20

I saw the, uh, what are they calling it -- sequel -- and was curious as to how the original movie ended. I can't find a rental copy anywhere and it's not streaming on Netflix anymore.

I guess, for the sequel to work, it means the character played by Jeff Bridges was left trapped in Tron? Or no? I've talked about it with some friends and no one knew what had happened in the original or if it really fits with the way the story picked up in the most recent movie.

  • 8
    If we can't ask questions that are answered by Wikipedia about science fiction, then there's not much that can be asked. Why don't you post an answer and use the Wikipedia article as a source. You know, do something constructive to help build up the site? – Slick23 Jan 22 '11 at 16:23
  • 7
    @Gilles that's a little pissy. Why not just answer the question. If you don't like it, vote to close or vote it down. Pretty much every single question I've read on here could be answered by reading Wikipedia. – scotty Jan 22 '11 at 16:27
  • 4
    @Gilles, that's not a very constructive response. This site is still finding it's footing and we should be trying various types of questions to see what the community responds to. Next time, try offering advice on how to improve the question. – Kyle Jan 22 '11 at 16:35
  • 4
    If you don't know that the Wikipedia article is correct, then there's no reason to bring it up. Especially the way you did. I don't get scared off easily, but had I been new, I never would've come back to another SE site after that. But, the answer is I don't trust Wikipedia articles at all. Don't even use the site unless I have to. I trust people more here -- that should be enough. – Slick23 Jan 22 '11 at 17:02
  • 4
    I think @final makes a useful point here: in a SE site we have reputation to use as a highly-visible indicator of how reliable the answer is likely to be. In Wikipedia, it is much harder to determine how much the information should be trusted. – Tony Meyer Jan 22 '11 at 23:25
13

The event you are talking about are all explained in the Tron : Betrayal comic book (spoiler in the link) which has been made to fill that gap.

|improve this answer|||||
7

The sequel explains it, some time in.

Yes, Flynn and Alan do take over the company from Dillenger as implied in Tron.

Yes, Flynn gets a life.

Then, Flynn disappears (we, the audience, already suspect from preview hype that it's into the alternate universe inside the system).

This is actually flashbacked about in the movie. There is more on it in the extras on the Blu-Ray.

|improve this answer|||||
4

I get what you're asking, is there a disconnect between how the first movie ended and the storyline the second revolved around (if so, maybe an edit to avoid such passive-aggressive responses).

The answer is yes. In the original Flynn is not left trapped in Tron, he becomes CEO of Encome as he is when the sequel picks up if I recall correctly. So, there are some off-screen events that transpire between the two and that's not mentioned in the wikipedia article on the first movie, but probably should be. It's not very clear in the second movie why he went back, if I recall. But I hated the second movie.

|improve this answer|||||
  • 2
    Yeah, that was more along the lines of what I was getting at. I'd actually read that Wikipedia article before posting the question, but alas -- it didn't answer. I'll revise. – Slick23 Jan 22 '11 at 16:37
  • I think the primary realization for me, when I saw the original Tron the impression is that they are in the network, the internet as Encoms mcp is belligerently taking over many other networks, so it's outside in the internet. But in the sequel, we see Flynn is in essentially a mini computer from the 80's. So their is a conceptual disconnect. – scope_creep Jan 24 '11 at 19:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.