Dredd (2012)

[The Sherman Kid]

Mmmm... now I'm not a marketing guru or anything, but I'm not sure that releasing one photograph and not another would have made such a fundamental change to the box office performance of the movie.

True. The great posters that followed made little difference to people's pre-conceived notions.

Because........their pre-conceived notions had not been altered one jot from the 1995 debacle due to a terible marketing campaign.Hardly anything had been released in the previous 12 months . Using good quality material such as these photos would help alter that, lots of stuff like this should have been issued over a longer period of time to keep getting the message across that this film was different and was worth checking out.
It was irretrievably stupid just to sit on these photos, baffles me why they did.

[Frank]

Cute as a button, aint she?

[Richmond Clements]

Cute as a button, aint she?

Yeah, which is exactly the image of the movie this picture would have given...

[TordelBack]

Leaving aside the marketing side of things, it is a source of ongoing amazement that Anderson's costume is without any obvious sexual differentiation (plausible and comics-coinsistent removal of helmet aside).  More evidence for this film having its heart firmly in the right place.

[JOE SOAP]

Because........their pre-conceived notions had not been altered one jot from the 1995 debacle due to a terible marketing campaign.Hardly anything had been released in the previous 12 months . Using good quality material such as these photos would help alter that, lots of stuff like this should have been issued over a longer period of time to keep getting the message across that this film was different and was worth checking out.
It was irretrievably stupid just to sit on these photos, baffles me why they did.

I think the pre-conception left-over from the '95 film in the US was almost insurmountable for such a lesser-known foreign character. The only conception the US audience had of Dredd was a previous failure by a huge star who was also one of their own and to them if Stallone couldn't do it no one else could. Those pictures wouldn't have made a dent outside the comic-film community - just like all the good reviews and great screening reactions made little difference - and that unfortunately is where it mattered the most. A different red-band trailer may have helped after the first one but we'll never know. They were banking on a good US reception to sell the film world-wide without a huge advertising spend, it didn't follow through.

All the money in the world probably wouldn't have convinced the target demographic in the US that Dredd wasn't supposed to be like Stallone. You can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

[The Sherman Kid]

Other properties have been successfully remade so audiences are ,in fact, open to it.However, you need to convince them that it is radically different than what came before.They didn't show the general public that it was different.

When the end product is sound and is still beaten by the likes of Howard the Duck and The Spirit in the historic box office charts then you have to point to the marketing (or rather the lack of it).

[Richmond Clements]

Other properties have been successfully remade so audiences are ,in fact, open to it.However, you need to convince them that it is radically different than what came before.They didn't show the general public that it was different.

When the end product is sound and is still beaten by the likes of Howard the Duck and The Spirit in the historic box office charts then you have to point to the marketing (or rather the lack of it).

That may be the case, but it is absurd to say that releasing one picture would have made a $50mil + difference to the box office.

[JOE SOAP]

Other properties have been successfully remade so audiences are ,in fact, open to it.However, you need to convince them that it is radically different than what came before.They didn't show the general public that it was different.

True, but there's no examples in recent memory of bad/unsuccessful films with bad reputations being remade/rebooted that became successful. The Punisher is a case in point and that is a Marvel comics character with a built-in audience in the US.

I really don't know how they could show/prove it was a different film to the target audience without manually forcing them to see it. The screening reactions indicated this. The only people who took any real notice of the marketing/news for this film were comic fans. A few photos wouldn't change that.

When the end product is sound and is still beaten by the likes of Howard the Duck and The Spirit in the historic box office charts then you have to point to the marketing (or rather the lack of it)

Well Howard the Duck was made by Lucasfilm during a time when they could do no wrong and films with almost no marketing still made more money than Dredd the week it was released suggesting that it's not as simple as publishing better pictures.

Dredd was just unfortunate being released in what happened to be the year of only the 3 biggest superhero films ever plus the previous effort was a flop did not help.

