EXCLUSIVE - FIRST STILL FROM DREDD!

[vzzbux]

I'm totally behind the new movie as it is, JD fans should just thank the good Lord we're getting another JD movie... and this time, they mean business!!!

For sure. Have many of the doom sayers sat back and just thought "wow they are actually putting money up and finally taking on a Dredd film".
If it is shit like 95 then so be it, but at the moment we have no evidence one way or another to rate or slate it. Just be thankful it is just round the corner and may pave way for future 2000ad projects.




V

[radiator]

I hope the new film goes some way towards rehabilitating Dredd in the public imagination in the same way that Batman Begins did following Batman & Robin.

I was listening to a movie review podcast the other day and they were discussing comics crossovers. Someone name-checked Judge Dredd Vs Batman, and the mere mention of Dredd provoked derisive laughter amongst the hosts, followed by impressions of Stallone saying "I am the law!" - even though they were talking about the comic version. To so many people, Dredd still - after all these years - begins and ends with that bloody movie!

[JOE SOAP]

The idea of a pared down introduction which introduces the character to a wider audience seems hamstrung by the fact that Dredd is such an unmitigated cunt. I can't imagine wanting to spend an hour in his company unmediated by the comedy, horror, humanity and infinite scope of Wagner & Grant's Megacity One and its population. The desire to make a Dredd film at any cost without making a serious attempt to analyse the unique appeal of the strip and reflect that on screen seems like a waste of time and other peoples money.

Generalising what 'most' people will watch is a bad idea, most won't be interested in seeing Dredd -not his one anyway- and the film I believe is not intended that way, it'll likely be R-rated/18 for a start, hardly the average cineplex fare so the 'expectations' will be in a certain remit.

The history of film is stewn with such cunts, never stopped anybody likin' 'em or the films or sequels. Snake Plissken comes to mind, a character who didn't go through any character 'change' in Escape from New York, he went out the same way as he came in. Lee Marvin in Point Blank another- unredeemable. No one in Sergio Leone's spaghetti films were particularly cosy either or subject to 'change'/'character arcs'. There's something to be said for such characters in films and Hollywood's fear of portraying them in recent years and playing 'safe'. Dredd has never been a mass audience character nor do I think he needs to be to be successful unless they want to attract the Sex & the City audience too.


I've argued this in previous posts:

If they get the tone right, it's going to be an even harder sell.

Action fims require a hero, if they are to follow the general action film template, and Dredd isn't one.

Was Dirty Harry a hero, was he sympathetic?, not in any substantial terms he wasn't. I've said this before and I still think it's true: If you want people to support a certain character, make those/the antagonists he is against, be worse -maybe morally- than he, that way you can establish certain moral parameters in the film which you can stick to and bend as you wish with substantial reason.


Antoher great recent example is the Way of the Gun, two completely amoral characters -with no back stories presented- are the centre of the film. There are very few 'likeable' people in it yet you know who to get behind and there's a point to all the violence to boot. The same holds for all Sergio Leone films and most of Pekinpah's too. Who in the Wild Bunch is the average hero? The 'sypathetic hero' concept is a hangover from bad/dated 80's Hollywood bullshit peddled by unsuccessful writers and execs who know fuck-all but wish to force their demographic formulas on the industry. Amoral central characters are a film staple going back to film noir and before. That's what an anti-hero is. It's just people have forgotten that such films have been made and were successful before the 80's, the conservative American mainstream does not decide what people 'like'.

Dredd will be going around with his motivation being upholding a police state and maintaining a status quo that keeps the citizens firmly in their place.  That's quite a hard sell, for a movie audience expecting a sci-fi costumed superhero type cop film, as there won't be any movement towards making the City or the Judges more humane - which would compromise the character and make a sequal more difficult.

Considering the amount of dystopian sci-fi films and amoral cop films that pepper the history of film, the only hard sell will be if Dredd is a bad film, if it's not, it'll hold it's own. Trying to make Dredd a 'hero' in the '95 film was a complete disaster, there is plenty of room for a real character like Dredd in film-space. Serioulsy, at least in 'comic' terms, was Dredd a hard sell for young 'uns back in the 70's/80's when we all hardly understood the concept of hero types and what Dredd meant? No because it was still entertaining seeing Dredd do what he did every week.

The notion of Terry Gilliam directing a Dredd film -though I know why people would suggest such a thing- I find slightly bizarre and more than likely wouldn't work nor do I believe would he be interested in doing it. Dredd ain't a typical Gilliam character and Gilliam ain't a one-size-fits-all fantasy/sci-fi film-maker, he's quite specific in how he treats his stories and what he expects to get from them.

