|
Kraps posted:This, I think. Whatever the larger implications of whether the Law is good or bad, or the Judges, or everything else, the fact is that he is a lawman trying to survive being hunted down by criminals, and the extreme methods that he may seem to use are just par for the current circumstances, like the "escalation" that Gordon mentions in Batman Begins. I did not know anything about Dredd before watching this movie, and to me it was a great action movie about cops surviving in a crapsack world. I'm probably completely off based on the discussion so far but that how I saw it. It's not really about cops "surviving," though. It's about two cops instigating a war as a practical and ideological test for a rookie.
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 15:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:03 |
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Y'know, if this movie was not set in the future and did not feature a guy who calls himself a "Judge" adapted from a comic book well-known for its fierce satire of iron-fisted policing, but instead was set in the modern day featuring a joe average guy, people interpret everything very differently. Once Dredd reaches Peach Trees, he's not much different from John McClane in Die Hard or Casey Ryback in Under Siege. Dredd is like Die Hard only in that it takes place in a tall building. If you want to make an analogy between Dredd and another movie, I suggest High Noon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 15:15
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's not really about cops "surviving," though. It's about two cops instigating a war as a practical and ideological test for a rookie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's not really about cops "surviving," though. It's about two cops instigating a war as a practical and ideological test for a rookie. They were not the ones who fired 3 gattling guns across a wide swath of living spaces with no regard to who was in there vOv. Also what Tuxedo Catfish said.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
I think people are simplifying the film in saying that it's a condemnation of a police state, when it (and the comics) are in fact a simultaneous condemnation and celebration of one. The point of Judge Dredd is that he represents the part of all of us that, no matter how well-meaning or lefty we are, would love to see a boot smash into the face of all those we consider undesirables. Even if you regularly organise anti-capitalism protests, if your house gets burgled, a large part of you will want the police to find the wrong-doers and crack some heads, even if intellectually that's something you're opposed to. So the movie and the comics balance these two drives. On the surface, we are made sympathise and even root for an actual fascist stormtrooper because he's charismatic, direct, and even noble in his own way. But our intellectual halves are also satisfied with a - not particularly subtle - criticism of the world and ethics around Dredd. Essentially it's an attempt to have their cake and eat it, but I think it's a successful one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
Comrade Fakename posted:I think people are simplifying the film in saying that it's a condemnation of a police state, when it (and the comics) are in fact a simultaneous condemnation and celebration of one. But the comedy is very important. If it wasn't an inherently ludicrous concept, I'm sure it wouldn't have attracted the following it has. That's why the unironically jingoistic bullshit like that Frank Miller Batman vs Al Qaeda thing are universally reviled while Dredd keeps on ticking. It's exactly because it's obvious at a glance that no one is actually endorsing Dredd's actions. I guess we've just reached a point in society where someone can look at Dredd and go "yeah that's a fair level of response given the circumstances, case closed" instead of "hahaha this guy is CARTOONISHLY fascist what a lark"
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Shanty posted:I guess we've just reached a point in society where someone can look at Dredd and go "yeah that's a fair level of response given the circumstances, case closed" instead of "hahaha this guy is CARTOONISHLY fascist what a lark"
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
160 new posts? Dredd's getting a sequel!?!?!?  Oh. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:I don't think Dredd planned a block war for Anderson. It was just supposed to be a simple drug bust. Off course, poo poo happens. So... what, the fact that he was improvising makes it better, somehow? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
Eau de MacGowan posted:160 new posts? Dredd's getting a sequel!?!?!? That was what I thought. Instead it's the same old 'this movie has no satire in it' argument with thick as pigshit Baron Bifford that has been going on for almost a loving year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:So... what, the fact that he was improvising makes it better, somehow? They started it! Also I don't see the 2 sides as morally equal. Kraps fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Sep 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
This thread was doing so well, and then bam! pages and pages of poo poo posting. At this point it is basically the same 3-4 people arguing past each other, so can't you just agree to disagree and go poo poo up some other thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:I feel like you're constantly thinking about the whole of the Dreddverse while this movie only shows a part. Well the movie more or less shows the whole Dreddverse. The "Eight hundred million people living in the ruin of the old world" monologue at the beginning frames it, the events of the day are absolutely emblematic of the rest of the universe. It's not like Dredd goes back to the office and goes "well THAT was unusual, now to settle into my normal routine of handing out parking tickets" MrBling posted:This thread was doing so well, and then bam! pages and pages of poo poo posting. I really can't parse why it is a problem for you that people are using the Dredd discussion thread to discuss Dredd. To the point where you feel compelled to pretty much tell them to gently caress off, even.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
Shanty posted:But the comedy is very important. Can't agree more. In this respect it's like Dr. Strangelove: losing the black humor loses something essential. We laugh because otherwise we would cry. The discussion in this thread brought up the point that Judges do things the way they do because it's "necessary" or "practical", even if both the methods and results are horrific. The film starts with a monologue describing how the powers that be destroyed the world. Judges are the stormtroopers of whatever remains of this old order. The first 10 minutes of the movie show Dredd firing a machine gun in public street and a cowboy-style shootout. The conflict of movie setting Judges up to be heroes via cinematic tricks while all their actions clearly show they're not is the core contradiction of Dredd. John Wagner created the comic with this very contradiction in mind. I think the movie succeeded in recreating it very, very well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
