|
Baron Bifford posted:OK, so we agree at least that Dredd and Anderson were justified in defending themselves. Now, let's move on to the broader picture. The way I see it there are whole pages dedicated to providing you with these points, with you picking them apart by saying "I didn't see that, I was too busy focusing on the movie".
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 23:38 |
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:OK, so we agree at least that Dredd and Anderson were justified in defending themselves. Now, let's move on to the broader picture. Why is the onus on me to watch the movie for you? You have proven if nothing else in this thread that you are not worth engaging on any level, as you don't care to listen to what anyone has to tell you. I can't tell if this is an advanced troll job or if you're just a gigantic idiot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:OK, so we agree at least that Dredd and Anderson were justified in defending themselves. Now, let's move on to the broader picture. Here's your immediate one. Ma-Ma has her rivals given Slo-Mo and thrown off the balcony. At the end of the movie, Dredd does exactly the same thing to her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
OK, that's one point. We're getting somewhere. I can't argue that was needlessly cruel, even if it could be seen as poetic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
In that same scene you also have Dredd perfectly willing to endanger the entirety of Peach Trees because THE LAW needed to be dispensed right there at that moment. This really isn't any different than MaMa having an entire floor ripped to shreds as long as it meant two dead judges. Neither of them were about to let innocent bystanders get in the way of what they wanted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Eh, OK. He reasoned (correctly) that the radio signal would not reach the bombs from the bottom. And perhaps this was his best opportunity to end Ma-Ma. It's like the hostage situation in the opening sequence. Dredd is a guy absolutely must get his man now rather than later (in MC1, "later" might mean "never") and is willing to risk civilian lives for it, even if said risks are calculated. At least he takes civilian safety into consideration; Ma-Ma does not. It's typical of Dredd stories to pit him against villains who are way nastier than he is. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Sep 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:It's typical of Dredd stories to pit him against villains who are way nastier than he is. It would have been cool if this movie had done that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
But it did! Ma-Ma's viciousness shocked me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
Ghosthotel posted:In that same scene you also have Dredd perfectly willing to endanger the entirety of Peach Trees because THE LAW needed to be dispensed right there at that moment. This really isn't any different than MaMa having an entire floor ripped to shreds as long as it meant two dead judges. Neither of them were about to let innocent bystanders get in the way of what they wanted. I don't think that he actually considered it a serious risk. In retrospect, it seemed to me that he was completely certain of the outcome, but the scene was initially framed as if there was some uncertainty to add tension.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
He literally sets the building on fire at one point. How is that not him risking the lives of innocents just as much as Mama was?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
Mr.48 posted:I don't think that he actually considered it a serious risk. In retrospect, it seemed to me that he was completely certain of the outcome, but the scene was initially framed as if there was some uncertainty to add tension. Oh, he's pretty sure he'll be right, absolutely. But he doesn't even care if he's wrong. Drugging her and throwing her off the building has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with sending a message.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:31
|
|
|
He kind of had to throw her off the building, if he didn't want to get blown up. Drugging her, yeah, that was pointless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:It was pointed out before: He didn't spare the guy, Anderson did. Dredd pointed him out to her and basically said "Here is a lawbreaker, you almost missed him" and she goes " Dredd does spare the guy. They walk up and dredd points the guy out to anderson. Anderson says how long the sentence is for vagrancy with no implied rolleyes whatsoever. Dredd: Correct. [pointing to vagrant] Don't be here when we get back. And actually, if the guy had listened to dredd, he'd still be alive because he wouldn't be in the door. When they come back with the gang member to leave, they're getting ready to arrest him and the door closes on him. Compassion is probably the wrong word for what dredd is doing for the vagrant, the correct way to say it is that he's showing leniency. As far as the civilian casualties and possibly blowing up peach trees is concerned, we see in one of the first scenes that dredd is willing to accept civilian casualties in order to stop these extremely dangerous criminals. Does this make the judges as bad as the criminals? We're never shown that, but you could argue it, i think. The movie makes it obvious that the judge system doesn't work, and that it only exists because of increasing violent crime and dwindling resources. Dredd knows this, but perseveres anyways, which i think makes his character more interesting. edit: and what are they supposed to do if not fight against mama and her gang? Just lay down and die? Mama is doing public executions by throwing them off the top floor of the tower, are they supposed to just let that continue happening to avoid civilian casualties? Hell Yeah fucked around with this message at 20:41 on Sep 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:37
|
|
didn't we want to investigate a murder, sir?"
