Messages

...you have someone in contemporary clothes, judges are going to look a little odd in comparison, particularly with a comic faithful helmet.

It is also the helmet that I found 'jarred' my eye a little, still...here's hoping that, in context, it shant be an issue.

I can guarantee you that if you're watching the movie, the scene's action and composition will make sure that the last thing you'll be looking at is the extras.

Good point,crowd scenes in the comics were always static, giving us time to pore over sumptious sartorial detail.

I'm quite fond of Soylent Green meself; just not crazy about the art departments work on it.

Dredd and the Judges always stood out from the citizens, it's part of the point.

But they did all seem to co-exist in the same, visually heightened, ubiquitous knee-pad, culture.
If everyone is in standard modern civvies 'cept the Judges... it's harder to see them 'belonging'.
As MichealVk indicated, context shall probably clear this up - but just from those pics; the Mega-city mufti seems disappointing to me.
Surely I'm not alone in this?

 

context, people..

Well we can only talk about what we know, and we don't know very much.
Just reassure me that it's not gonna look like 'Soylent Green' and I'll be fine

Dredd and Anderson look fabbo, but I have to confess I'm a little underwhelmed by this Mega-City mufti; it makes even the toned-down practical version of Dredd's 'garb of Justice' seem kinda eccentric to me in comparison.

This opinion is informed by nothing more than few on-set pictures mind you.

I'm breaking my promise now, but as it's off-topic I reckon what-the-hey? Cheers Hunter; Rational opposition should always be regarded as a compliment, and it was remiss of me to never acknowledge the very cool imagery you started the thread with. Happy trails my friend, and yes, it's three o'clock in the morning and I'm out of my gourd,- but no less sincere for that.

1.  Death works perfectly well visually as long as he is the dark mirror image of the film version of Dredd.

The point i've been trying to make is that the 'dark mirror image of Dredd' owes more a to a subversion of a graphic convention than anything else.

2. You seem to focus a lot on the comic book visuals of Death rather than the core of his character.

And this is why.

Dredd's law is the core of the comicbook. And to have the protagonist question his own system, his own Law that he puts above all else will make for great drama. With Anderson as his conscience, it could be a powerful conclusion to a film series.

Frankly, I reckon this is a pretty good point, and justifies the whole notion and origin of Death in the comic series, film-wise I just reckon it's too soon; a Dredd that keeps his helmet on and does his job has a lot of ground to cover before he begins to be an understandable and relatable character. Unfortunately,  the scenario that you outline would make no sense to the uninitiated cinema- goer.

...And that's not even mentioning the fact that Death and the Dark Judges are an iconic part of the Dredd universe. The four horsemen. Apart from the deeper reasons listed above, they are pure rock 'n roll and they need to be a part of a Dredd film franchise...

No. No they don't. Nothing needs to be anything... regardless of it's comic-canon pedigree, elements should be included because they work in a new context and medium, or excluded because they dont.

If we get a 'Death' he should be almost unrecognisable from the comic incarnation. That's the only way I'd want him, and purely personally, I could do without him in any form because a half-arsed 'villain' like Death could lead the franchise into the mug-and-t-shirt-sale friendly banality that most comic-to-film adaptations are, and the appeal of DREDD for me, has always been how different it was from the typical, assembly-line hero-and-villain comicbook kack.

3. No, not in the first film, but most definitely in a second or third film.

You offer no justification for this. Look, I do I get that you are attached to, enjoy and perhaps even revere Judge Death of the comics, but you must be aware that this makes you quite a tiny tiny minority among the intended cinema audience.

4. Just like Dredd is not a spandex-clad hero, Death is most certainly not a standard villain. Why Death? See point 2.

Honestly,from what I can see, Death is hardly even a villain at all, he's too simple for that:he's more a graphic subversion of the iconic elements of Dredd. In terms of character, he's a one-note visual pun. Even the comic writers try hard to make something of him but he's really just a transparent motivation-less gag. I reckon what Bolland did with him was truly exceptional, all the more so because the concept was so thin.

'Twas probably wrong of me to repeat meself, I just reckoned the thread had gone down a 'batman/realism route that wasn't addressing the salient points of Death's worth as a character.
I reckon you get me Hunter and I reckon get you so this will be my last post on this thread.

If I may repeat my own reservations about Death's inclusion in a sequel:

1:What made him 'work', visually(i.e. the baroque comic judges outfit), is absent from this incarnation.

2: There is very little else to his character; even the old "internal-heart-yank" (original at the time ),is now as old as the second Indiana Jones film.

3:It makes no sense to present a 'negative image', based on our Joe, to an audience who are just getting to know him, (anyway, they already have an 'opposite' to Dredd in their heads, he goes by the name of Sylvester Stallone).

4: Dredd is not a standard spandex 'hero' any more than Dirty Harry is a 'hero', and he doesn't require a standard villain. Antagonists should be plentiful for a lawman in the Mega-city and Dredd's methods and the system he represents places him very far from the knight-in-shining-armour model. This is interesting to me, in comparison to what else is out there. It's hard for me to see Death's inclusion as doing anything but taking from that.

Yes anything's creatively possible; it's a celluloid dream in a different world after all. But one can still ask why? Why Death? Because he worked so well in the comics? That is no reason to believe he would work in this context at all... as a character he's paper thin. The hints have been that he would be in the sequel we hope for, and despite not having seen Dredd I'm fairly confident in the chaps involved will do the best job they can with him, but honestly
Why bother?

I'd 'riot foam' Jennifer Lopez; I'd 'riot foam' her good.

THAT should look like THIS:

As I said before, It only 2 secs untested footage! Very pointless debate about that in many pages!

Modern vehicles in Mega-City One is such a departure from the traditional depiction that its bound to give rise to opinions and speculation.

Quite. So what do you reckon Jock was on about?

I know, but I can't say.

Curiouser and curiouser... I am so stoked to see this film!

editfunctionmuttergrumble

As I said before, It only 2 secs untested footage! Very pointless debate about that in many pages!

Modern vehicles in Mega-City One is such a departure from the traditional depiction that its bound to give rise to opinions and speculation.

Quite. So what do you reckon Jock was on about?

I know, but I can't say.

Curiouser and curiouser... I am so stoked to see this film!

Quite. So what do you reckon Jock was on about?

I have it on good authority that the van has not been changed, it's still the same van.

Makes sense in the light of the 'not expensive' tweet and Wagner's quibble.

Some people were clutching at CGI straws...

Because of Jock:

Regarding the 20th century van in the chase clip-perhaps it's a stand in van,pre-fx,much like the motorcycles in this behind the scenes clip from Terminator Salvation`?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjrbYD32toM

No.

Yes