|
marktheando posted:The whole point of Dredd is that he isn't extreme by big meg standards- he's a good judge. He's not a loose cannon renegade- he's a by-the-book stickler for the rules. I hated that other Judges called him out for being too harsh in the Stallone film. Yeah, this is important. When Dredd says "I AM THE LAW," it's not just hyperbole or a dramatic flourish. His actions directly point to the rigid universality the Law creates (we're all perps waiting to be realized). Anderson completes the picture as the obscene superego (she's a mutant for a reason) at work in between the lines, the knowing when the rules are supposed to bent or broken, who is "more equal" before the Law (the hacker goes free), in order to protect the social fabric from the inhuman violence the Law inflicts. She reinserts the morality that Dredd knows nothing of. My favorite part about the movie is how it zeroes in on the flip side to that Good Cop superego: how this guise of morality and "reasonable" action is used to legitimize transgression and produce power. Anderson stops Dredd from beating on Kay, not just because this is inhumane, but because there's a better way. By substituting "humane" psychological torture for physical, the integrity of the Law is preserved (Dredd watches approvingly in front of a conspicuous flag) and at the same time the morality of the superego is reinforced. What's more, it's that passage back from universal inflexibility to specific regulation that introduces a power relationship. We see Kay piss himself, that's important. One of first instances of regulatory power we're subjected to as children is when and where to use the bathroom, and the same regulation of basic bodily functions is an important method of power in a prison (it also connects back to the imagery of water-boarding). Anderson also notably assumes the regulation of his sexual fantasies, connecting the whole thing back to Law's inability to incorporate intent, mental illness, etc (again, she's a mind-reader for a reason). There's so much going on in that one scene, it's fantastic. In short: Dredd is the Law that imposes authority, but Anderson is the knowledge that produces power from that authority. They are a perfect team.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2012 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
Woah. No offense, but I think you might be reading too much into that one scene. Or maybe you're using terminology that is a little too esoteric. Why can't you just say it's hilarious to see a hard-rear end gangster get his dick bitten off and piss his pants?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2012 23:25
|
|
|
Because that would be boring! Half the humor comes from the absurdity, that this poo poo is already familiar to us, that as ridiculous as it is, it points to some truth. It's satire. That being said, I probably could've worded all that more clearly, what didn't make sense?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2012 23:48
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:If there was anything substantially satirical in Dredd, it went over my head. Baron Bifford posted:Woah. No offense, but I think you might be reading too much into that one scene. Or maybe you're using terminology that is a little too esoteric. Why can't you just say it's hilarious to see a hard-rear end gangster get his dick bitten off and piss his pants? Yep.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Woah. No offense, but I think you might be reading too much into that one scene. Or maybe you're using terminology that is a little too esoteric. Why can't you just say it's hilarious to see a hard-rear end gangster get his dick bitten off and piss his pants? Becasue thats boring and some people like to talk about movies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 15:36
|
|
|
Was the American release censored in any way? In the European version I'm told that when Anderson gets into Kay's mind there is more sexual content, like him undressing Anderson.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
I definitely remember that happening in the Australian version. Not that you saw anything rude as such.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
You don't see anything, but yea, she unzipps her armor and there's nothing underneath.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 03:19
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:No, but the movie doesn't do much to show that it is a bad idea. They do not confront Dredd with a situation that could have been resolved with a soft touch. This movie is in many ways a remake of The Raid: Redemption (and perhaps Die Hard). You have a lawman who is trapped with some very dangerous men who have no intention of surrendering peacefully or taking prisoners. Dredd is faced with similar circumstances, and goes all John McClane. The only reason Dredd's actions appear "good" is because the actions of the villian he is compared to are so horrendous (skinning people alive?!) that Dredd only looks "good" by comparison. But Dredd's actions being "less bad" than Ma-ma's does not automatically make him "good". It's like comparing Dexter to the killer from Seven and coming to the conclusion that Dexter is "good". They're both psychotic killers. It's just that one of them only horrendously murders "bad people" and so looks good by comparison. But if you take away that contrast of the villian, the hero doesn't look so heroic anymore.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 06:39
|
|
|
Most of Dredd's kills are in self-defense, or in the defense of innocent life. I wouldn't blame any cop for acting in that manner given the circumstances. There are only a few occasions where he is seen executing a helpless criminal, thus illustrating swift and brutal Mega-City 1 justice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 09:28
|
|
|
To be honest, Bifford does sorta have a point. In the context of other works about police, Dredd is actually really, really close to a lot of straight depictions (Lethal Weapon and Dirty Harry come to mind). It also marks a key difference between comic and movie; the movie takes it for granted that such a character as Judge Dredd would be absolutely ridiculous, whereas the comic kinda beats you over the head with its satire. While I like the movie's approach better, and I feel that the comic's approach would have given the movie some serious tone problems, Bifford's reaction does somewhat illustrate the problem.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 11:42
|
|
|
Well, as it is the movie is quite good. It redeems the awful Stallone film, though the lousy box office receipts means a sequel is unlikely. I'm just disappointed at the opportunities it missed. It doesn't feel like the definitive Dredd film.
Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 12:53 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 12:27
|
|
|
It would be impossible to make "the definitive" Dredd movie on the budget they had.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 14:12
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Most of Dredd's kills are in self-defense, or in the defense of innocent life. I wouldn't blame any cop for acting in that manner given the circumstances. There are only a few occasions where he is seen executing a helpless criminal, thus illustrating swift and brutal Mega-City 1 justice. Well that's kind of the point. The circumstances which make Dredd's actions seem appropriate can only exist in completely broken system.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 14:41
|
|
|
MrBling posted:It would be impossible to make "the definitive" Dredd movie on the budget they had.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 15:33
|
|
|
Foundry Dancer posted:The only reason Dredd's actions appear "good" is because the actions of the villian he is compared to are so horrendous (skinning people alive?!) that Dredd only looks "good" by comparison. But Dredd's actions being "less bad" than Ma-ma's does not automatically make him "good". Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 17:03
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:This is what happens when your screenwriter does a rewrite of The Raid rather than crafting an original tale tailored to the Judge Dredd setting. I think it's been covered several times that the screenplay to Dredd was completed well before The Raid was released and it is not a rewrite or rip off, and it's just a coincidence that two tower block invasion movies happened to come out within a year of one another.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Even when you remove the contrast between him and Ma-Ma, he still doesn't come off as very bad. There isn't very much he does that can objectively be qualified as "evil" or even excessive. Killing people in self-defence or to save the lives of others is justifiable even by modern standards - it's the whole reason cops have guns, right? We see only a few occasions where he does something objectively bad, ie executing a helpless criminal (and giving her Slo-Mo to heighten her suffering) and beating up a captive for info. This is what happens when your screenwriter does a rewrite of The Raid rather than crafting an original tale tailored to the Judge Dredd setting. The problem is that Judge Dredd as he stands in the comics is woefully unsuited to a movie going experience. He is completely unrelatable as a hero and just would not connect at all with an audience. Comic books have the luxury of having ridiculous characters and allowing them to exist in a serious tone but im not sure i want an hour and a half of Dredd charging people for being accessories to muggings etc... It just wouldnt be entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
Nutsngum posted:The problem is that Judge Dredd as he stands in the comics is woefully unsuited to a movie going experience. He is completely unrelatable as a hero and just would not connect at all with an audience. Fatkraken posted:I think it's been covered several times that the screenplay to Dredd was completed well before The Raid was released and it is not a rewrite or rip off, and it's just a coincidence that two tower block invasion movies happened to come out within a year of one another. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 17:29
|
|
|
OK, now let's try to change the subject, this argument has gone on long enough... I was disappointed by the movie's lack of futuristic props. I guess to keep it low budget they had to cut back in some places. I was especially disappointed with Dredd's motorcylce. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:I was disappointed by the movie's lack of futuristic props. I guess to keep it low budget they had to cut back in some places. But you just said the budget didn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 18:25
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Maybe, but I still feel like I've seen this movie before. Die Hard, Under Siege, etc. It feels very formulaic. It's almost like the same fascist undertones run through almost every action movie, and all Dredd has to do to satirize them is push them a little closer to the surface!