|
TheJoker138 posted:He literally sets the building on fire at one point. How is that not him risking the lives of innocents just as much as Mama was? Self defence, the building was trying to kill him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
Tripwyre posted:Oh, he's pretty sure he'll be right, absolutely. But he doesn't even care if he's wrong. Drugging her and throwing her off the building has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with sending a message. Dredd was carrying out a death sentence that Ma-Ma deserved, but it would have been more sensible for Dredd to cuff Ma-Ma and drag her to the isocubes. There's no rush to execute. Would have made even more sense for Ma-Ma to use a transmitter that broadcasted a continuous "do-not-detonate" signal instead, so if she was removed from her apartment the bomb would go off. TheJoker138 posted:He literally sets the building on fire at one point. How is that not him risking the lives of innocents just as much as Mama was? Christmas Miracle posted:edit: and what are they supposed to do if not fight against mama and her gang? Just lay down and die? Mama is doing public executions by throwing them off the top floor of the tower, are they supposed to just let that continue happening to avoid civilian casualties? Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Sep 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
Christmas Miracle posted:Dredd does spare the guy. Dredd doesn't spare him. He points him out because someone is willfully breaking the law in his presence and that must be stopped. Anderson says shouldn't we prioritize murders, which Dredd confirms as the correct procedure in the circumstance. Dredd doesn't give a gently caress about his plight and it isn't about leniency either. If not for a more pressing criminal issue (and only because of that more pressing issue) the man would be in the isocubes. At the time Dredd lacked the ability to resolve the situation the way it should be and compromises by ending the ongoing crime without having punished it; on the way out the door he faces no such constraint. If the doors smashing in on the homeless man are suggestive of anything it's not that having listened to Dredd would have saved his life, it's that having disobeying Dredd got him killed. It's a subtle "glass half empty" distinction, but one I think is important as more accurately representative of Dredd's characterization within the movie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
EvilTobaccoExec posted:If the doors smashing in on the homeless man are suggestive of anything it's not that having listened to Dredd would have saved his life, it's that having disobeying Dredd got him killed. It's a subtle "glass half empty" distinction, but one I think is important as more accurately representative of Dredd's characterization within the movie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
EvilTobaccoExec posted:Dredd doesn't spare him. He points him out because someone is willfully breaking the law in his presence and that must be stopped. Anderson says shouldn't we prioritize murders, which Dredd confirms as the correct procedure in the circumstance. I guess maybe you are right, but i read this scene differently. He specifically asks anderson for judgement, anderson says the sentence for vagrancy, then mentions that they're there to investigate the murders. When dredd says "correct" he could be referring to anderson being correct about the sentencing guidelines since she is under evaluation (what i thought was the case,) or that they're there to investigate the murders and not to pinch homeless people for vagrancy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
I think some of you are missing a key point in the "Ma-Ma and the Judges are the same" thing. Dredd is -- sometimes, in a purely immediate sense -- justified in what he does. But so is Ma-Ma. She came to Peach Trees when it was in a state of constant violence between four different gangs and united it. It's been a while since I saw the film, but I'm pretty sure there's even a pretty little 3D infographic towards the beginning that talks about how violent crime in the block actually decreased once she assumed total control. If Ma-Ma weren't completely horrifying to face, she wouldn't have that kind of power. Terrorizing traitors and snitches is essential to her remaining in control and her remaining in control is essential to Peach Trees retaining order. Of course, "order" is a relative statement since it's still the ugliest slum in MegaCity One, but again, that's exactly the same as the Judges imposing "order" on the city with a 6% response rate. Worrying about whether Dredd gives homeless men a second chance or not is beside the point. For all his gruffness, Dredd is basically an idealist -- he's not very different from Anderson at all. But the system in which he places his idealistic faith is monstrous, the "order" it provides is a joke, and his and Anderson's decision to carry out the law basically destroyed Peach Trees, and in all likelihood sent it right back to the era of competing gangs. We don't find out for sure, because once they apprehend Ma-Ma, they're done -- they have their perp and made a gruesome example of her, and it isn't their job to make sure Peach Trees recovers or even improves. The Judges don't exist to make people's lives better, they exist to maintain the power of the Judge system over the city.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I think some of you are missing a key point in the "Ma-Ma and the Judges are the same" thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 00:14
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:So you see Peach Trees as the sovereign domain of Ma-Ma? Essentially, yes. She's a tyrant (and overthrowing her would probably be a vital, but not sufficient component of reforming Peach Trees) but treating MegaCity One as a single unified city-state is absurd if the Judges are the only thing keeping it together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 00:18
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:It's was an AoE attack on a bunch of armed goons that Dredd had cleverly tricked into clustering together. Depicted below: Examples of a clever AoE attack.  
