Main Menu

Dredd (2012)

Started by Goaty, 06 September, 2011, 11:51:16 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PreacherCain

Hmm. Well I don't think it's as clear-cut as saying 'art is money'. One requires the other and vice versa. It's a symbiotic relationship more than a parasitic one; Art and commerce make for interesting bedfellows. People would still make art even without money (though obviously there'd be a lot less of it!). Hell, just look at all the musicians in the world!  ;)

I think Hollywood is probably less stable now than it's ever been. It's all gone boom-or-bust, and it's getting to the point where a single film/investment can take down an entire studio if it doesn't succeed. I think there are often two or three parallel film 'industries' in any country which sometimes crossover. You have mainstream, Hollywood-type films, "independent" film and actual independent/underground film!

As for Dredd: this is not good news. Someone has clearly fucked up here and they have to come in and do damage control with editing/re-shoots. This will also mean the film is going to carry around a 'stink' when it comes to publicity, as people are going to be more interested in the backroom machinations than the film itself. It's more than likely going to be mentioned in every review/article on the film.

If they do have to do re-shoots, I recommend having Dredd shave!  :D

Michaelvk

Quote from: PreacherCain on 09 October, 2011, 03:27:11 PMThis will also mean the film is going to carry around a 'stink' when it comes to publicity, as people are going to be more interested in the backroom machinations than the film itself. It's more than likely going to be mentioned in every review/article on the film.

This is a good point.. It might make any reference to the film start with "the troubled.."
You have never felt pain until you've trodden barefoot on an upturned lego brick..

CYCLOPZ

I have more faith in Alex Garland and the producers on this particular project than I do in Pete Travis even though I respect him as a director.

Vantage point didn't blow me away, But I put that down more to the nature of that script and the multiple viewpoints than anything else. The action scenes were quite good.

Andrew MacDonald and Alex Garland obviously have knowledge of the way Judge Dredd should be portrayed and I get the impression that they are seriously aiming to build a franchise on the strength of the first film. So I'm sure for them it has to be true to the comic and therefore unwatered down.

Having read Garlands script for Dredd and not hearing word one on the subject from Travis, I'm still confident that the film will work..


Bring on the re-shoots if that's what it'll take.

PreacherCain

Quote from: Anderson's Shame on 09 October, 2011, 04:02:40 PM
I have more faith in Alex Garland and the producers on this particular project than I do in Pete Travis even though I respect him as a director.

Fair enough. But it's these same producers who made the decisions that led to this situation. If Travis wasn't right for the project, they shouldn't have hired him in the first place. To let it get to this stage in the process and shake things up to this degree kind of shows that the producers are the ones at fault here more than anyone else. They don't have control of the film that they've invested millions into.

Saying that, Garland may indeed be the right man to take over. Maybe he'll seek some directorial advice from his ol' buddy Danny Boyle. :)

I, Cosh

Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 08 October, 2011, 08:52:14 PM
According to some online Wiki reports Pete Travis originally wanted to be a Social worker. Not the best man perhaps to shoot a Movie about a violent Authority figure then.
Holy shit! I originally wanted to be a cosmonaut. Does that make my object modelling rubbish?
We never really die.

Teivion

Just because Pete Travis has now gone- doesnt mean to say that what he worked on was rubbish (quality wise)
If Alex and Andrew were on set everyday, then if Pete was turning in something not up to par he wouldn't have lasted the shoot- let alone up until now. I doubt its the footage thats the problem.

What it could mean is something someone touched upon a page or so back- Pete may be working the edit to be one sort of movie, whereas Alex may want something more from it- it might just be a difference of pace, for instance. Pete may have wanted a bit more depth, Alex may be wanting a more full on Bourne.

Its a surprise- and certainly opens up the event to lots of speculation. ....





Michaelvk

If anything it's got people talking again..

..waaaaaiiiit a sec..
You have never felt pain until you've trodden barefoot on an upturned lego brick..

Zarjazzer

They should have a shoot out ala War Games Prog 51 and see who wins.   ;)
The Justice department has a good re-education programme-it's called five to ten in the cubes.

IAMTHESYSTEM

It could all be part of some elaborate conspiracy by the Film makers to get everyone gossiping about the Film but I doubt it. They've had a severe difference of opinion. What can we do to influence that -zilch. Whoever is going to get the Final edit of the Film has it tough enough already.

I assume we'll know if it's a very serious falling out when some Law suit is filed in Court.  I hope relationships didn't get that bad between all the creators involved.

The Law, ironically might eventually decide whats going to happen in the end.



"You may live to see man-made horrors beyond your comprehension."

http://artriad.deviantart.com/
― Nikola Tesla

vzzbux

Has anyone thought the because DREDD is going to be so fucking arsom that Garland want co producer in the credits.






V
Drokking since 1972

Peace is a lie, there's only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.

Zarjazzer

Quote from: vzzbux on 09 October, 2011, 09:12:48 PM
Has anyone thought the because DREDD is going to be so fucking arsom that Garland want co producer in the credits.






V

No. But I do now. But that's because I'm a "the glass is half -what? " kind of a goblin. Chances are it will be ultra-arsom.
The Justice department has a good re-education programme-it's called five to ten in the cubes.

brendan1

This is really terrible news. Usually this type of "Director removed from edit" results in a hideous, bloody cinematic abortion that nobody wants to take parental responsibility for.

I fear the worst. Mind you, having read the script, I was never "fearing the best".

Oh please, just give me a great Dredd movie that makes LOTS of money for all concerned, esp Rebellion.

Michaelvk

Quote from: vzzbux on 09 October, 2011, 09:12:48 PM
Has anyone thought the because DREDD is going to be so fucking arsom that Garland want co producer in the credits.






V

From my understanding he is co-producer..
You have never felt pain until you've trodden barefoot on an upturned lego brick..

vzzbux

Quote from: Michaelvk on 09 October, 2011, 10:06:58 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 09 October, 2011, 09:12:48 PM
Has anyone thought the because DREDD is going to be so fucking arsom that Garland want co producer in the credits.

From my understanding he is co-producer..
GAAAHHHH. I meant co-director.




V
Drokking since 1972

Peace is a lie, there's only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.

MR. ELIMINATOR

Quote from: brendan1 on 09 October, 2011, 09:59:58 PM

I fear the worst. Mind you, having read the script, I was never "fearing the best".

Oh please, just give me a great Dredd movie that makes LOTS of money for all concerned, esp Rebellion.

I thought the script was pretty spot on.