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 18:26
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:This is rubbish. There have been plenty of antiheroes in movies, and plenty of satires of extreme justice. No its not, name one anti hero who literally locks up people for being the victims of crime. I cant think of one in a successful mainstream movie. Comic Dredd is an unreasonable response to an unreasonable world. Thats the luxury that comics afford that mainstream movies, that have maybe 2 hours to work with, limited scope and a specific audience it needs to reach, dont have. You could certainly do this kind of stuff as direct to DVD etc.. that directly caters to the fans of the comic and no one else but its got to have greater appeal as well to be a mainstream movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 18:52
|
|
|
Nutsngum posted:No its not, name one anti hero who literally locks up people for being the victims of crime. I cant think of one in a successful mainstream movie. That and the supposed sequel that adapts the Democracy storyline, which would have done a lot more of that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 20:17
|
|
|
Zodar posted:It's almost like the same fascist undertones run through almost every action movie, and all Dredd has to do to satirize them is push them a little closer to the surface! In fact, wasn't that the original intention of Judge Dredd when it was first published? I've heard it was basically a parody of Dirty Harry, with the undertones made explicit and pushed to its limit in a sci-fi setting. Also, gonna have to echo the sentiment that the soundtrack absolutely owns.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Even when you remove the contrast between him and Ma-Ma, he still doesn't come off as very bad. There isn't very much he does that can objectively be qualified as "evil" or even excessive. Killing people in self-defence or to save the lives of others is justifiable even by modern standards - it's the whole reason cops have guns, right? Except Dredd doesn't kill people in self-defense, he kills them because that is their sentence. Someone else pointed out that he fairly easily stunned the kids who attacked him. The satire in the movie comes from the fact that the brutal 'justice' dispensed by the judges actually does nothing as a deterrent and only serves to encourage violence. It's there from the beginning - minor criminals fleeing from Dredd cause the death of an innocent civilian. Then again in the scene with the hostage, Dredd has nothing to negotiate with because the criminal knows judges don't show leniency. Equally the hostage is as terrified of Dredd as she is the criminal, since she knows his presence doesn't help her. In fact, he would rather let her die than let the criminal go. And in the tower block, who is going to surrender when they know Dredd will execute them anyway? The threat of death only makes people fight harder. Look at the 'judged' who are literally a criminal gang who copy the garb of the judges. And in the final scene Dredd risks the lives of everyone in the tower in order to kill Ma-Ma. The whole movie shows that he doesn't care about innocent people, he only cares about punishing the guilty. And since he is an extension of the system, then that is all the system cares about. Which is exactly why the movie is so good, because it shows us the logical conclusion of justice systems that neglect the innocent to focus on harsh punishment of criminals. jabby fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 21:11
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:Also, gonna have to echo the sentiment that the soundtrack absolutely owns. I probably prefer Drokk to the actual soundtrack, but both are amazing. (Drokk was originally going to be the movie soundtrack, but they went in a different direction. So now Drokk is the soundtrack to an imaginary 1980s Dredd movie). Edit- http://drokk.bandcamp.com/ in case anyone missed when it was posted earlier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 21:23
|
|
|
jabby posted:Except Dredd doesn't kill people in self-defense, he kills them because that is their sentence. Someone else pointed out that he fairly easily stunned the kids who attacked him. The criminals that Dredd pursues are already violent gangsters - they had firearms and chose to shoot at Dredd and drive recklessly through heavy traffic rather than pull over and take a pinch for their "minor" crimes. We see this sort of thing every day on America's Wildest Police Chases. Do you blame the cops for every car chase that goes bad? Criminals must be pursued, and when they are chased they will often risk the safety of innocents in their path. But to cave into their threats out of fear is to let them win. Dredd offers leniency to the perp with the hostage: life sentence instead of the death he deserved under law - this shows Dredd cares about innocents, if only because it's his job. The perp rejected the offer, so Dredd took a risk and shot his head off, because when you let a criminal run off with a hostage things can get pretty bad. Of course the hostage was shaking afterwards. She just went through a very harrowing experience. She was taken hostage at gunpoint, and then saw a Judge shoot the guy's head off. Maybe after she's had time to recover, she might feel grateful to the Judge that saved her. In the tower block, the criminals come running for Dredd, not the other way around. Dredd was about to leave with Kay in tow, but then Ma-Ma seals the building and orders every man with a gun to after Dredd. Dredd warns them to stay out of his way, but they all seem to fear and respect Ma-Ma more. It is Ma-Ma's reckless use of a minigun that kills lots of innocents. Dredd, by contrast, is remarkably surgical with his weapon. Dredd and Anderson then fight four genuinely corrupt Judges. Judges who have genuinely stopped caring about the law and their duty, and have become greedy criminals willing to kill their fellow Judges. Dredd is revolted. Dredd reasoned that Ma-Ma's transmitter would not work from the ground floor. Maybe he could have flown her out into the Cursed Earth to be extra safe, but it looks like his calculation was correct.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:17
|
|
|