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 02:12
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:
You're a dumb motherfucker if you don't realize this is the point. Really, seriously dense as a lead brick. Every single random gangster wears unique clothes and is visually distinct from one another. Each one has an uncovered face. Each one is a person. Dredd and the Judges are not. They wear identical uniforms and helmets that cover almost the entirety of their face. The only one who doesn't is Anderson, who isn't a judge proper yet. The judges are the faceless storm troopers, uniformly dispensing totalitarian "justice" that would be gunned down by the dozens by a perky resistance in other movies. Instead, the people resisting these fascists are reduced to the "bad guys". The movie focuses so much on facial damage and dismemberment because Dredd reduces them to a faceless mass of criminals, neglecting that fact that they have families and are in a terrible situation. It would be easy to flip Ma-ma and Dredds roles. Ma-ma brought order to the block by empowering herself and organizing the citizens to overthrow the other gangs. She brought in economic prosperity through manufacturing and selling a recreational drug. Sure, her methods were brutal but that's war, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
Saw it on Netflix, it was great. 2 questions related to torture (!): was that what Kay was thinking about when he "shocked" Anderson, and why was Yellow Shirt subject to torture in the flashbacks?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Dredd is -- sometimes, in a purely immediate sense -- justified in what he does. But so is Ma-Ma. She came to Peach Trees when it was in a state of constant violence between four different gangs and united it. It's been a while since I saw the film, but I'm pretty sure there's even a pretty little 3D infographic towards the beginning that talks about how violent crime in the block actually decreased once she assumed total control.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 04:07
|
|
|
david_a posted:There was an infographic showing the other gangs waning influences, but I don't remember the medic stating that the violence level decreased. For all we know the other gangs left each other alone. Well, either way really. Ma-Ma doesn't have to be good for the block to be similar to the Judges, in fact it might be a better analogy if she isn't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 04:11
|
|
|
Kraps posted:Saw it on Netflix, it was great. 2 questions related to torture (!): was that what Kay was thinking about when he "shocked" Anderson, and why was Yellow Shirt subject to torture in the flashbacks? Kay was putting an image of having sex with her (possibly forcefully, not sure if he was imagining it being consensual in the image), and I think the images of torture with Yellow Shirt was just Ma-Ma gouging out his eyes to put in the robo-eyes, presumably so he'd be more useful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
Hewlett posted:Kay was putting an image of having sex with her (possibly forcefully, not sure if he was imagining it being consensual in the image) Hewlett posted:Ma-Ma gouging out his eyes to put in the robo-eyes, presumably so he'd be more useful. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 04:23
|
|
|
The idea is that whatever he's showing her is so horrible that it's better off left to our imaginations. So just think of something really bad and then imagine it's worse than that. It doesn't matter what he's thinking about. It's Bad. Maybe he's thinking about the glowing stuff in Marcellus Wallace's suitcase.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:OK, so we agree at least that Dredd and Anderson were justified in defending themselves. Now, let's move on to the broader picture. Baron Bifford posted:OK, that's one point. We're getting somewhere. I can't argue that was needlessly cruel, even if it could be seen as poetic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
Kraps posted:That was the first image that she shrugged off no? Ah, I thought that's what you were talking about for some reason. I totally forgot about the lack of image shown in the big mind-torture sequence. Welp, guess it's time to watch Dredd again 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 06:27
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:So you see Peach Trees as the sovereign domain of Ma-Ma? The Judges are merely another gang. They just happened to inherit the resources and symbolic order of the previous megagang in charge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 06:32
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:
Improbable Lobster posted:You're a dumb motherfucker if you don't realize this is the point. Really, seriously dense as a lead brick. Every single random gangster wears unique clothes and is visually distinct from one another. Each one has an uncovered face. Each one is a person. Dredd and the Judges are not. They wear identical uniforms and helmets that cover almost the entirety of their face. The only one who doesn't is Anderson, who isn't a judge proper yet. The judges are the faceless storm troopers, uniformly dispensing totalitarian "justice" that would be gunned down by the dozens by a perky resistance in other movies. Instead, the people resisting these fascists are reduced to the "bad guys". The movie focuses so much on facial damage and dismemberment because Dredd reduces them to a faceless mass of criminals, neglecting that fact that they have families and are in a terrible situation. Maybe I am also biased. I saw this movie as some lawmen paying attention to a neglected part of their jurisdiction, taking down a criminal element that had been allowed to fester to horrific proportions. You see it as some evil foreigners invading the sovereign state of Peach Trees, with Queen Ma-Ma retaliating as is her right. At this point, the debate becomes too political and I can't remain objective. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 08:22 on Sep 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:06
