Should/Could Dredd live on as a series of Direct to Video films?

[The Adventurer]

It'll be a while before Dredd's home video sales are made clear, but from the immediate outlook they're looking kinda strong. As we all know Dredd didn't make the box office explode like we'd all want. And even with solid retail sales the likelyhood of another boxoffice outing seems... unlikely.

But there is another place Dredd could make a go.

Direct to Video.

Now... I know that phrase probably just made you shudder (perhaps throw up in your mouth a bit?). The idea that DtVs are movies unfit for theaters, made on tiny budgets, and usually manned by hack directors and unknown actors is probably pretty strong.

And that... is often true. But its not always true. Recently Jean-Claude Van Damme has done a pretty snazzy job at rejuvenating the Universal Solider franchise with a pair of rather cool action heavy installments. Both of which are direct to video, action heavy, and getting rave reviews from people I trust.

There are other examples (I'm sure?). But it raises some interesting ideas. Dredd didn't cost a lot to make in terms of typical Hollywood anyway, and a lot of the preproduction design work is already done for props and general world building. On top of that, Dredd made a point of utilizing non-superstar talent for their lead roles. Actors that in the grande scheme of things are probably pretty affordable on a DtV budget. As long as the Dredd producers could retain their writing staff and director on a smaller scale production, I don't particularly see a difficulty in making an excellent DtV showing.

But of course the question becomes, should it be done? Certainly going DtV there might be a perception of cheapening the brand. And we're certainly not going to get a big spectacle sci-fi epic (or at least I hope not, DtV sci-fi epics tend to come out really bad. See: any Starship Troopers DtV films). But we'd get more live action Dredd, perhaps several times.

Personally I'm all for it (as long as the quality stays in line with Dredd and doesn't dip). And frankly I think its the smart choice considering how Dredd did in theaters vs how its doing on home release. And it'd be criminal not to give Urban another go at the character.

[The Enigmatic Dr X]

I think Urban would bail on a DtV production as it would likely blight his career (if being in a "flop" hasn't already). Bear in mind he is also in Star Trek, so he is building his roles in big productions.

[The Adventurer]

Urban's been in plenty of stinkers.

So I honestly don't believe his pride would be hurt too much. If the script and production is still solid (because that's the important bit)

[hazy efc]

I couldnt see carl urban putting on the helmet again for a straight to dvd sequel,
im pretty sure he was gutted as we all were when dredd floped at the box office,
look on the bright side guys were left with a fantastic movie in dredd a sure fire cult clasic,
and i would hate to see some shitty straight to dvd cash in without urban or garland etc,
but if dredd does great on home video sales wise who no`s what the future holds, alex garland
did say in an interview he would love to see a dredd tv series sounds good to me

[JOE SOAP]

Urban's been in plenty of stinkers.

Careers move upwards and Urban's seems in the ascendant. I think Urban would rather go for a decent TV series and the possibility of a larger potential audience (syndication, residuals) rather than D-V. TV is considered a 'legitimate' career move these days.

[The Adventurer]

Again. There is no rule a direct to DVD film has to be a turd.

[JOE SOAP]

But it wouldn't be the best use of resources. If someone is that willing to invest in actors, sets, props, music etc. why not make a mini-series rather than just 90 minutes?

[hazy efc]

Again. There is no rule a direct to DVD film has to be a turd.

It is rare to see a movie as great as dredd get a straight to dvd sequel and its
anything but a turd. Starship troopers 2 anyone lol 

[Bat King]

I think a direct to dvd would be OK in some circumstances but that a TV mini series is better idea.

6 1 hour shows, maybe with Karl only doing a Cameo. Show more of the city. Get Alex Garand in as show runner but have a few writers contribute seperate episodes. Do six different stories with a few recurring characters and themes running through. So ep1 & ep6 bookend the series.

Then if that is successful film a movie alongside season 2 of the TV show. Crossover the stars/costars.

Robert married your mother's sister!

