Judge Dredd 2012 movie.
- Thread starter Trekker4747
- Start date
They were written and went into pre-production at more or less the same time, AFAIK. The Raid beat Dredd to the punch and thus the latter was accused of copying it but it was just bad/coincidental timing.
I never saw the Stallone version, but I really liked Dredd.
I've seen it suggested that one thing that hurt this movie was the perception that it was a remake of the Stallone movie, rather than a completely separate and far more faithful adaptation of the original comic. Which may be part of why its title was changed to just Dredd, though if so, the change didn't help much.
For the scene where Ma-ma had to be killed by dropping her some 200 feet into the camera it was purely a 3D trick.
Are DVD sales and other ancillary avenues keeping even just a hint of hope alive for a sequel? This article sure spins it that way.
What I remember of the Stallone movie was that it was very.... Stallone-y. Sort of the concept the original Superman movie had where they wanted an unknown to play Superman rather than a star so that people would see Superman and not Actor-as-Superman.
Granted, Judge Dredd is nowhere near as iconic a character as Supes or as known but it can be hard to sell the idea of a character when people watching your movie are seeing an actor as himself. Stallone in Judge Dredd might as well have been playing his character from "Demolition Man" or "Cliffhanger" or "Over the Top" or something.
Carl Urban is pretty much an unknown so it was easy to "not see him" but an actor who's able to play a role other than "himself" would have been able to pull it off, mask or not.
The Stallone movie wasn't strictly "bad" from what little of it I remember it was just very... Stallone. And I suspect unsatisfying to fans of the character.
Granted, Judge Dredd is nowhere near as iconic a character as Supes or as known but it can be hard to sell the idea of a character when people watching your movie are seeing an actor as himself. Stallone in Judge Dredd might as well have been playing his character from "Demolition Man" or "Cliffhanger" or "Over the Top" or something.
Carl Urban is pretty much an unknown so it was easy to "not see him" but an actor who's able to play a role other than "himself" would have been able to pull it off, mask or not.
The Stallone movie wasn't strictly "bad" from what little of it I remember it was just very... Stallone. And I suspect unsatisfying to fans of the character.
A
Amaris
Guest
The Stallone Judge Dredd has its own charms, but I didn't take it at all seriously. Dredd, on the other hand, was a nail biter for me from start to finish. I loved the setting, loved Karl Urban's take on Dredd, Olivia Thirlby's Anderson was a fresh perspective on a normally very jaded and cynical sci-fi trope, and the villain felt like an actual person; someone who was just rotten to the core while still seeming believable. I still hold out hope for a sequel, but it is highly unlikely, so I just enjoy what I got, which was a great movie.
Well, that's just it. The makers of that movie weren't trying to adapt the comic faithfully so much as turn it into a vehicle for Stallone. Hence having Dredd's helmet removed for most of the movie, which is blasphemy to the comic's fans. (Actually I always thought that could've worked if he didn't have his helmet removed until he was tried and sentenced; then it would've been against his will and a sign of disgrace, so it would've been more in character. Although it would've conflicted with the comics' assertion that Dredd's face is unbearably horrible to look at. And no, I'm not going to take a cheap shot at Stallone at this point.)
I wouldn't call Karl Urban an unknown, not after his turns in Hercules, Xena, Lord of the Rings, and Star Trek. He's prominent enough to have gotten the lead role in the current Almost Human series. However, he's the kind of actor who can disappear into a role.
Well, I'd consider Urban an "unknown" or at least an actor who is not a box-office draw. Kind of going back to the Superman:The Movie example of purposefully not hiring a well-known actor in the role, instead putting more known actors in the other roles.
I don't think the analogy to Superman really works, because Dredd isn't a big-budget star-studded movie in any case. It's a fairly small movie that doesn't have any massive star power. Lena Headey is fairly prominent, but she's certainly not in the league of Marlon Brando or Gene Hackman when it comes to celebrity standing. I'd say, in fact, that Urban was the second most prominent member of the film's cast. He and Headey were the only cast members I'd ever seen or heard of before, although I gather that Olivia Thirlby has some name recognition from Juno and one or two other things.
A great movie Dredd is. I consider it one of the last great action films and right up there with the ranks of Terminator, Die Hard, Alien and all the oldie action movies which kicked ass and had real f*** yeah moments.
The best thing is the minimalist use of CGI, virtually everything you see (barring the 3D scenes) is either actual sets, actual props and actual effects. While the slow-mo scenes are really awesome, and Ma-Ma's death scene definitely belongs to some of the most iconic moments of the sci-fi film genre.
Also Dredd has very little BS in its presentation and its nice to see an actual practical outfit on a main female protagonist (instead of something sexy or a latex skin-tight suit). Finally Dredd has something which most films lack these days (even the new Trek movies I'm afraid to say suffer from this); atmosphere.
It's films like Dredd which keep up my hopes that there are some people out there who know what they're doing and know how to effectively use the plethora of tools, techniques and effects out there to make a movie.
The best thing is the minimalist use of CGI, virtually everything you see (barring the 3D scenes) is either actual sets, actual props and actual effects. While the slow-mo scenes are really awesome, and Ma-Ma's death scene definitely belongs to some of the most iconic moments of the sci-fi film genre.
Also Dredd has very little BS in its presentation and its nice to see an actual practical outfit on a main female protagonist (instead of something sexy or a latex skin-tight suit). Finally Dredd has something which most films lack these days (even the new Trek movies I'm afraid to say suffer from this); atmosphere.
It's films like Dredd which keep up my hopes that there are some people out there who know what they're doing and know how to effectively use the plethora of tools, techniques and effects out there to make a movie.
Me too.I liked the Stallone version better.
"I AM THE LAW!!!"
Or rather, the Stallone one was less bad.
I don't know, one of the things I loved about the 2012 film is the realistic depiction of the uniform, weapons, vehicles etc
Simple, practical, effective and helped the immersive "lived in" feel of the movie. The megablock was also very well done, the shut down mechanism was low key, yet still gave a good shut in feeling.
It was less about hyping up Dredd, and more about seeing things more from Andersons point of view. Stallones...well when you have one of the big overblown 80's action stars in a movie, it's all about them one way or another, the entire cast of the new movie were excellent really.
Simple, practical, effective and helped the immersive "lived in" feel of the movie. The megablock was also very well done, the shut down mechanism was low key, yet still gave a good shut in feeling.
It was less about hyping up Dredd, and more about seeing things more from Andersons point of view. Stallones...well when you have one of the big overblown 80's action stars in a movie, it's all about them one way or another, the entire cast of the new movie were excellent really.
