Dredd (2012)

[Tiplodocus]

Doesn't an 18 film have a much smaller market than a 12?


I'm sure Garland could have written  a 12 DREDD screenplay that "GOT" DREDD  as well.

I said ages ago that I was disappointed I couldn't take Tiny Tips to see it. And much as I like the film they made, I still wish they'd plumped for a 12.

[JOE SOAP]

They tried to do that with the Stallone film. It got an R anyway.

[radiator]

Yep, you could make a Dredd movie with equivalent levels of violence to Taken or Dark Knight, but ultimately it would end up getting slapped with a 15/R because it's a bit edgy thematically. Dredd is a state executioner - there's no getting away from that.

[vzzbux]

The missus is flatly refusing to let my lad watch the film when the blue ray comes out. I am sure I can find an opportunity though. (He is 8)




V

[radiator]

Simple - scribble out the '1' on the '18' certificate logo on the box!

[Spikes]

Or SBT could adopt him, 

[Stan]

It seems a bit silly to talk about rewriting the entire film at this point; which would have to happen in exchange for a lower rating, otherwise you're just neutering a well received Dredd flick (of those who watched it).

[dweezil2]

I've seen very few films with such a disparity between box office takings and quality as Dredd.
Irrespective of this, I think the film was made for fans and those who saw it had an overriding appreciation for what Garland and Co were trying to achieve, it was just that an audience brought up on a diet of formulaic and uninspired fayre were not attuned to appreciate it.
Time will be very kind to Dredd though I suspect.

[SmallBlueThing]

Neither of mine will ballowed to watch Dredd- the language puts paid to that, and the sexual content. Both things were strong reasons i thought the makers didnt have a clue.

SBT

[Steve Green]

So why didn't they ask them this time round?

Probably because "obscure-to-the-only-country-that-matters British comic geek who has a surname like a Nazi" doesn't have as much cachet with the cinemagoing public as "THAT GUY WHO WROTE THE FAST-ZOMBIE MOVIE!"

Thing is, from what I recall they didn't really capitalise on that either - I don't remember any references to 28 Days Later on the poster/trailer.

[Apestrife]

So why didn't they ask them this time round?

Probably because "obscure-to-the-only-country-that-matters British comic geek who has a surname like a Nazi" doesn't have as much cachet with the cinemagoing public as "THAT GUY WHO WROTE THE FAST-ZOMBIE MOVIE!"

Thing is, from what I recall they didn't really capitalise on that either - I don't remember any references to 28 Days Later on the poster/trailer.

That's a real shame they didn't! The beach, 28 days later and Sunshine. Not to say I'm the biggest fan of either of those, but I know quite a lot that are. And they could'v easily watched Dredd thanks to it.

The new film Gambit makes very good use of stating it was written by the Coen brothers. I'm sure at least a couple of people will see it just because of that.

[radiator]

Thing is, from what I recall they didn't really capitalise on that either - I don't remember any references to 28 Days Later on the poster/trailer.

That really bloody irked me. In my experience, dropping Garland's name in relation to Dredd was the only thing that got friends interested/hopeful!

They could also have possibly got away with 'from the makers of District 9'....

[IndigoPrime]

Neither of mine will ballowed to watch Dredd- the language puts paid to that, and the sexual content. Both things were strong reasons i thought the makers didnt have a clue.

The language I'll grant you, but sexual content isn't alien to the more mature Dredd stories (and a handful of less mature ones); the America arc has [spoiler]sex and Beeny is sexually assaulted[/spoiler]. I'd also question at what point Dredd would become suitable for kids anyway. The old-day comics were by their very nature sanitised, and what you see in stills is very different to a moving image. So you'd have to remove most of the gore, any negative sexual content, and probably soften Dredd in the nature of what he does.

[Apestrife]

They could also have possibly got away with 'from the makers of District 9'....

That too!

[Rusty]

Doesn't an 18 film have a much smaller market than a 12?


I'm sure Garland could have written  a 12 DREDD screenplay that "GOT" DREDD  as well.

I said ages ago that I was disappointed I couldn't take Tiny Tips to see it. And much as I like the film they made, I still wish they'd plumped for a 12.

Sure. I mean Taken 1 and 2 were PG's. The thing is, I felt there was something wrong with the first Taken when I watched it, and couldn't put my finger on it. It felt cheap or something, and I think it was the lack of proper violence or blood that did it. In other words, it lacked a bit of bollocks. You could take the gore out, but where would be the fun in that? Then there was also the language. Drop an F bomb in there, and your rating goes up too. If you want to show how brutal Dredd's reality is, then all that good stuff is a necessary evil. It gives it a proper edge. The only thing I felt that didn't really need to be in there was the sex scene bit. I think that was a bit gratuitous and playing with the fact that Garland knew it was going to be an 18 anyway, so he threw it in there for extra value.