|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Why not, if you don't mind me asking? To me it seemed like the perfect representation of some kind of post-apocalyptic slum. A self-contained community, housing tons of residents as well as being a commercial hub and a medical complex and probably other stuff too. Rageaholic Monkey posted:At the end, when Dredd threw Ma-Ma from the 200th floor and she plummeted to her death, and her face was shown splattering on the ground and blood was all over the screen, you didn't think that was gory? There was plenty of showing bullet holes being made in people, but it seemed like any time anybody got mutilated they were afraid of showing it to the audience for some reason. You never get a clear look at the three bodies that got thrown off from the top of Peach Trees (they cut away after like half a second), and they never pan down to show you the thug whose arm blew up when he tried to use Anderson's gun. And all you really see when Ma-Ma hits the floor is the blood that quickly encompasses the frame. These things didn't actually bother me, it just struck me as odd seeing as the film is rated R anyways, and I can't imagine they ever considered shooting for a PG-13 rating.
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:12 |
|
|
TechnoSyndrome posted:There was plenty of showing bullet holes being made in people, but it seemed like any time anybody got mutilated they were afraid of showing it to the audience for some reason. You never get a clear look at the three bodies that got thrown off from the top of Peach Trees (they cut away after like half a second), and they never pan down to show you the thug whose arm blew up when he tried to use Anderson's gun. And all you really see when Ma-Ma hits the floor is the blood that quickly encompasses the frame. These things didn't actually bother me, it just struck me as odd seeing as the film is rated R anyways, and I can't imagine they ever considered shooting for a PG-13 rating. Maybe it's because long, lingering shots of ruined bodies isn't fun to watch for normal people? And because adding more gore than is already in the movie doesn't actually add anything to it? You don't need to show any of the shots you mention because people already know what happened and there's no need to spend more time on it. Half a second is all you need to get the desired reaction out of people. If you really want more time spent on those shots for some reason, you can pause it on DVD or just go look up photos of fatal car accidents or something. OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Sep 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:30
|
|
|
After further thought, Im going to go ahead and say contrary to what some other posters said about this movie being misogynist, Alex Garland actually managed to write a really fantastic feminist statement with this film. One of the biggest issues with feminism is the notion that for women to be equal to men, they must exhibit the traits of men. Dominance, authority, "controlled" emotions, etc. Well, I think Dredd is primarily a film about that notion. Here you have Dredd, the embodiment of a fascistic authoritarian male dominance figure. Andersons psychic analysis of him in the beginning is out right stapling this label to him. Then theres Ma-ma, the stereotypical "Amazon" type feminist figure. Scorned by man and rebelling violently. She becomes the anti-thesis to everything that we deem "feminine". She is the type of women that MRA's have nightmares about. And shes a total farce, just like Dredd. And finally you have Anderson, who to me represents the accurate symbol of a female in a hyper masculine world. Her psychic abilities are a metaphor for "female intuition". I put that in quotes because its a highly debatable subject but for the sake of the argument Im going to say that it definitely exists. Men fear it throughout the film, it scares them, and they even think they can use it against her. She is literally a "mutant" because she has some kind of emotional connection/reading with people, when every other main character scoffs at it and revels in their emotionless violent rational. Anderson hesitates to kill, she dares even think about it. And in the end, she was right. She killed a womans husband because this world of hyper masculine opposites demands she kill him. Much like men demand women become more like them if they want to be treated equally. Dredd routinely pushes her to act against her instincts, to sacrifice her individuality and become the machine of dominance that he is. They even pit her up against another female Judge in the end, who has become one of the men. She even tries to use her false sense of acquired masculinity to assume because Anderson has not reached this level, she will hesitate and be an easy kill. In the end, if Anderson were Dredd, she would have been dead. And finally in the end, after all is said and done, after Anderson had experienced all of this, she rejects both social constructs. She removes her badge and walks away from the mentality they try to force on her. She wont adopt the hyper masculinity of being a Judge and will not disconnect and become Ma-ma to do so. I would have never guessed to find any of that in a Judge Dredd movie. Alex Garland is fantastic. Rageaholic Monkey posted:Unless I'm remembering those scenes incorrectly, all that could have been done the same way in 2D and 3D didn't accentuate it any. Those scenes definitely had added depth. Maybe it was your theater, but every little sparkly light and element seemed to float on a different plane and created some amazing visuals. It was pretty amazing, but other than that the 3D was loving horrendous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