These are the occasions where I think Dredd uses force beyond what a modern cop would given the circumstances: -During the car chase in beginning, Dredd fires the weapon on his motorcyle to pop the tyres. Cops do this sort of thing during chases, but Dredd was doing it in heavy traffic. Maybe his weapon is computer controlled and really precise, but I don't think a modern cop would be allowed to do that. -Dredd pops the head of the gangster holding the hostage. Whilst his gambit worked well, I don't think a modern cop would be allowed to do this sort of thing in a hostage situation. -When he raids the drug den with Anderson, he doesn't give the men inside a chance to surrender. He just breaches the door and shoots everyone who is holding a gun. -At Dredd's insistence, Anderson executes one of the criminals who was hunting them, even though he was disarmed and helpless. Classic Mega City justice -Dredd beats up Kay for information, then lets Anderson mess with Kay's mind. -Dredd executes Ma-Ma by throwing her off the top floor, but not before giving her Slo-Mo took make the plunge extra vivid. Also I should mention that after he saves the hostage, the bodies of the innocents killed in the crossfire are swept up by the janitor rather than respectfully removed by a coroner. This was, I think, the only truly satirical moment in the entire film: dead humans are just piles of rotting meat. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
Are you arguing that the movie doesn't portray Mega City One as a fascist police state because it's pretty similar to modern day America?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:31
|
|
|
Err just on that first point, opening fire with machine guns in a crowded highway is not the responsible thing to do. As usual, I can't tell if you're trolling or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:35
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Are you arguing that the movie doesn't portray Mega City One as a fascist police state because it's pretty similar to modern day America? Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:41
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Mega City 1 in the comics is a fascist police state (is "fascist" even the correct term for excessive police powers? I don't know if a political science professor would agree). This movie's plot, however, doesn't demonstrate that very well. I love the Dredd comics, but this movie doesn't really display all the things that make Dredd so unique and endearing. They've recycled the basic plot of Die Hard and Under Siege and countless other formulaic action movies, rather than crafting a proper social satire. You don't come across like you are very familiar with the comics at all actually.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:48
|
|
|
How do you know that? I've discussed the movie, not the comics. This movie does convey SOME of the satirical elements of the comics, but not enough, really.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:How do you know that? I've discussed the movie, not the comics. Your first post in this thread- Baron Bifford posted:He's got a sort of X over his visor. Don't they obscure his eyesight?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
Does it matter what level of familiarity anyone has with the comics? We're talking about the film here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 22:56
|
|
|
I've always wondered about the X over the visor ever since I read my first Dredd comic back in the 1990s. I never read an issue that addressed the question. I know the Stallone film removed them because the actors actually wanted to see where they were going. I wonder how Karl Urban coped.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 23:00
|
|
|
Professor Clumsy posted:Does it matter what level of familiarity anyone has with the comics? We're talking about the film here. Absolutely, it doesn't matter, I didn't mean to come across like I was saying you need to know the comics to discuss the film. I was just responding to him saying he loves them when he doesn't come across as being that familiar with them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:The criminals that Dredd pursues are already violent gangsters - they had firearms and chose to shoot at Dredd and drive recklessly through heavy traffic rather than pull over and take a pinch for their "minor" crimes. We see this sort of thing every day on America's Wildest Police Chases. Do you blame the cops for every car chase that goes bad? Criminals must be pursued, and when they are chased they will often risk the safety of innocents in their path. But to cave into their threats out of fear is to let them win. Except they would have been treated extremely harshly for their 'minor' crimes, which probably factored into their decision to flee. The whole point I was making is that people will get desperate and commit even worse crimes if they fear punishment so much. Also you may be right in America, but in most civilized countries the police will abandon car chases if they become too dangerous. Because they realise (quite rightly) that endangering the lives of the public to catch criminals is getting their priorities wrong. Maybe you didn't get the satire in this film because you agree with the methods a bit too much? Baron Bifford posted:Dredd offers leniency to the perp with the hostage: life sentence instead of the death he deserved under law - this shows Dredd cares about innocents, if only because it's his job. As the criminal even points out in the film, a choice between death or life in isolation is not exactly offering much. And as you say yourself, shooting the criminal was a major risk to the hostage which a cop who 'cares about innocents' would hopefully not have taken - similar to opening fire on a crowded freeway. Dredd even executes the guy in a needlessly painful and gruesome way with no regard for how traumatizing it would be for the hostage. Dredd's speech to the citizens of Peach Trees is also telling. He doesn't tell them he is here to help or offer any reassurance. He just reminds them that he is the one they should be more afraid of. So yeah I think most people would say this film is satirical. You not seeing it probably has more to do with your own views. jabby fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Nov 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:I was disappointed by the movie's lack of futuristic props. I guess to keep it low budget they had to cut back in some places. I was especially disappointed with Dredd's motorcylce. I wasn't, and in fact preferred it. If this movie was going to feature all sorts of the crazy Dredd SciFi hijinks with aliens and robots and the moon it would be appropriate. But this film was aiming for a more near future, believable world. The inclusion of the surveillance drones for instance: police departments are already using these. Also what's not futuristic about a handgun with a variety of specialty ammunition, or cybernetic eyes, or massive arcologies, or gut-wound sealing foam, or psychics?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 23:20
|
|
