer program can somehow live in human world, because soul and program are the same thing somehow. Sigh.
There are SO many movies with this kind of thoughtless ridiculousness. It shouldn't be so hard to make 'fantastic thing' that ALSO follows how the Universe actually works.. after all, there are things like astral world, other planets, RIDICULOUSLY MASSIVE size even on the physical planet, telekinesis, telepathy, teleportation, UFOs, time travel, etc..
But sure, let's make computer programs walk in real life with NO EXPLANATION for anything. Sigh sigh sigh.
They could've made it into an immersive VR simulation, they could've made Holodeck-type stuff, they could've made some kind of biochip implant thing where your soul operates both your physical body and the machine, OR is incarnated into the machine and so on, but nope. Nothing interesting like that.
They could've taken Tron, fixed all that's wrong, made it a more interesting, more relatable, more realistic AND more fantastic story at the same time.. maybe hacking combined with magic - surely two already interesting things that do not need idiotic embellishment..
I mean, even the old TV show 'Reboot' was better than the original Tron, which was a thousand times better than this.. 'movie'.
Crap, colorless, 'hologram' visuals, TOUCHSCREEN computers even in the 1980s (I HATE touchscreens!!), modern clichés, injected romance..
I mean, there's nothing solid there to stand on, to then look at all the things that do not make sense. I would have to stand on fluff to point at more fluff that makes no sense, and that wouldn't make sense for me to do. In other movies, at least I can stand on more solid ground to then point at the nonsensical clouds of ridiculousness, but how do you stand on nonsense to point at more nonsense..?
But the movie is in many ways too much like the crappy Dr. Strange movie that makes so little sense that Mauler was able to make around six-hour explanation of its stupidities..
Maybe this movie doesn't have quite as many quite as stupid things, but it has too many for me.. maybe I am too tired, maybe these modern movies just don't deserve more than a couple of groans and some vomit.. although predictably, I even said it out loud, people will WORSHIP this crap and lust for its simplistic 'music' (anyone remember Jon Williams and Alan Silvestri, from when music had actual interesting structure, chords and melody..? I guess not.)
I can't find many posts that do not absolutely drool and praise the Emperor's amazingly beautiful clothes.
The emperor COULDN'T BE more naked, and yet here we are.. best movie ever, no plot, no color, based on RIDICULOUS premise that sucked even the first time, people talking about 'Tron 3', even though Tron 2 doesn't exist (look at the name AND plot of this movie)..
There's just too much stupidity in and surrounding this movie to delve into, and people always praise the most ridiculous things that make the least sense, and have the most hideous, modern visuals (where's the color, SERIOUSLY? Where are the beautiful nature scenes? I realize even the first movie was just glorifying 'computer-made dull visuals', but this movie is even worse with its basically two non-colors and crappy dystopian non-world.
I expected this movie to be even worse than the first one, but it showed me a remarkable thing; how much I can get angry at something modern crapping on something old that I hated in the first place.
Why do I want to defend something that didn't even make sense originally, and was basically just another polished turd, just because a modern remake thing doesn't follow its idiotic rules properly..?
In any case, this movie is not worth my usual 'My Questions' or 'Doesn't make sense' lists, there's just too much fluff to base it on.
"So far we can't figure out any way to do faster than light travel yet that's in everything."
Speak for yourself. Just because cockroaches can't figure out how to make electric cars, doesn't mean they don't exist.
Faster than light is easy; the only thing keeping you from doing it is physical mass. Remove that obstacle, and you can already reach high speeds - for example, when you astral travel while your body is 'asleep', or between incarnations.
You can move physical mass faster than light, too. All you need to do is utilize higher vibration frequencies. It's possible, though somewhat dangerous to elevate your whole body system's frequency, but a more commonly-used and safer method is to simply create a spacecraft without any protrusions, use rich mixtures of purest possible metals for the material, make it as smooth and seamless as possible, and then just generate an energy field to surround the craft to isolate it from external impulses, like gravity.
All you need to do then, is to elevate the vibration frequency of the surrounding, protective energy field, and you can travel in higher realms, which means higher speed than light on the physical side can even try to dream of.
Anyway, back to the topic itself.
I started making a similar thread, but obviously more thorough. However, as the movie progressed, it became such a flood of stupidity, inconsistencies, breaking the movie's own rules, ridiculous reactions, and illogical, unexplained things, like smoke in a digital world, everything being SO PHYSICAL in a digital world (clothes instead of textures, really? WHY?!), gravity being EXACTLY identical.. yet people dying by turning into transparent cubes somehow (pixels are not 3D, so these are what, voxels?), and so on and so forth.
For a long time, I thought I was going to write a very long post just about how the 'Tron arcade cabinet has no power cables but yet has power on', the 'electricity working in an abandoned factory (who gets the bill), BUT!
"Will adults like this movie"
Is that a pun? I mean, you do not have a QUESTION MARK in your title, so one can assume you are actually making a STATEMENT instead of asking something..
To add a ninth point, the word 'Mario' would NOT be pronounced with such an italian intonation, not to mention stretched like that, if it was just the japanese way of saying 'Mario'. EVEN IF we don't even look at anything that comes before the word 'Mario', that whole 'Itsumi'-crap STILL makes no sense, because japanese normal pronunciation of 'Mario' is _NOT_ the italian 'maariooooooooooooooo', but short, tight, to-the-point-style 'MA-RI-O' (マリオ）with a very short 'O' at the end (even the english stretches it a bit, phonetically into 'määriou').
So even if we just look at the word 'Mario' and nothing else, that ridiculous claim still makes no sense.
Some commonly known, easy to remember, useful 'bit amounts' that can serve you well if you use computers a lot, program things, etc..
8 bits = 256
9 bits = 512
10 bits = 1024
11 bits = 2048
12 bits = 4096
13 bits = 8192
14 bits = 16384
15 bits = 32768
16 bits = 65536
18 bits = 262144
24 bits = 16777216
..
64 bits = You try to figure it out..
The problem with 'bits' was that people didn't understand what they were, what they meant, they just saw a number and an 'alien word', and just started thinking it somehow means how good the graphics are, or has something to do with the quality of games, or the quality of the system, so of course it was understandable but frustrating to hear AVGN ask something like 'where did all the bits go?' in his Jaguar review, but bits actually had nothing to do with how good something looked, sounded or played.
It was always just about 'how much data can a CPU cram through', and that's all it was. This kind of renders it at least semi-meaningless, as CPU power alone does not dictate anything - you need good artists, good programmers, good design/designers and so on, but the system can vary WILDLY outside the whole 'bit' stuff, as to how much data the system as a whole can handle, how many colors it allows, what kind of sound system it has, and so on and so forth. The bits are relatively meaningless considering ALL of the other stuff, so it was, and would be stupid to have 'system wars' around that concept alone.
You can have fast CPU in an otherwise crappy system, or amazing graphics and sound capabilities in a system with relatively slow CPU. It's like a movie's budget, really - a big budget does not guarantee a good movie, and a small budget movie can be really good. It just means the movie has potential for 'larger visuals' (not necessarily better) and 'better actors' (or at least more famous ones), so it can -potentially- be better, but there are SO many other factors to consider, it's almost meaningless or even counter-productive.
The next time you think of bits, think of PC Engine, think of Atari Jaguar, think of C64's synthesizer.
Bits aren't everything, and never were. If we were to calculate the bits of ALL the components and processing units in every single console/system, the bits would fluctuate quite wildly. Don't just think that 'the more bits, the better'.
View all replies >