Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted August 28, 2013 Author Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 Not really. It was too bothered with ultra slow motion bits of violence for that. In that regard it felt far more like a modern actioner, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 The SloMo visual effect is just SO incredible in 3-D that you don't mind it being repeated. It's the single best 3-D effect I've seen yet. Â On DVD though, perhaps feels over-used but I think it adds something each time, as it's usually used to slow down bullets, which looks amazing, and is VERY comic-book-y. Â Honky - substance is killing people. It's that sort of film. Next you'll be criticising Commando for its lack of feminist issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted August 28, 2013 Author Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 I don't care about 3D or effects, though. It was a pointless use of technology that added nothing to the story. It was just a jazzed up version of that yokel flicking a cigarette at the screen in that 3D Friday The 13th film. It should have had more killing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Bifkin Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Next you'll be criticising Commando for its lack of feminist issues. Â Commando is brilliant fun, Dredd is just a bit boring really. I did actually nod off for about ten minutes. Maybe that bit was really good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members chokeout Posted August 28, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 The biggest flaw with Dredd is they stuck so closely with the comic character. Hes a great character but over 90min all you're gonna get from him is 'Man who frowns' and its hard to identify with someone who has zero character. The Stallone film went too far in the other direction. Like The Punisher hes a character that would probably be best suited to a tv series where they have the time to build. I did enjoy it though, considering it has such a small budget it looked great and the 3D was some of the best that i've seen and was stunning in the cinema Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Total Package Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I actually like the Stallone film. I have no idea why it gets so much hate. I know he committed sin by taking off the helmet, but really, I never found that an issue myself. The film visually looks like the comic books, far more than the new movie. However I think they're both really good movies. I dont think Dredd did well at the cinema's so probably won't be getting a sequel. Too bad, would have been cool to see what they could have pulled off with a bigger budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bellenda Carlisle Posted August 28, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 (edited) Taking off his helmet was bad, having a comedy sidekick in Rob Schneider was really terrible. Â I think it's cool Dredd didn't have a bigger budget, films (especially sci-fi action) are so expensive these days it's nice to see what can be done with less. Â There could potentially still be a sequel too. Â I like the fact that Dredd is just gruff with no personality. He's a lifelong dedicated cop in a crime ridden world, not everyone has to be complex and layered, it works for him. Edited August 28, 2013 by Steve 'Big' Jobs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Sergio Mendacious Posted August 28, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 I really enjoyed the new Dredd movie, but more just on its own terms as an excellent action film. I agree with the Total Package in a sense, as the Dredd comic book may have a grim (if sometimes sarcastically amusing) central character, but he's surrounded by a whole gaggle of comic relief characters, and a lot of absurdity. Stallone's movie went too far one way, and the new one went too far the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted August 28, 2013 Author Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 What's so bad about him taking off his helmet if it makes sense to the film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bellenda Carlisle Posted August 28, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 I'm not getting into this discussion again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted August 28, 2013 Author Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 Have we had this argument before? I don't remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 It's kind of like saying "How come Superman can fly" Gladders. It's an established part of the character. Â You can't fuck around with Dredd's character either, Stallone's take was completely wrong. The great thing about the comics is that Dredd stays the same regardless of whether the story he's in is comic or serious. Whether he's dealing with the Death Judges or busting Fatties, he's the same ultra-fascist lawman. Over the course of 30 years or so, some very slow changes have happened as he's aged, but in the new film he's clearly still a young Dredd. If they do more films, maybe some of that ambivalence can creep in but not in the first instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted August 28, 2013 Author Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 It's kind of like saying "How come Superman can fly" Gladders. It's an established part of the character. Â In the comics, yes. In the films, no. One does not have any have to have any reason to kowtow to the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 So in a Superman film, you'd have Superman having to nick a helicopter to get from A to B? That's daft. Â If you just want a super-tough lawman, you don't need to use the Dredd franchise. Robocop (which was actually a script for Dredd that was rewritten when the license fell through) was a perfectly good take on it, and showing Murphy's face made total sense there. Dredd's face has NEVER been seen in the comics, so as soon as you do that, you're moving away from the mythology. Â With characters like Batman, there are many different styles both of the comics and of the various tv and film adaptations. Nowadays, he's practically a blank slate on which to apply your own style. That's not true of Dredd - he was conceived as an anti-hero directly opposed to the sort of goody-goody comic heroes you get in America. He doesn't obey the things that normally apply to such franchises. If you make him take off his helmet and be nice to people, then he's not Dredd and it's pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted August 28, 2013 Author Paid Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 So in a Superman film, you'd have Superman having to nick a helicopter to get from A to B? That's daft. If you just want a super-tough lawman, you don't need to use the Dredd franchise. Robocop (which was actually a script for Dredd that was rewritten when the license fell through) was a perfectly good take on it, and showing Murphy's face made total sense there. Dredd's face has NEVER been seen in the comics, so as soon as you do that, you're moving away from the mythology.  With characters like Batman, there are many different styles both of the comics and of the various tv and film adaptations. Nowadays, he's practically a blank slate on which to apply your own style. That's not true of Dredd - he was conceived as an anti-hero directly opposed to the sort of goody-goody comic heroes you get in America. He doesn't obey the things that normally apply to such franchises. If you make him take off his helmet and be nice to people, then he's not Dredd and it's pointless.  I don't know why you're pressing this point about Superman, Jerry. I'm talking about Judge Dredd!  I don't give a crap about the mythology of Dredd. Neither should I have to and neither should a film adaptation presume that I do. If it makes sense in the film to have him take his helmet off, then let him. If it makes the film better and advances it, they are stupid not to do it. No-one's saying that means he has to start adopting puppies or anything. I'm not even saying that he necessarily should, but what I'm saying is that film directors shouldn't feel scared of having him do that just in case it causes outrage around all the branches of Forbidden Planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts