Discussion in 'Misc. Comics Films' started by Thread Manager, Sep 28, 2012.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]377564[/split]
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]316042[/split]
I absolutely agree. I dunno, the whole framed/cursed earth story is problematic for this reason. I like that they tried to do the Rico story and introduced the Angel family but...ugh it just sucks so much.
If they do the cursed Earth in a hypothetical sequel to this Dredd, I hope they go with a version of the comics story where Dredd has to lead a caravan to deliver the cure to a plague that's ravaging another Mega City. Go all Road Warrior with it. Could be really cool.
God...just watching this makes me facepalm.
Was it really Stallone's fault? Because I often come across people saying that Stallone wanted to keep the helmet on, but the Studio heads paid for his face, so he needed to take the helmet off.
Good God, I'd almost forgotten how awful Stallone's acting was in this movie. And I don't even think he's a bad actor like Arnold, Dolph, Chuck and some of his other action movie counterparts. But wow. He sure gave an awful performance in that movie.
You know, I don't actually think Dredd did *change* in the remake. He's a hardass certainly, but he's a hardass who does things like:
1. Give a harmless beggar fair warning to stop lawbreaking rather than letting him go unwarned
2. Took down a couple kids nonlethally who were pointing guns at him, because they were clearly dumb kids over their heads
3. Told Anderson that "99% certain isn't good enough to execute a man."
Dredd at the end of the movie didn't soften his views on the law. Rather, he softened his views on *Anderson*, who showed that she was both learning the lessons, and had judgement and conviction to match her idealism.
I've seen clips of Stallone's Dredd film but I never got around and watch the entire thing. I may have to find a way to watch it.
But in the process, he softened his black and white perspective. Anderson says herself that she failed the test early on because she lost her gun. Dredd mentioned that constitutes an immediate fail. Yet, in the end, he passes her. He learns that maybe not everything can or should be taken at face value, that there are, in fact, grey areas. Though subtle, that's a pretty big change for a character like Dredd IMO.
What I've heard from Danny Cannon is that the film underwent some fairly significant changes to suit Stallone's wishes. I'm sure the studio wanted it that way too, though.
What I've always wondered is, if they wanted Stallone's face, why didn't they have him play Rico as well as Dredd? The two are supposed to be clones, afterall. And it would have been a potentially cool thing to see. Oh well. We have an actual Dredd flick now.
^Exactly Balthus, the Dredd at the start of the movie would have definately failed Anderson for losing her weapon, but through his interactions with her and obviously what they went through together he softened, looked at the world a little differently, especially by the end.
Helmet or no helmet... that didn't bother me. But that stupid codpiece... seriously, what were they thinking with that horrid thing?
It gets its own close up too...
A close up that would make Joel Schumacher proud.
Dredd has tanked at the box office But has mostly positive reviews from both critics&fans and maybe dvd/blu-ray sales&rentals will do decent that a sequel will be greenlit
,I'm doubting it right now But I'm hoping so bad that one day in the near future I read and article with the headline reading"Dredd gets a sequel AND Karl Urban returns for the role"
I still think a sequel is on the cards.
Oh and Giant was originally failed before he went on to redeem himself. Sometimes the circumstances require a bit of leeway.
Aside from Looper this weekend,, I cant see why it can make some good money. I hope!
Apparently there is yet another animated film released this weekend.
Maybe we were just poor and there were fewer of them about but we used to watch those things on TV. It seems parents are too tied up with the latest 3D animated shiz to see stuff for themselves.
Dredd without his helmet, for me at least is a big deal. Dredd never takes his helmet off, ever* so that would be like Batman without the cowl**, Superman without the cape***, Spider-Man without the mask****.
* Dredd has appeared without his mask but;
Had his face rearranged by a machine.
Had bandages covering his face.
** Batman has appeared in several elseworld tales without his cowl
*** Electric Superman had no cape
**** Spider-Man is forever taking his mask off in the comics and movies
All of that is true but Dredd is perticular is famous for not taking his mask off so more than any other superhero it IS a big deal.
I've said the same for years [many a time in here, no less].
Saw it yesterday in 3d. Didn't want to see it in 3d, just wanted to see the movie. But when I went to the theater they said the listing online was wrong and they only had 3d. I hate 3d movies.
The movie itself was good, not great. After the novelty of the first few kills wears off I didn't find it very interesting. It's a decent action movie, it'll make for a good sequel, but I wonder if the "slo-mo" gimmick is gonna be used again? Just like the first few kills, that wore off after the first few times too.
There's not really going to be a readilly available source of Slo-Mo out there in the Cursed Earth, so I'd say the 'gimmick' most likely be seen if again if a sequel gets made. The Slo-Mo served a purpose in this movie - absolutely no real need to carry it over into the next imo.
Agreed, though Dredd was also seen without his helmet for the 'Dead Man' story, however he was badly scarred (had been badly burned all over his body) with no memory, so the readers didn't know it was Dredd until near the end of that story. We did learn from that one though that his bionic eyes (acquired after having his real eyes torn out during City of the Damned) have square Irises.
But that is the point: No artist has ever been allowed to draw Dredd's actual face fully, nor should they. It's kinda like the Doctor Doom deal.
Geeze,, "novelty" "gimmick"...critical much??
The gimmick, was showing the effect of the drug they took.. It was for the purpose of showing that viewpoint.. I thought that was pretty amazing.
The novelty, if he had to kill in order to survive how does that qualify as a novelty.
If you didnt like the movie or the "gimmick" and/or "novelty" served 0 purpose for the movie I could understand.
Im glad you enjoyed the movie but what your saying sounds like "I love to go to car races, I just hate when they go fast, i hope they have more car races".
I dont understand....
Loved the movie, just watched it last night. I hope they do a sequel.