[JOE SOAP]

The idea of a pared down introduction which introduces the character to a wider audience seems hamstrung by the fact that Dredd is such an unmitigated cunt. I can't imagine wanting to spend an hour in his company unmediated by the comedy, horror, humanity and infinite scope of Wagner & Grant's Megacity One and its population. The desire to make a Dredd film at any cost without making a serious attempt to analyse the unique appeal of the strip and reflect that on screen seems like a waste of time and other peoples money.

Generalising what people will watch is a bad idea, 'most' won't be interested in seeing Dredd -not his one anyway- and the film I believe is not intended that way, it'll likely be R-rated/18 for a start, hardly the average cineplex fare so the 'expectations' will be in a certain remit.

The history of film is stewn with such cunts, never stopped anybody likin' 'em or the films or sequels. Snake Plissken comes to mind, a character who didn't go through any character 'change' in Escape from New York, he went out the same way as he came in. Lee Marvin in Point Blank another- unredeemable. No one in Sergio Leone's spaghetti films were particularly cosy either or subject to 'change'/'character arcs'. There's something to be said for such characters in films and Hollywood's fear of portraying them in recent years and playing 'safe'. Dredd has never been a mass audience character nor do I think he needs to be to be successful unless they want to attract the Sex & the City audience too. The other elements in Dredd's world can come later and not be contradictory, why rush?


I've argued this in previous posts:

If they get the tone right, it's going to be an even harder sell.

Action fims require a hero, if they are to follow the general action film template, and Dredd isn't one.

Was Dirty Harry a hero, was he sympathetic?, not in any substantial terms he wasn't. I've said this before and I still think it's true: If you want people to support a certain character, make those/the antagonists he is against, be worse -maybe morally- than he, that way you can establish certain moral parameters in the film which you can stick to and bend as you wish with substantial reason.


Antoher great recent example is the Way of the Gun, two completely amoral characters -with no back stories presented- are the centre of the film. There are very few 'likeable' people in it yet you know who to get behind and there's a point to all the violence to boot. The same holds for all Sergio Leone films and most of Pekinpah's too. Who in the Wild Bunch is the average hero? The 'sypathetic hero' concept is a hangover from bad/dated 80's Hollywood bullshit peddled by unsuccessful writers and execs who know fuck-all but wish to force their demographic formulas on the industry. Amoral central characters are a film staple going back to film noir and before. That's what an anti-hero is. It's just people have forgotten that such films have been made and were successful before the 80's, the conservative American mainstream does not decide what people 'like'.

Dredd will be going around with his motivation being upholding a police state and maintaining a status quo that keeps the citizens firmly in their place.  That's quite a hard sell, for a movie audience expecting a sci-fi costumed superhero type cop film, as there won't be any movement towards making the City or the Judges more humane - which would compromise the character and make a sequal more difficult.

Considering the amount of dystopian sci-fi films and amoral cop films that pepper the history of film, the only hard sell will be if Dredd is a bad film, if it's not, it'll hold it's own. Trying to make Dredd a 'hero' in the '95 film was a complete disaster, there is plenty of room for a real character like Dredd in film-space. Serioulsy, at least in 'comic' terms, was Dredd a hard sell for young 'uns back in the 70's/80's when we all hardly understood the concept of hero types and what Dredd meant? No because it was still entertaining seeing Dredd do what he did every week.

The notion of Terry Gilliam directing a Dredd film -though I know why people would suggest such a thing- I find slightly bizarre and more than likely wouldn't work nor do I believe would he be interested in doing it. Dredd ain't a typical Gilliam character and Gilliam ain't a one-size-fits-all fantasy/sci-fi film-maker, he's quite specific in how he treats his stories and what he expects to get from them.

[Mardroid]

Beside we'll be in the company of Anderson too. The film might be about Dredd but I get the impression* she'll be our audience into that world. I'm not saying she'll be the comic relief, but hopefully her rather different personality will provide some contrast in tone.

And of course there are the villains. Villains are often a good source of black humour.

*Bearing in mind I haven't read the script, so could be talking out of my rumplestiltskin...

[TordelBack]

...Bat Mite isn't in any of the Batman movies...

Wasn't that Chris O'Donnell's character?

[vzzbux]

Just googled Batmite.
What the fuck?





V

[Jared Katooie]

Bat-Mite kicks ass.

[weehawk]

The idea of a pared down introduction which introduces the character to a wider audience seems hamstrung by the fact that Dredd is such an unmitigated cunt. I can't imagine wanting to spend an hour in his company unmediated by the comedy, horror, humanity and infinite scope of Wagner & Grant's Megacity One and its population. The desire to make a Dredd film at any cost without making a serious attempt to analyse the unique appeal of the strip and reflect that on screen seems like a waste of time and other peoples money.