MrBling posted:This thread was doing so well, and then bam! pages and pages of poo poo posting. By doing so well do you mean that huge gap where no one was really posting in it? This discussion is definitely circular, but what else do you expect people to be doing in the Dredd thread than discussing Dredd? It's not like it's infringing on some other conversation people would be having.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Shanty posted:Well the movie more or less shows the whole Dreddverse. The "Eight hundred million people living in the ruin of the old world" monologue at the beginning frames it, the events of the day are absolutely emblematic of the rest of the universe. It's not like Dredd goes back to the office and goes "well THAT was unusual, now to settle into my normal routine of handing out parking tickets" I think the issue they have is that at this point it's not so much a discussion as it is a few dedicated people trying to have a conversation with a brick wall. And I feel like the "gently caress off" is more directed towards the wall.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
It's not a discussion when the same 3-4 people are yelling at each other without acknowledging the other sides point. That's just noise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:I think the issue they have is that at this point it's not so much a discussion as it is a few dedicated people trying to have a conversation with a brick wall. And I feel like the "gently caress off" is more directed towards the wall.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Well, in sequel news: Dredd only took $10m below its budget at the box office despite minimal marketing, but it sold 650,000 copies on DVD/BD in America in the first month. Worldwide sales are now into seven figures. The petition for a sequel got over 61,000 signatures inside a week and is now over 75,000. Oh, and this: 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:We're all walls here. The only time anyone agrees with a point I make is when someone new enters the debate. I have not managed to convert anyone to my view. It's because you make no points. All you are saying over and over again is "No I didn't see that" and then you put your hands over your ears and go "la la la la la I can't hear you." You made your mind up about this movie long ago, I don't know why you're even bothering having this debate. At this point I honestly think you're just trolling because the only other option is you're just incredibly dense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Well, in sequel news: Dredd only took $10m below its budget at the box office despite minimal marketing, but it sold 650,000 copies on DVD/BD in America in the first month. Worldwide sales are now into seven figures. The petition for a sequel got over 61,000 signatures inside a week and is now over 75,000. What's this from, just some fan thing?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
marktheando posted:What's this from, just some fan thing? Found it on the Facebook page for the official sequel campaign. Which means I have no idea, as the campaign started out as a fan campaign before Rebellion joined in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
Kraps posted:Also I don't see the 2 sides as morally equal. I kind of agree with this, and i think it's central to the discussion that's happening right now. While i agree with the people that are pointing out the similarity between the comics and this film, that we're meant to be questioning dredd's actions in the context of the justice system, and at the same time rooting for him because he's killing bad guys, we can't necessarily claim that dredd and anderson are just like Mama. There are a lot of scenes in the movie that are meant to make us think about this, however, the two sides in the context of this film don't seem morally equal. I should point out, i'm specifically talking about Dredd and Anderson, NOT the entire judge system as a whole, which is portrayed in the film as every bit as evil as the gangs. The difference between dredd and anderson and mama and her gang is that dredd and anderson aren't doing what they're doing out of self interest, they're doing it because they genuinely believe what they're doing is right and that it will, ultimately, help people. Based on what we're shown, especially during the sequence when dredd gets shot by the corrupt judge, Dredd genuinely seems to believe in what he's doing and views the corrupt judges as an affront to his entire character. Mama, on the other hand, never intends to help anyone. She's at the top of the block and just wants to stay there. The fact that gang violence was reduced when Mama took over the entire block is inconsequential when comparing Dredd and Anderson vs Mama and her gang, because that never factors in to Mama's thinking about her next move. She skinned those men and threw them off the top of a building to strengthen her own position, she destroyed an entire floor of peach trees to get Dredd and Anderson out of her hair. On the flipside, dredd and anderson go to peach trees to investigate gruesome murders on behalf of the hall of justice. They arrive there, check out the bodies, and then talk to the doctor about the best way to approach the gang. They do a drug bust, apprehend one of the murderers, and then get trapped inside peach trees. At this point, they're forced to kill a lot of people to try and get out of there alive, but they never let their captive free because they want to take down the murderers, again, presumably to help people in peach trees. Obviously there are a lot of hosed up consequences to Dredd and Anderson even going over to peach trees, but at least as far as intent is concerned, Dredd and Anderson and the Mama gang are not morally equivalent. It's not Dredd or Anderson's fault that the judge system is ineffective, it seems more like they participate as judges because they believe that the judges will win the war against the gangs and restore order, or that the criminals make the city more dangerous for regular people just trying to live their lives, respectively.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
If you lived in MC1 and had to choose a side, as a Judge or a gang member, which do you think would give you a better chance to make a difference? That's kind of the feeling I got about Anderson, and I'd like to think Dredd gives her a pass because of it, and not just her success at being a Judge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 21:19
|
|
|
