Messages

as ive posted to all on live give the spidey games to rocksteady! played edge of time and got bored after anti venom ...

Rocksteady are owned by Warner Bros (they bought the studio after the success of Arkham Asylum). WB own DC, and hence own Batman. There's no way in hell they would want to use their company resources to service the IP of a rival's flagship comic character. (And for the same reason, there's no way Disney-Marvel would let their main rivals handle one of their flagship characters.)

edit! a new dredd game by these guys would be arsom!

True. But that won't happen either, I'm afraid, for similar (if lesser) reasons.

Batman is referenced in a Dredd story, but is referred to as 'that Gotham clown'.

Hahaha. Super.

Think that's a refence to The Joker (who's in Die Laughing), not Batman.

Scojo turned up yet?

Because he will.

Well he was really good in Out of the Blue.

You mean the film that - according to imdb - made $728 at the US box office?

The issue isn't whether he's good, it's whether he's got box office appeal as a lead actor, and will bring people to the Dredd movie.

You're kidding, surely? I don't think Karl Urban's starred in a hit film yet. (And that's starred - i.e. him as the lead actor playing the lead character, so no Star Trek, Red or Lord of the Rings.)  Doom, Pathfinder and Priest (although he was second fiddle in that) were all attempts to launch him as an action star, and all of them were flops.

On the basis of available evidence so far, he's pretty solid in second banana parts (his McCoy was good - although you could have taken that character out the film and it wouldn't have made the slightest difference to anything) and he makes a great villain (Red, Bourne Supremacy and maybe Chronicles of Riddick) but he's yet to prove he can open a film on his own, as lead actor.

The logic that Trekkers are going to go and see Dredd because he played McCoy doesn't hold up. They didn't go and see Chris Pine in the big budget flop Unstoppable - and he's only Captain friggin' Kirk,  - so why would this work for the guy who plays McCoy?

And all these women fans of his, who still couldn't make his other starring vehicles a success  - they're going to go and see him in a film where his face is covered up the entire time?

I like Karl Urban - I do - but it's a big jump to assume he's going to be an major audience draw.

Oh for god sake, Scojo or Scott Nestel is Dreddhead123 making a comment in Empireonline report today!

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=32186

Ha Ha! Nice going Goaty and James! You showed that loser who the real fans are.

I'm going to sign up and stick it to him as well.

Let's have a Sc*j* watch. If anyone spots any of his demented burblings on a website, let us know on here and we can all sign up and out him as the raving lunatic that he is.

Anyone so inclined might want to noise him up on the Bleeding Cool comments section, where he's posting as 'bleedcool'.  He does get around.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/forums/showthread.php?47942-Judge-Dredd-Filmmakers-Release-Official-Statement-So-What-s-Going-On

From one of the stories on the Dredd movie:

In related news, The LA Times also reveal that Jim Sheridan requested his name be removed from the credits of flop horror Dream House. The Oscar-nominated director reportedly approached the Directors Guild of America this summer, as he was so displeased with the Daniel Craig-starring thriller. The studio, Morgan Creek, released their own edit of the film following reshoots. The film opened to poor reviews, following a baffling promo campaign which included a spoiler-filled trailer. It opens in the UK this November.

Maybe Alex Garland can put his name on the director credit for that one instead (or as well)...

Interesting to note that Empire have still yet to report the news...

Are they deliberately avoiding it as to not piss off Macdonald and co (who they seem to be on good terms with) or to save face following their big exclusive?

Or are they waiting on an official response from the producers, put out something proper rather than just rehash some rumours? I'm keeping my eyes on the site in any case...

The LA Times Hollywood section seems to have been the first reputable source to run the story.

In journalistic terms, LA Times > Empire.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/10/director-drama-heats-up-on-dredd.html

I'm not going to make  up my mind until I see some solid evidence i.e a trailer...

Hey! We'll have less if that logical, reasoned and common sense approach around here, thank you very much!

But he forgot to mention Star Wars (none of the cast understood the script, and the early special effects were a disaster), Jaws (the robot shark didn't work, and shooting went months over-schedule), Aliens (Cameron and his British crew developed a strong relationship of mutual loathing) and The Godfather (the studio came close several times to firing Coppolla off the movie).

There is also a far larger and considerably more ignominious list of films that parted company with their directors well into production, and suffered accordingly.

Which is Dredd? I guess we'll find out next year, but my point was that it's fairly idiotic to try and spin what's happened as a Good Thing, when it's quite clearly not.

Anyone knows what Sc*j*'s comments on it?

He's crowing about it on the scojo-destroyed wasteland that is alt.comics.2000ad. Naturally, it's all the fault of the script, and the producers should have used a proper Dredd script (i.e. his) instead.

I'm also fairly sure he's 'bleedcool' on the comments section of the Bleeding Cool story on this.

[DREDD]

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

Lots of films look like they're going to be fucking arsom. Somehow, though, on none of them do you see writers and others trying to attach their names to them as co-director.

Seriously, there's no way - despite some utter bollocks-spouting attempts here - that you can spin this into looking like anything other than a Very bad Thing for the film's prospects.

Aquila is a self-contained prologue story, and doesn't immediately continue after Prog 2012 - so no new series there. (Although I imagine it will be forthcoming as a series sometime in 2012.)

The Absalom story in Prog 2012 is likewise a stand-alone, although a new series - called Ghosts of London - is currently being worked on.

Played the demo and loved it! Nice comic bits and did I spot someone called Gunnar?   

Nowt to do with me, thankfully.

So people don't make "pilots" any more?

In US TV - where the profits from a hit syndicated TV series are so vast that they can afford what are essentially R&D costs of developing and shooting pilots that will never even ever be transmitted, or to sign the talent up to deals that wil make them money even if the show dies at pilot stage  - sure they do.

In UK TV, not so much.  Standard practice is to sign people up for a first series, and then having to make a calculated guess before it's transmitted on whether it's going to be a hit or not, so that the talent can be offered contracts for a second series before they all move on elsewhere.

Perhaps they should commission a one off Television show rather than a series. It's a lot cheaper. If the viewing figures are ok they can always make more.

And, in between the time when you make the thing and it being transmitted and you have the viewing figures and audience appreciation numbers to allow you to make a decision on whether to go ahead to a full series, you've lost half your cast and writing team, because in something as uncertain as the creative industries, people can't afford to wait around on a maybe, and they'll all have gone off to other jobs.