NoneMoreNegative posted:

Myrddin_Emrys posted:

For some reason, this is a film no one saw at the cinema, but are all buying on dvd /blu ray. Weird. Maybe its a Brit thing and everyone knows of dredd in one form or another.

BreakAtmo posted:

Maybe the good word of mouth didn't travel fast enough during the cinema run, but now after months it's grown to a greater extent?

Another Person posted:

That is the best news you could hope for with this movie. Hopefully it pushes it over the 50$mil profits the movie needs for a sequel. I still need to buy my copy.

Cream_Filling posted:

Dunno, they could be ballistic armor, too. It is the future, after all. But yeah, the point of the suit is the same reason most other comic book movies forgo the skintight spandex - it looks kind of silly, which detracts from the gritty feel they're shooting for. Also, probably the stuntmen appreciate the protection.

quote:

I know it's a Glock with a bunch of plant-ons on it. That might be one reason that the proportions are kind of awkward-looking. Especially that placement of the second magazine-looking thing in front of the trigger assembly.

etalian posted:

I suppose the cheesy Stallone Dredd movie was in many ways much closer to the look of the comics and the wider range of colors.

Kegluneq posted:

I really don't want to have to watch the old one to check this, but I think you're right. Besides budget concerns, I think they really tried to distance themselves from the old film by having a completely new and more realistic aesthetic for Megacity One. I think it works pretty well though. This film is astonishingly colourful and amazingly well shot - the Slo-Mo scenes in particular are like comic book art.

etalian posted:

You can watch it on Youtube if you enjoy cheesy movies, if anything it serves as a amusing contrast the newer better executed movie.

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

I'm starting to think the best joke in the film is in how Anderson spares that one guy, because she sees that he was forced to do bad things and is therefore a victim.

It shows how myopic she is - because which of the criminals wasn't forced into a lovely life of crime by their dire situation? But that one gesture nonetheless makes her instantly 'the good guy' to audiences, after killing/torturing her way through half the building.

Danger posted:

Dredd knows how to properly subdue an enemy hiding in a civilian population:

Kegluneq posted:

Oh, I have seen it - it was actually my first encounter with the Judge Dredd universe :-/ I thought it was okay at the time, but after reading some of the comics I realised the depths of my error... With a different script and cast(!) it could have been a pretty decent rendition of the original material.

Kegluneq posted:

That's true to the comics at least. There isn't really anywhere else a second magazine could go without significantly enlarging the weapon.

Kieselguhr Kid posted:

I said this in the general chat thread, but I'm convinced there's a liberal and a pinko reading: the liberal sees Anderson as softly-softly revisionist, slowly moving the system into a more humane approach -- or at least a more efficient system needing less torture, 'collateral damage,' etc. (or is it more humane as a consequence of this?) -- whereas the pinko is more likely to say 'gently caress this, the system is hosed and any moralism atop it is contemptible fraud.'


I find myself stunned that his argument is there's nothing all that brutal about Dredd since a Judge's standard 'area-of-effect attack' is white phosphorus. How do you miss the point by getting it?

Danger posted:

I definitely see Anderson's approach as the more 'humane, progressive' torture that can reach many more souls. It's not that the system will need less torture, but that the torture is, as you point at, less wasteful. Of course they'd pass her. So she is the liberal reformist in that sense.

Cream_Filling posted:

A part of the American mythology (and also actual commie ideology) is that oppressive systems will, as historical inevitability, eventually crumble and be replaced by more just systems. I think this is not true, and so I think it's important to have convincing and nuanced portrayals of dystopias to underline the fragility and rarity of the American system (or at the very least, our idealized image of that system), and the viability of horrible dystopian systems. I don't think that it's harmful to "normalize" oppressive actions in the context of such portrayals - I think it's a good thing to show the parallels between real life and the fictional world, and I disagree that seeing something familiar in such a context serves to promote that thing, though it's of course going to be open to interpretation.

Of course, the alternative isn't totally ruled out, here. I wonder how much damage Dirty Harry and other movies which came out in reaction to the creation of the Miranda Doctrine did by promoting the narrative of "crooks get away because of legal loopholes babying criminals!"

Danger posted:

I don't think it's promoting anything. Look at that "Nathan's Diner" sign.