AccountSupervisor posted:After further thought, Im going to go ahead and say contrary to what some other posters said about this movie being misogynist, Alex Garland actually managed to write a really fantastic feminist statement with this film. I was thinking along those lines but wanted to sleep on it before posting. One thing that made me think this way during the film was the gender makeup of the gangsters. Ma-ma aside, were there any woman gangsters at all?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:41
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Maybe it's because long, lingering shots of ruined bodies isn't fun to watch for normal people? And because adding more gore than is already in the movie doesn't actually add anything to it? You don't need to show any of the shots you mention because people already know what happened and there's no need to spend more time on it. Half a second is all you need to get the desired reaction out of people. If you really want more time spent on those shots for some reason, you can pause it on DVD or just go look up photos of fatal car accidents or something. I don't know why you seem to take this so personally, I never at any point implied that I was disappointed because I wanted to get off on some over the top gore. I just found it odd how quick they cut away, and personally think some of the impact is lost when you dance around the aftermath of violence and only really focus on the act itself. No need to make me out as some loving creep for it, it's just a difference of opinion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:45
|
|
|
TomWaitsForNoMan posted:I was thinking along those lines but wanted to sleep on it before posting. One thing that made me think this way during the film was the gender makeup of the gangsters. Ma-ma aside, were there any woman gangsters at all? Nah, I think there were only male gang members. The only females in this movie were Anderson, Ma-Ma, the Chief Judge or whoever that was that Dredd was with when they're outside Anderson's cell at the beginning (and she shows up at the end too), that crooked female Judge that Anderson comes across and immediately plugs in the head because she psychically learns her intentions right off the bat, the woman whose husband Anderson killed, and whoever the female voice on the comms channel belongs to. A dispatcher, I guess? Oh yeah, and I think there was one other that they saw in one of the hallways who shut her door immediately after seeing them walk past.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
TechnoSyndrome posted:I just found it odd how quick they cut away, and personally think some of the impact is lost when you dance around the aftermath of violence and only really focus on the act itself. Lingering shots of the aftermath of violence would've given the film an instant NC-17 rating from the MPAA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:51
|
|
|
AccountSupervisor posted:And finally in the end, after all is said and done, after Anderson had experienced all of this, she rejects both social constructs. She removes her badge and walks away from the mentality they try to force on her. She wont adopt the hyper masculinity of being a Judge and will not disconnect and become Ma-ma to do so. Interesting thoughts but Anderson doesn't walk away from being a Judge, she is walking away because she thinks she has failed her assessment, since she lost her weapon which is an automatic fail. She doesn't realise that Dredd is willing to bend the rules and pass her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:53
|
|
|
VoodooXT posted:Lingering shots of the aftermath of violence would've given the film an instant NC-17 rating from the MPAA. I guess that lines up with the weird rule about how you can say gently caress once and maintain a PG-13, but using it twice will get you an R. The MPAA rules are bizarre. Thanks for the explanation, I didn't realize violence kind of worked in the same way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:55
|
|
|
Yeah, this isn't Saw, it's Judge Dredd. It's supposed to be brutal and violent, but let's face it, it probably would have made $2 million less than it has if there was a ton more gore. I don't know about you guys, but what we got satisfied me 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 23:59
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Yeah, this isn't Saw, it's Judge Dredd. It's supposed to be brutal and violent, but let's face it, it probably would have made $2 million less than it has if there was a ton more gore. The only thing that disappointed me was Dredd not charging those kids with loitering and send them to Aspen for three years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:01
|
|
|
TechnoSyndrome posted:I don't know why you seem to take this so personally, I never at any point implied that I was disappointed because I wanted to get off on some over the top gore. I just found it odd how quick they cut away, and personally think some of the impact is lost when you dance around the aftermath of violence and only really focus on the act itself. No need to make me out as some loving creep for it, it's just a difference of opinion. Haha, you're a weirdo, plain and simple. It's not odd--mass audiences don't want to see a torture flick when they see an action movie. I walked into it expecting high adrenaline action and not Saw/Hostel. They likely hoped to avoid alienating audiences/garnering an NC-17, as previously stated. In terms of the impact being lost by avoiding the "aftermath," I feel like you just said the opposite of how the director and the rest of the population feels. The aftermath of the violence is there, it's more than stupid rear end rivers of blood and gouged out eyes hangin around on screen. It's the city/block itself, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