[The Sherman Kid]

Other properties have been successfully remade so audiences are ,in fact, open to it.However, you need to convince them that it is radically different than what came before.They didn't show the general public that it was different.

When the end product is sound and is still beaten by the likes of Howard the Duck and The Spirit in the historic box office charts then you have to point to the marketing (or rather the lack of it).

That may be the case, but it is absurd to say that releasing one picture would have made a $50mil + difference to the box office.

???Nobodys said that.As part of a wider and longer campaign ,more material (including photos but not just photos), esp short clips and teaser trailers, should have been used.

Dredd being released in a year of successful comic book adaptations was a positive not a negative.Dredd should have rode on their tails ala 'heres another great adaptation'.With short teasers before showing Dredd a the 'dessert' after the main courses so to speak.

The 'buzz' with Joe public to see it wasn't remotely there.Fine product, little take up =poor marketing.We've going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Richmond Clements]

???Nobodys said that.

Well, I don't know what to say. After all those months (years?) of crappy stolen shots and no publicity- which ultimately led to Dredd's crashing failure at the box office, we find out they had this. If that shot had been released at the start, along with a nice posed shot of Urban and the Lawmaster against a black background, the Internet would have gone mental. And for the right reasons this time. What an absolute waste and a massive pile of shit the marketing for Dredd was. It's enough to make a grown man cry.

SBT

THIS ^^^^^^^^  !! 

[JOE SOAP]

???Nobodys said that.As part of a wider and longer campaign ,more material (including photos but not just photos), esp short clips and teaser trailers, should have been used.

A longer marketing campaign wouldn't have made much difference. A wider one would have been more than the film's budget.

[Goaty]

Mmmm... now I'm not a marketing guru or anything, but I'm not sure that releasing one photograph and not another would have made such a fundamental change to the box office performance of the movie.

True. The great posters that followed made little difference to people's pre-conceived notions.

Yep.

[The Sherman Kid]

???Nobodys said that.As part of a wider and longer campaign ,more material (including photos but not just photos), esp short clips and teaser trailers, should have been used.

A longer marketing campaign wouldn't have made much difference. A wider one would have been more than the film's budget.

7

I'm going to have to set a Yoda quote on you 'Always with you it can not be done'   

RC -Obviously not just a couple of photos    for petes sake.

[JOE SOAP]

No need to bring Pete into this.

[Cookyman]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it?

I'm as gutted as the rest of you that Dredd underperformed at the box office - it was a cracking film and it's not only us that think so the majority of reviews back this up. 

However it was a long shot this being a box office success both Alex Garland and Karl Urban admitted this:

Alex Garland -

If I was involved in a second movie, it would be about origins and subversion, and Chopper would feature. In fact, I think Chopper would start and end the story. Apart from him, my rough plan involves Fargo, Giant, Angel Gang, and a version of Satanus. For a trilogy, add Cal and the Dark Judges. And Anderson would be in all three. But... just to be clear, this is hugely speculative and also unlikely, for any number of reasons... There are some variables which would rule me out [of any sequel] immediately.

Karl Urban -

"I don't know. I'm kind of at the point where I'm not even thinking about a sequel. I just want to release this film, and I just hope that audiences will embrace it and – look, if this is a one-off cult-classic – and I firmly believe this is a cult-classic film instantly – I'm good. Seriously, I'm really happy. If we make no more['Dredd' films], fine. Honestly, it wouldn't bother me at all. But if we get to make more of them, then I would love to do that, too. I really would. I would just look forward to continuing the journey and sort of broadening it up, seeing more of this world, more of these characters. I think one of the greatest strengths about this film is the relationship between Dredd and Anderson, you know. There's a good chemistry between those two characters. They play off each other really well."

So we can all blame lack of publicity pics, lack of marketing etc but we should we be glad we got such an unapologetic badass movie. 

Stranger things have happened though and this could over time become a huge hit on DVD/BLU-Ray and become a cult movie that demands a sequel - lets keep our fingers crossed folks.