(no subject)
Mar. 17th, 2006 08:36 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearOn /., in reply to a comment about Tron being unique in being a Disney sci-fi film from a studio that makes "fuzzy animal movies"...
Disney did the Black Hole 2 years earlier, and in the 70s did a number of sci-fi films (some funny, some not - Escape/Return to Witch Mountain, Cat from Outer Space) so they'd already established that they could do serious, if teen-oriented, scifi. Hell, Disney was on the cutting edge of the "epic" sci-fi film back in the 60s with 20,000 Leagues and a few others.
I agree the timing was just a little early. We needed Wargames *first*. Show us what happens outside the computer world when a modern computer "thinks", then the audience might be ready for what might happen inside that world.
Personally, I love Tron, always did, its a reason I'm in software now. But among this crowd (/. pundits who hate everything), I know i'm an apologist so I'm not going to bother to try to justify it.
And box-office flop or not, its more than in the black with HBO and home-video sales, like every disney "flop". People FAR too often complain about Disney making box office flops (about half of their animated feature canon didn't make a profit in the box office, including Fantasia, Pinnochio, Bambi, Alice in Wonderland, and the well-known flops of the 90s-00s), but over time, the films have serious legs in the home video market and continue to be watched today, which is not something you can say for many at-the-time blockbusters from other studios.
Jim Henson's works are the same way (Dark Crystal, Labyrinth). As is Princess Bride, and other classics in hindsight like Wizard of Oz.
Its like comparing Salieri to Mozart. Salieri was the more popular AT THE TIME, especially his operas (AFAIK, he never had a flop, Mozart had 2). But its Mozart we listen to today.
Only Hollywood judges quality by its at the moment popularity. The real judgement happens far later, when you realize that 25 years on people ARE STILL WATCHING IT (crappy script and all), which can't be said for MOST films from 1981-1982.
Disney did the Black Hole 2 years earlier, and in the 70s did a number of sci-fi films (some funny, some not - Escape/Return to Witch Mountain, Cat from Outer Space) so they'd already established that they could do serious, if teen-oriented, scifi. Hell, Disney was on the cutting edge of the "epic" sci-fi film back in the 60s with 20,000 Leagues and a few others.
I agree the timing was just a little early. We needed Wargames *first*. Show us what happens outside the computer world when a modern computer "thinks", then the audience might be ready for what might happen inside that world.
Personally, I love Tron, always did, its a reason I'm in software now. But among this crowd (/. pundits who hate everything), I know i'm an apologist so I'm not going to bother to try to justify it.
And box-office flop or not, its more than in the black with HBO and home-video sales, like every disney "flop". People FAR too often complain about Disney making box office flops (about half of their animated feature canon didn't make a profit in the box office, including Fantasia, Pinnochio, Bambi, Alice in Wonderland, and the well-known flops of the 90s-00s), but over time, the films have serious legs in the home video market and continue to be watched today, which is not something you can say for many at-the-time blockbusters from other studios.
Jim Henson's works are the same way (Dark Crystal, Labyrinth). As is Princess Bride, and other classics in hindsight like Wizard of Oz.
Its like comparing Salieri to Mozart. Salieri was the more popular AT THE TIME, especially his operas (AFAIK, he never had a flop, Mozart had 2). But its Mozart we listen to today.
Only Hollywood judges quality by its at the moment popularity. The real judgement happens far later, when you realize that 25 years on people ARE STILL WATCHING IT (crappy script and all), which can't be said for MOST films from 1981-1982.