Christmas Miracle posted:they never let their captive free because they want to take down the murderers, again, presumably to help people in peach trees. Christmas Miracle posted:I should point out, i'm specifically talking about Dredd and Anderson, NOT the entire judge system as a whole, which is portrayed in the film as every bit as evil as the gangs. The difference between dredd and anderson and mama and her gang is that dredd and anderson aren't doing what they're doing out of self interest, they're doing it because they genuinely believe what they're doing is right and that it will, ultimately, help people. Based on what we're shown, especially during the sequence when dredd gets shot by the corrupt judge, Dredd genuinely seems to believe in what he's doing and views the corrupt judges as an affront to his entire character. The Justice Department is indeed very anti-democracy in the comics - see Dredd's internal monologue in the America story arc - but this isn't touched upon in the movie. He isn't fighting pro-democracy revolutionaries, he's just fighting some drug-dealers, perhaps the most common type of stock villain in ultra-violent cop movies. You want villains who the heroes can slaughter without a second thought and whom the audience will not sympathize with? Use Nazis or drug-dealing gangsters. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Sep 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:Dredd can be stubborn, but letting Kay go would have made no difference. Once Ma-Ma sends her army against the Judges she has to finish them off no matter what or else they will escape and come back with an army. Okay. So what's the first thing we see Ma-ma do? Kill someone who broke the rules, horribly. First thing we see Dredd do? Kill someone who broke the rules. Horribly. What do we know about Anderson? She came up from the streets, and is desperate not to go back. Ma-ma? Same deal. What does the Doctor say? Judges and criminals are the same, as far as he's concerned. And to address your point about drug dealers being the 'go-to' generic baddies, take a note of what the drug does. It makes everything beautiful, even horrible death. Noone gets violent on it, it's not painted as any kind of inherent social ill. All the violence comes out of the power it represents. And an easily supportable point of the film is that the Judges are just another power structure. Add in the stuff about masks, and faces, and scars and you've got a really interesting additional layer of meaning which is one of the main reasons people like the film so much. I mean you're not wrong that on one level Dredd is a rote buddy cop movie. But you're admiring the glass in the aquarium and ignoring the fish.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:28
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:Okay. Anderson is more than desperate not to return to the streets. She's a mutant, and if her powers don't prove expedient the Judges will kick her out of the entire city.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:Okay. sebmojo posted:And to address your point about drug dealers being the 'go-to' generic baddies, take a note of what the drug does. It makes everything beautiful, even horrible death. Noone gets violent on it, it's not painted as any kind of inherent social ill. All the violence comes out of the power it represents. And an easily supportable point of the film is that the Judges are just another power structure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
All you are saying is that you don't understand what subtext is, and also that you can't read the posts your'e replying to. No one is saying there is a 1:1 comparison between the sides, but that they have more similarities than differences. And that the similarities they have are pretty loving key.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:You want villains who the heroes can slaughter without a second thought and whom the audience will not sympathize with? Use Nazis or drug-dealing gangsters. Dredd goes out of the way to make you feel bad about the gang members, we get an entire bit with one's family and we can assume most of them are residents and also have family living in the apartment block. They're not nice people but you're not supposed to be cheering while Dredd executes them while they're incapacitated or when he blows them apart in gory slowmo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
I didn't cheer their deaths (except Ma-Ma's - gently caress that bitch), I simply accepted them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:I didn't cheer their deaths (except Ma-Ma's - gently caress that bitch), I simply accepted them. Never have I begun to understand how someone's mind works in so few words.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
MrBling posted:At this point it is basically the same 3-4 people arguing past each other, so can't you just agree to disagree and go poo poo up some other thread. Shut up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:I didn't cheer their deaths (except Ma-Ma's - gently caress that bitch), I simply accepted them. Mama was like the most tragic character in the entire movie other than the red haired kid whose eyes she cut out. I honestly got choked up a little during the shot of her face exploding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
Kraps posted:They were not the ones who fired 3 gattling guns across a wide swath of living spaces with no regard to who was in there vOv. Also what Tuxedo Catfish said. Those gatling guns wouldn't have been there is the Judges were a system that worked.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 03:41
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:Those gatling guns wouldn't have been there is the Judges were a system that worked. Not necessarily. They might have been property of the block defense militia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 04:42
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Not necessarily. They might have been property of the block defense militia. A more compelling hint is that the block can seal itself up from external invasion and attack with blast shields. It makes you wonder what kind of world would require a residential building to have such a set-up. I think in the Dreddverse, the Soviets are still around (the East Meg cities) and are still hostile to the Americans. Baron Bifford fucked around with this message at 13:01 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 08:25
|
|
|
No, if East Meg 1 were still around, MC-1 map would show it stretch all the way down to Florida.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 12:30
|
|
|
Riso posted:No, if East Meg 1 were still around, MC-1 map would show it stretch all the way down to Florida. If the map doesn't stretch to Florida, there shouldn't be 800 million people in MC-1. So you can't judge anything on that basis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 12:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:03 |
|
|
I'm pretty sure East-Meg is in Russia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 12:44
|
|