Payndz posted:

Arse, I was hoping they'd have the 'Dredd stares unreadably at a gang of burning perps' closeup shot at wallpaper size, but they didn't.

jabby posted:

That's an awesome picture, but it does draw attention to how goofy the Judge helmet is for actually seeing out of.

massive spider posted:

The thing that stands out most to me about 95 dredd is the theme, which its totally badass but totally ill suited to the movie. It really seems like everyone involved thought they were kickstarting an epic sci fi franchise.

Kieselguhr Kid posted:

I said this in the general chat thread, but I'm convinced there's a liberal and a pinko reading: the liberal sees Anderson as softly-softly revisionist, slowly moving the system into a more humane approach -- or at least a more efficient system needing less torture, 'collateral damage,' etc. (or is it more humane as a consequence of this?) -- whereas the pinko is more likely to say 'gently caress this, the system is hosed and any moralism atop it is contemptible fraud.'

etalian posted:

And also amusing from a theme point of view since a bombasic heroic theme really doesn't really capture why Dredd is so different than the standard superhero setup.

Red posted:

Not that I know a ton about the technology of the universe or Dredd's comic backstory, but I, as the viewer, assume the following:

- There's an obscene amount of shielding built into the helmet and visor (hence why Anderson's abilities are seriously hampered by it)
- The helmet provides the wearer with a Heads Up Display-type overlay - they can target objects, get statistical readouts, etc.
- It's supposed to look large and imposing, just like the pads and armor - it makes the Judge look larger than they actually are.

Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:

Always assumed there was a HUD of some sort, especially given the chase scene at the beginning. Kinda like Stormtrooper helmets in Star Wars. Useless as poo poo for just wearing as a helmet for a costume, but as far as the "technology" goes, pretty badass with poo poo like internal/external coms, sensor packages, hell I think some of em even have sealing forcefields for space work.

moths posted:

They do establish that helmet HUD technology exists, as evidenced by that kid playing a video game. I wonder if we were going to get a Dredd's eye view shot and then they decided against it.

Kegluneq posted:

Minor thing that annoys me about the film, or at least the extras: they keep insisting that Slo-Mo slows the brain down to 1% of its normal speed. But that has to be the opposite of what's actually happening - if it just slowed down the mind then everyone on Slo-Mo would just lag behind everyone else visually...

BreakAtmo posted:

Maybe the good word of mouth didn't travel fast enough during the cinema run, but now after months it's grown to a greater extent?

Physical posted:

One thing though, why did Dredd slo-mo mal-mal? That seems like some sort of corruption, the only thing that I didn't understand.

DicksToAsses posted:

Either for a sadistic eye for an eye torture while she meets her death sentence, or possibly to try and stop her freaking out hard and having some kind of fear induced heart attack halfway down and blowing the block up.

Or third option: because the slo-mo shots look cool as hell and it got us one more

Physical posted:

The eye for an eye part is what I think is corrupt and I didn't think Judges could do that. But whatever all of these make sense.

berzerkmonkey posted:

I was thinking about this and the only explanation I can come up with is that while your reaction time remains at 100%, your brain is somehow interpreting things at 1% - in other words, time in general seems to slow, not just your time. This is the only way to explain how people who are on Slo-Mo are able to go from zero to sixty in a split second (the gang-banger in the van in the beginning of the movie.) But yeah, it's definitely a puzzling thing.

Physical posted:

One thing though, why did Dredd slo-mo mal-mal? That seems like some sort of corruption, the only thing that I didn't understand.

quote:

I really wish I would have seen it in IMAX 3D or whatever I feel bad that I didn't give it 2x tickets worth of money.

berzerkmonkey posted:

The sad thing is that Stallone had been trying to get a Dredd film made for a long time, but was waiting for the right script to come around - unfortunately for everyone, that one was the script he chose...

Kegluneq posted:

I assume it hotwires the brain into operating a hundred times faster than normal, for a few seconds (albeit only the part that processes visual images and senses passage of time). Was that what you were saying? Their use of percentages is a bit confusing.

Elentor posted:

Maybe the others were so much worse (). To me what was so bad about the first Dredd movie was the tone. It had that 90's cheesy humor for kids that was unbearable, scattered all over the film. Stallone itself was a good Dredd, in my opinion at least.

Elentor posted:

Maybe the others were so much worse (). To me what was so bad about the first Dredd movie was the tone. It had that 90's cheesy humor for kids that was unbearable, scattered all over the film. Stallone himself was a good Dredd, in my opinion at least.