For the record, I thought the shots could have just used like an extra second or so, not ten second lingering shots so you can absorb every little detail. I generally don't watch super violent movies because I got pretty desensitized to that stuff as a teenager when I went through that phase, but I think it can help a movie where it's appropriate.gobbles posted:In terms of the impact being lost by avoiding the "aftermath," I feel like you just said the opposite of how the director and the rest of the population feels. The aftermath of the violence is there, it's more than stupid rear end rivers of blood and gouged out eyes hangin around on screen. It's the city/block itself, I guess? I thought the state of the city/block were more of a product of the poverty that comes with post-apocalyptic societies, which in turn breeds violence. I think at one point they said Peach Trees has like a 96% unemployment rate or something. That kind of tie into the themes of the movie in a way, with Judge Dredd blindly fighting the products of poverty rather than the cause. TechnoSyndrome fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Sep 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:13
|
|
|
TechnoSyndrome posted:I thought the state of the city/block were more of a product of the poverty that comes with post-apocalyptic societies, which in turn breeds violence. I think at one point they said Peach Trees has like a 96% unemployment rate or something. That kind of tie into the themes of the movie in a way, with Judge Dredd blindly fighting the products of poverty rather than the cause. It's not exactly blind. Comics Dredd is very aware that the city-wide unemployment rate of 87% is a cause of much of the crime he faces. It's just not possible to do anything about that; mechanisation of labour and corporatism has reduced the number of jobs that need doing by humans at all levels. As for the level of violence in the movie against the comic, I will provide the following panel from a side-story as evidence:  The comic can be extremely violent, but comics are no longer rated or censored. Movies are, which is why Dredd is as violent as they can get away with but does not go to excess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
The movie showed similar types of blood splatter effects, so I'd say it was pretty faithful to the comics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:44
|
|
|
Jedit posted:It's not exactly blind. Comics Dredd is very aware that the city-wide unemployment rate of 87% is a cause of much of the crime he faces. It's just not possible to do anything about that; mechanisation of labour and corporatism has reduced the number of jobs that need doing by humans at all levels. Even in the movie it's definitely not blind by the end, but for most of it he seems just concerned with doing his job, and doesn't really care about the people or circumstances surrounding them outside of the broad notion that he's protecting them. He contrasts a lot with Anderson, who very much wants to make a difference, and I found the relationship between the two and their differing ideologies one of the more interesting parts of the movie. It's only after Anderson lets the hacker kid go that he seems to start to think about how justice might not just be following his directives as closely as humanly possible. Speaking of the comics, is there a good place to start out for a newcomer? I'm super curious about them after watching the movie and reading parts of this thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
So, this is more of a general Dredd question (although I plan on seeing the movie sometime this week): Is there anyone in prison who's actually a hardened criminal? It seems like all the real criminals ending getting executed. Are the only people doing hard time jay-walkers and litter bugs?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
TechnoSyndrome posted:Even in the movie it's definitely not blind by the end, but for most of it he seems just concerned with doing his job, and doesn't really care about the people or circumstances surrounding them outside of the broad notion that he's protecting them. He contrasts a lot with Anderson, who very much wants to make a difference, and I found the relationship between the two and their differing ideologies one of the more interesting parts of the movie. It's only after Anderson lets the hacker kid go that he seems to start to think about how justice might not just be following his directives as closely as humanly possible. Case Files#2
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 00:59
|
|
|
nickmeister posted:So, this is more of a general Dredd question (although I plan on seeing the movie sometime this week): There are quite a lot of hardened criminals in the Iso-Blocks, as the Judges tend not to kill people who surrender without a fight. Most perps don't surrender, though, as there is so much crime that the Judges can't handle all of it. If you're not caught right away, there's a good chance you'll get away with it unless you're later caught doing something else. Re: places to start - I wouldn't actually recommend Case Files 2 as it's almost entirely comprised of two stories, one set outside the city and one that provides an atypical view of the Justice Department. Case Files 3 would be better in my opinion, as it contains more standard stories but the world is better established than it was in Case Files 1.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 01:16
|
|
|
So something that I thought might be a nod to the comics: Were the four corrupt Judges possibly meant to represent Judge Death and his gang? E: Also, saw the movie was bombing badly in the States  . How's it doing overseas?