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Maybe I am also biased. I saw this movie as some lawmen paying attention to a neglected part of their jurisdiction, taking down a criminal element that had been allowed to fester to horrific proportions. You see it as some evil foreigners invading the sovereign state of Peach Trees, with Queen Ma-Ma retaliating as is her right. What? No I don't, don't put words in my mouth. I think the characterization that you are ascribing to yourself is as ridiculous and hyberbolic as the one you're ascribing to me, but more importantly my argument has nothing to do with rights, it has to do with force and power. Baron Bifford posted:At this point, the debate has now become too political and I can't remain objective. I honestly thought people were coming down way too hard on you, but this is a pretty stupid thing to say. It's a fundamentally political movie. Viewing it through a political lens is a requirement for having an intelligent conversation about it, not an obstacle. If you think that a police force, without a corresponding court system, that has totally lost the monopoly on force, and which responds to a mere one in twenty cases is still a legitimate government, by all means argue for it. Bear in mind that you're arguing for a fictional system whose creator has explicitly described it as fascist, but hey, it's possible he's wrong. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 08:24 on Sep 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:14
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I think the characterization that you are ascribing to yourself is as ridiculous and hyberbolic as the one you're ascribing to me, but more importantly my argument has nothing to do with rights, it has to do with force and power. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 08:36 on Sep 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
Having just seen this film I think it may be the clearest example of Poe's Law in a film that I've ever seen. I honestly can't tell if parts of it are a celebration of a right-wing "law and order" police state or a parody of it as some people here are arguing. My inclination is to say that it's both, though I'm not sure that everyone involved in the writing and production understood it as such. The film honestly may be too subtle in the parts that are critical of Dredd and the Judges. I remember most critics taking Starship Troopers at face value and that movie is about as obvious in it's satire as a baseball bat to the head. Sadly most of the audiences leaving Dredd are likely to see it as just another lone hero, fighting for the state against an evil racially different other.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:33
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:My arguments were not about force and power, but of motivations and responsibility. Motivations are easy; I don't think I disagree with you about those, I think Dredd really does have good intentions (much like Anderson, although his are more abstract -- Anderson just wants to help people, Dredd wants to maintain order, but presumably believes that order is what is best for everyone.) Responsibility, though, is a bit hairier. The Judges are incapable of acting as an effective deterrent against crime, or even of just punishing criminals consistently. Their responsibility can't be to a universal sense of justice -- despite that obviously being how Dredd thinks of his job -- because they're literally incapable of enforcing it. Their ability to operate as an actual police force, that does what police forces do in the real world, has already crumbled away before the film even begins. It's hard to even say it's to the public good, because the result of their visit to Peach Trees is that hundreds of people die, huge sections of the compound are left in ruins, and they've left all those people vulnerable to whatever predator comes along next.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:46
|
|
|
Or to sum up my point very briefly: the idea that a social contract exists between normal citizens and Judges is laughable. (Which is the point of the scene with the doctor, where he refuses to let the Judges into the clinic and is completely unconvinced by Dredd's claims to legitimate authority.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:49
|
|
|
The doctor was simply terrified. Ma-Ma threatened to kill anyone who aided the Judges, remember? Whoever he sees as legitimate, he sees Ma-Ma as the stronger force, the one you must not defy if you know what's good for you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 23:38 |
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:The doctor was simply terrified. Ma-Ma threatened to kill anyone who aided the Judges, remember? Whoever he sees as legitimate, he sees Ma-Ma as the stronger force. There's no difference between "the stronger force" and "legitimate." A government is by definition an entity that has a monopoly on force.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 08:53
|
|