[Noisybast]

I watched the third and fourth Crow films on Netflix recently. *Shudder*

[Teivion]

Yes.
I was saying about Tv shows/ cable Movies on another thread-  the way any form of footfall based retail (cinemas included) is going at the moment, other avenues of revenue need to be explored for the people selling things ( in this case movies/ production companies) to survive.

I dont agree that a budget can dictate if a project is any good- is how the money is spent, not how much of it . Anybody whos read 365 days of Star Wars can see my point .... £1 well spent is going to always look better than £5 badly spent...

For very four stinkers of direct to video etc there is the odd gem. If a decent script is decided apon, and a proactive production company really work through it properly, then I think its perfectly feasible to have a 'budget' Dredd as a TV show.
Re-used sets, etc- not to the point of the 70's John Dykstra SFX spaceship footage in the TV BattleStar Galactica (!) but you get my gist. Base the story in a few core locations, rather than a road trip around Mega City one.

I also like the idea of getting in guest Directors - imagine Tarantino or Duncan Jones taking the helm.
OK Duncan didnt like the 'new' direction but he'd undrstand the point of it all.

D

[Stan]

I think a direct to dvd would be OK in some circumstances but that a TV mini series is better idea.

6 1 hour shows, maybe with Karl only doing a Cameo. Show more of the city. Get Alex Garand in as show runner but have a few writers contribute seperate episodes. Do six different stories with a few recurring characters and themes running through. So ep1 & ep6 bookend the series.

Then if that is successful film a movie alongside season 2 of the TV show. Crossover the stars/costars.

Robert married your mother's sister!

I really dislike the idea of them going down the TV series route but as a lead up to a sequel I would find this acceptable. In a way it might even be preferable since you would build a base of characters that could be use in the slightly more epic Cursed Earth type story Garland was thinking about.

A direct to TV movie though would basically suggest to me that the franchise is dead. And I say that as a fan of Universal Soldier: Regeneration and the Undisputed sequels. I'm not claiming it doesn't work but I think Dredd deserves better.

[Bat King]

TV series apparently make money easier... And would reach a wider audience. Keeping Dredd out, or minimising his presence Lewis a movie special.

[The Adventurer]

I'm not sure pinning your hopes on a TV series is the best idea IMO. For one thing, you'll never the get the level of violence Dredd was able to have. Also I think you're all understating the amount of money it costs to make a TV series (people are brandishing around the idea of doing it in 6 episode chunks. Like it would air on the BBC or something).

Remember, the Dredd we got cost $30m to make. And even the best Sci-fi action TV shows don't have budgets higher then $2m per episode (though Pilots + production design often cost more get the ball rolling)

Where most serious DtV films can get budgets in the $10-20m range.

[JOE SOAP]

I'm not sure pinning your hopes on a TV series is the best idea IMO. For one thing, you'll never the get the level of violence Dredd was able to have.

One of the best things about Dredd stories is they don't require sustained violence and if you've ever watched Breaking Bad or the Sopranos you'll see they can present a level of violence that can equal film.

Also I think you're all understating the amount of money it costs to make a TV series (people are brandishing around the idea of doing it in 6 episode chunks. Like it would air on the BBC or something).

Remember, the Dredd we got cost $30m to make. And even the best Sci-fi action TV shows don't have budgets higher then $2m per episode (though Pilots + production design often cost more get the ball rolling)

Where most serious DtV films can get budgets in the $10-20m range.

TV demands you to tell a different type of story with longer character arcs, not purely based on short scenes of intense/condensed drama or action the way cinema does. In fact many of the latter Dredd stories reflect a more TV style long-form so you could structure a series based around a sector-house that would require far less spectacle than a DtV sequel that would likely end up a cheaper, paler imitation of the first film. TV series compensate for less spectacle with a different character based format and Dredd has a wealth of characters.

As for cost, if you only had $10 million to spend, you could stretch it further on a mini-series than a cheap film. Dramatically the longer duration would also allow for a different experience not in competition with the film therefore not forcing undue comparison.