DREDD Trailer!!!

[HunterZolomon]

Just got home, watched the HD version. So let me just say:

[Eric Plumrose]

Yeah, let's not bother... but you did bother to post again. Just saying, if the first line in your first response is "nothing you said is relevant", and you got nothing out of my post, than we had nothing to talk about. It's not something you'd say to somebody in real life.

While I have expressed similar sentiments in real life (even though it's not what I actually said to you), let's try this a different way:

Well, it's less you know, "out there", less extravagant in the sci-fi futuristicness of it. I mean, just compare it to any page from the comics. Whether near or far future, it's a lot more "normal" and less crazy. So it's not, say, the comic come to life. I'm not complaining, I think this version of Mega-City One will do great as a backdrop for this movie.

'Out there' is shorthand for futuristic, sure. Hey, the more 'out there' something is, the more futuristic it is. There have been concerns raised, however, that the film is set in the near-future rather than over a century away when the strip takes place. Skurvy, despite his initial fears, likes what he's seen but still considers it to be the former. I disagee: irrespective of how it compares to the comic, the trailer depicts (for me) a society that wouldn't happen any time soon.

So, to better-phrase my question (hopefully without the perceived rudeness), how far 'out there' does something have to be for it stop being 'the near-future'? BLADE RUNNER is set thirty-seven years from its release date. MINORITY REPORT, fifty-two. Both feature some 'out there' ideas, so when does the 'near-future' simply become 'the future'?

[karlurbaninternational]

What a day. Watched the Trailer now for 50 or 60 times. And still a hundret more to come. I will go through each HD frame this evening and enjoy this piece of art. *shivering* And guys wish me luck, my better half is doing that "maybe we go to London, maybe not, things happen all the time?" teasing thing.... *__*

[Kowalsky (formerly JudgeGumpty)]

don't read the comments on youtube. but if you have to then please thumbs down those fucktards.

Ive been doing that for the last hour and a half thumbing up the Followers of Law and thumbing down the Dictators of F*7ksville

[HunterZolomon]

Getting sick of this standard internet practice of basement dwellers pissing on 99.9% of everything. Look on the bright side, they have shit lives.

[mogzilla]

  dirty frank has bump in trousers

[SmallBlueThing]

What i liked: the song- what is that? Dredd firing that slow incendiary (?) bullet across the building's interior space.

What i didnt like: mostly everything else, im sorry to say. It's not worth me commenting on the city or the vehicles or the lawmasters or the uniforms- they are what they are. But "it's judgment time!"? Holy drokk, mr scriptwriter!

I dunno- im glad it's been made, and yes there's the possibility that a sequel would be more on the money... but if this hadnt had the helmets and the title 'dredd' it would have been exactly the kind of trailer i routinely fast forward through, or skip entirely, on dvd.

Im really glad so many people are responding so positively to it- but im not. I'll stick to the comics, thanks, and buy the dvd eventually.

But now that's said, i fully expect to be accused of being old fuck-face, and to be told im 'not a real fan'.

So let's pretend that's been said, and move on.

SBT

[JOE SOAP]

But "it's judgment time!"? Holy drokk, mr scriptwriter!

It's a clanger. The only one that irked me.

See you at the cinema, 'fuck face'.

[I, Cosh]

What i liked: the song- what is that?

It's In For the Kill by La Roux, but a different mix from the one which was top of the hit parade a couple of years ago.

Old Fuck Face.

[I, Cosh]

Think it's this version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2XmLcnYSwQ

[Steve Green]

It's a skreamer remix of LaRoux' 'In for the Kill'

And yeah, that line's gameshow terrible.

[radiator]

It's a clanger. The only one that irked me.

To be entirely, brutally, honest - there's quite a bit of dodgy, clunky dialogue in the trailer.

So much so that if I didn't have complete faith in Alex Garland (who is a smart, sharp writer and has written two of my absolute favourite films) I'd be quite concerned that this movie was going to be really dumb. I'm sure that - in context - the dialogue will be just fine.

The 'judgement time' line is baffling. Was that in the leaked trailer? Hopefully it won't be in the finished film...

[Leigh S]

City from a distance looks very Ron Smith - not entirely sold on the story line as it appears in trailer and from what Ive picked up - something Hunters Club-ish would ahve been filmable but a bit more dramatically charged than what appears to be a recipe for lots and lots of fighting and not much else (but we shall see!)

Urban and erm Anderson person (sorry Anderson person) looked great though and Urban seemed suitably Dreddish - as others ahve said, not sure about Judg(E)ment time and other catchphrasey soundbites from Dredd, and "sentence is death" always feels WRONG WRONG WRONG! in Dredd - he likes to take em alive, even going to insane lengths to do so, which is always part of the fun... but I'm a fan of Adam West Batman over Bale, or perhaps more accurately Jonathon Harris' Dr Smith over Gary Oldmans...

[PsychoGoatee]

and "sentence is death" always feels WRONG WRONG WRONG! in Dredd - he likes to take em alive, even going to insane lengths to do so, which is always part of the fun...

Not always, of course Dredd did the ol "sentence is death" thing in The Apocalypse War. Sure this is smaller scale, but it 's not entirely out of character for Dredd to sentence someone to death for crimes against the city. Though, I do look at this movie as it's own thing.

[The Sherman Kid]

Not too concerned by the dialogue -look at the stuff Batman has spouted, stand alone it sounds off but in the films it passes muster.