E the Shaggy fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Sep 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 01:41
|
|
|
E the Shaggy posted:So something that I thought might be a nod to the comics: I hadn't thought of that, but I don't think they were meant to be Judge Death and co. They were corrupt and opposed to Dredd, but there was nothing supernatural about them and they weren't the main villains. I think that Death would warrant his own movie (although Dredd fighting the two Judges was quite excellent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
E the Shaggy posted:E: Also, saw the movie was bombing badly in the States According to Box Office Mojo, between the UK and Spain, it's made like $5.2 million foreign so far. So over twice as well as here so far, but still not enough to make its budget back
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 02:05
|
|
|
Personally, I didn't see a single ad for this ever and the only reason I knew it even existed was when I was invited to a screening. I feel like they did a terrible job promoting the film. Like it or not, usually it's actually considered more profitable to spend money on advertising than it is on actual content.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Are you serious rageaholic monkey Anyways yes, the 3D scenes such as the slow mo scenes or the "action shots" would have lost their lustre had they not been in 3d.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 03:40
|
|
|
That was the most fun in a theater I've had all year I think. I'm sad to hear it's not doing well as far as the box office goes--it really made me want to watch Dredd go through the rest of the city and clean house. I'm sure this has been mentioned already, but I knew basically nothing about the film going into it outside of it being about Judge Dredd. So, once I understood the premise of the movie (ultra-violent movie with protagonists trapped in a building with a crimelord on top) I couldn't stop laughing, because I just watched The Raid: Redemption like two days ago.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 03:59
|
|
|
I saw it yesterday and had a ton of fun with it. One of the things I really liked is how they went relatively easy on the slow motion - especially for a movie having a drug that causes it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 04:29
|
|
|
So people have said how the “blood flying out of the frame" effect is only done once, by quickly switching to a 2.40:1 aspect ratio for that one shot? I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if, for the Blu-ray release, they actually went back and added a similar blood effect to multiple scenes in the film that covered the whole 16:9 ratio that the Blu-ray would naturally have at all times? I would love the hell out of that, and it would be a great way to take advantage of that particular difference between theater projection and digital presentation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 04:42
|
|
|
This movie was really great. The reboot set the world up very well without being too heavy on the exposition. It would be a drat shame for Resident Evil movies to make a killing with constant sequels and for this one to die as a stand alone. I think that releasing it so close to a schlocky 3d action movie like RE is one of the reasons it's floundering. That, and it's the end of the summer movie season. Holding on until another holiday might have been a better idea, but what do I know, I'm not an insider. I do have to say though, that one of the biggest factors in action movie success is star power, and Karl Urban hasn't really made a fan base with his career. It's just too bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 05:06
|
|
|
Watched it with zero expectations. I kinda loved it.. I think. I'm not a fan of the comic or the first movie, but this was a really well done action movie. I think it had and used every single cliche to perfection. I didn't think it was a "good" movie per-se, but I was thoroughly entertained.
CaptainHollywood fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Sep 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 06:40
|
|
|
CaptainHollywood posted:I didn't think it was a "good" movie per-se, but I was thoroughly entertained. That means it's good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 07:58
|
|
|
I really enjoyed this, hopefully its relatively low price tag will help it spawn a sequel. Its one of the first movies I've seen where I felt the 3D added anything. I really loved the design of the Hall of Justice, it looked fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 08:23
|
|
|
Captain Magic posted:I'm sure this has been mentioned already, but I knew basically nothing about the film going into it outside of it being about Judge Dredd. So, once I understood the premise of the movie (ultra-violent movie with protagonists trapped in a building with a crimelord on top) I couldn't stop laughing, because I just watched The Raid: Redemption like two days ago. It has been mentioned already, frequently. Dredd was in development before The Raid, and the director of The Raid saw the Dredd script while filming his movie. Any similarities between the two are entirely coincidental. I'm amazed that Dredd hasn't been advertised much in the States.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 10:02
|
|
|
Jedit posted:It has been mentioned already, frequently. Dredd was in development before The Raid, and the director of The Raid saw the Dredd script while filming his movie. Any similarities between the two are entirely coincidental. So if anything, The Raid ripped off Dredd? That makes me appreciate Dredd even more 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 10:10
|
|
|
Just saw this in 3-d last night, and there were only like 20 people tops in the theater for a 7 pm showing on a Saturday. Which sucks because I loved the hell out of this movie and desperately want them to make more. Although the fact that I have yet to see a single commercial for this, and only knew it was coming out because of Rotten Tomatoes may have something to do with that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 11:22
|
|
|
The amount of people who wanted another Judge Dredd movie before this was remarkably small. I was shocked to see how well it did on Rotten Tomatoes and word of mouth, and now have some interest in seeing it. If the producers kept the budget small enough, I could see a sequel being given the go ahead depending on how this does over the next year of rentals/purchases.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 14:43
|
|
|
ghostwritingduck posted:If the producers kept the budget small enough, I could see a sequel being given the go ahead depending on how this does over the next year of rentals/purchases. That's all well and good, but the issue here is that we already know exactly what this movie needs to do to get a sequel and the plans for the sequel and it doesn't seem like either are going to be feasible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 14:51
|
|
|
Did anyone else see this in dbox or whatever? The 3d is cool but I probably could have done without my seat moving around a little bit, idk.Jedit posted:It has been mentioned already, frequently. Dredd was in development before The Raid, and the director of The Raid saw the Dredd script while filming his movie. Any similarities between the two are entirely coincidental. I ended up seeing both movies in the same night and the similarities were pretty jarring. That's pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 15:26
|
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:That means it's good. It's not going to win any awards.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
CaptainHollywood posted:It's not going to win any awards. The vast majority of good movies dont win awards.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 16:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:12 |
|
|
Spike TV has an awards show, so it very well might.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 16:18
|
|