Generalising what people will watch is a bad idea, 'most' won't be interested in seeing Dredd -not his one anyway- and the film I believe is not intended that way, it'll likely be R-rated/18 for a start, hardly the average cineplex fare so the 'expectations' will be in a certain remit.

The history of film is stewn with such cunts, never stopped anybody likin' 'em or the films or sequels. Snake Plissken comes to mind, a character who didn't go through any character 'change' in Escape from New York, he went out the same way as he came in. Lee Marvin in Point Blank another- unredeemable. No one in Sergio Leone's spaghetti films were particularly cosy either or subject to 'change'/'character arcs'. There's something to be said for such characters in films and Hollywood's fear of portraying them in recent years and playing 'safe'. Dredd has never been a mass audience character nor do I think he needs to be to be successful unless they want to attract the Sex & the City audience too. The other elements in Dredd's world can come later and not be contradictory, why rush?


I've argued this in previous posts:

If they get the tone right, it's going to be an even harder sell.

Action fims require a hero, if they are to follow the general action film template, and Dredd isn't one.

Was Dirty Harry a hero, was he sympathetic?, not in any substantial terms he wasn't. I've said this before and I still think it's true: If you want people to support a certain character, make those/the antagonists he is against, be worse -maybe morally- than he, that way you can establish certain moral parameters in the film which you can stick to and bend as you wish with substantial reason.


Antoher great recent example is the Way of the Gun, two completely amoral characters -with no back stories presented- are the centre of the film. There are very few 'likeable' people in it yet you know who to get behind and there's a point to all the violence to boot. The same holds for all Sergio Leone films and most of Pekinpah's too. Who in the Wild Bunch is the average hero? The 'sypathetic hero' concept is a hangover from bad/dated 80's Hollywood bullshit peddled by unsuccessful writers and execs who know fuck-all but wish to force their demographic formulas on the industry. Amoral central characters are a film staple going back to film noir and before. That's what an anti-hero is. It's just people have forgotten that such films have been made and were successful before the 80's, the conservative American mainstream does not decide what people 'like'.

Dredd will be going around with his motivation being upholding a police state and maintaining a status quo that keeps the citizens firmly in their place.  That's quite a hard sell, for a movie audience expecting a sci-fi costumed superhero type cop film, as there won't be any movement towards making the City or the Judges more humane - which would compromise the character and make a sequal more difficult.

Considering the amount of dystopian sci-fi films and amoral cop films that pepper the history of film, the only hard sell will be if Dredd is a bad film, if it's not, it'll hold it's own. Trying to make Dredd a 'hero' in the '95 film was a complete disaster, there is plenty of room for a real character like Dredd in film-space. Serioulsy, at least in 'comic' terms, was Dredd a hard sell for young 'uns back in the 70's/80's when we all hardly understood the concept of hero types and what Dredd meant? No because it was still entertaining seeing Dredd do what he did every week.

The notion of Terry Gilliam directing a Dredd film -though I know why people would suggest such a thing- I find slightly bizarre and more than likely wouldn't work nor do I believe would he be interested in doing it. Dredd ain't a typical Gilliam character and Gilliam ain't a one-size-fits-all fantasy/sci-fi film-maker, he's quite specific in how he treats his stories and what he expects to get from them.

It would be a nice touch for "Dredd" to have some scenes that are inspired by "Brazil"(like "Watchmen" did), but yeah, this type of genre isn't quite Gilliam's "thing". Shoot em' up-type films of this sort aren't his bag.

[TordelBack]

Like I said:  Chris O'Donnell.

[Beaky Smoochies]

Terry Gilliam is a very versatile film-maker, and considering he was very serious about potentially directing a big-screen adaptation of Watchmen at one time, leads me to think he would be equally adept at a Judge Dredd movie- although he would undoubtedly inject a lot of his unique character into it- and it would have many of the typical Gilliam themes in it, like a dystopian society, authoritarianism, the little people squelched under an oppressive system... not to mention all kinds of crazy black humour, socio-political satire, and totally whacked-out visuals!

But that's all academic, ultimately, I'm just thrilled to have a new Dredd movie on it's way, and my best wishes and regards go to Pete Travis- who of us doesn't wish him the greatest success, not to mention wanting him to completely knock this one out of the park, anyone...?

[Mike Carroll]

This is an exclusive shot from the new Dredd movie, taken during rehearsals, of Karl Urban wearing the iconic uniform. Enjoy!

Blimey... It's actually been a year since this first photo was released!

-- Mike

[JOE SOAP]

Feels like 2.

[Buttonman]

114,000 page views though - at that rate the trailer could explode the internet!

[Goaty]

Happy Anniversary!

With hopefully of trailer soon...