Kinski wrote: » But those are all very low budget productions. Dredd cost $45m, and as such was a much riskier proposition (though it took $36.5m, so should break-even after DVD/Blu-Ray sales, broadcasting rights, etc.)
johnny_ultimate wrote: » Aye that is true, but in many ways Dredd was granted more of a fighting chance than most 'underdog' films are. It made it to the multiplexes (not all, but enough), which is certainly a luxury that is surprisingly rare treat for all non-studio output. Poor marketing and presentation choices scuppered its chances somewhat - responsible for one lost ticket from this viewer, anyway - but its resources did place it in a weird sort of niche between cult audiences and mainstream viewerships. Look like said niche is not enough to prop up a film of this scale. Also, as much as we can blame marketing, the sad reality is that huge percentages of audiences just don't make an effort anymore to step outside their comfort zone. Multiplexes are increasingly reluctant to programme anything other than blockbusters or high-profile American releases - but in a horrible sort of way can you really blame them when there's going to be a lot of empty seats if they try otherwise? There's a lot of factors leading to the increasing uniformity in mainstream cinema, but audiences (and alas we seem to be talking a huge majority of the film-going public) with a phobia for anything 'difficult' or 'different' are a major symptom of the general corporate shenanigans afoot for decades now. Dredd might be a victim - again, I wouldn't go as far as saying its the biggest victim as it least has a healthy budget, a relatively wide release, a cult franchise and the not insignificant asset of the English language - but its merely one victim of many. Yes, by all means if people want to purchase multiple copies go for it - they want to show their support for the movie, which is always nice (although I'd consider myself a devoted disciple of the 'be careful what you wish for' camp when it comes to sequels ). But that's merely one battle in a full-on war that few seem interested in fighting.
B.A._Baracus wrote: » People are bickering too much on here. Totally mising the important questions .... such as who would you rather :pac:olivia thirlby or Lena Headey :pac:
Everyone in 2013 is getting Dredd on DVD or Bluray for a present, even if the same house ends up with ten copies, I need to see more!!!!
siblers wrote: » Did this film remind anyone of The Raid? Enjoyed The Raid but enjoyed this considerably more. Such a pity when a film like this does so bad(no cinema in Kerry showed it), yet something so generic and bland as Contraband will take about 90 million.
DirkVoodoo wrote: » Agreed, marketing was atrocious. I remember cringing in the cinema when the trailer came on, they managed to take a whole load of lines that worked perfectly in the movie and made them sound like a series of hackneyed quips from B-rate action movies: "Let's finish this!" "Judgement time"
Zombienosh wrote: » This is why I never went to see it. The trailers didn't do anything for it.
Beefy78 wrote: » Slightly off topic but I'm surprised that so many people base their decisions on what films to watch on the trailer. I obviously know that that is the point of a trailer but I've been bitten too many times by trailers looking far better than the film turns out to be to pay much attention to them either way.
TheDoc wrote: » There was a pretty hilarious point watching where Dredd is behind the tiled wall calling for each type of alternative fire, and calls for a "Two way split". Misses immediately went " ow ****" and when the Lawgiver responded out of ammo she went "ow noes". Don't know why just shat myself laughing.
pixelburp wrote: » I think your perspective is skewed by the very fact you're posting here; afterall, a film forum is by and large going to have more savvy folks amongst its ranks, than the average crowd queuing at Cineworld. There's still a large chunk of punters who simply don't care that much about film that they pursue it; and most of their information would come from trailers, TV spots or whatever the Metro / Herald might scribble about it on release
oxygen_temp wrote: » Really enjoyed the Raid. Im looking forward to seeing this, but the raid was a genre defying action movie, I cant imaging this will be as good.
Yakuza wrote: » That "two way split" referred to the fact that Dredd had just popped another of the 4 dirty judges, so the million credits now only had to be split two ways. . I thought it was an excellent movie, streets ahead of the Stallone version (I watched them back to back). The Stallone version wasn't bad, just not what I'd hoped (it seemed to borrow a lot from Bladerunner which is a good thing to have in your celluloid DNA).
balkieb2002 wrote: » I was lucky enough to see this in the cinema with friend of similar tastes. Before I went in I hadn't seen the trailer or read up about it so actually knew nothing regarding the movies plot, just that it was similar to the "The Raid" which I had also seen around at the same time. I wasn't looking forward to seeing it in 3D either. I ended up leaving the cinema with a big smile on my face, having just seen my movie of the year. Urban was excellent as Dredd and had some really great moments. Even the 3D effects were well done and really added to the Slow-Mo sections. In the showing I saw in Cork there was about 20 people at it and every single person there enjoyed it. There were quite a parts in the movie where Dredd does something followed by a one-liner and while I'm not sure it should be funny, we all ended up laughing at and just enjoying the film. First time I felt that way in cinema in ages!
TheDoc wrote: » Really? I had another quick look and He looks to be just cycling through the alternative firing modes, he calls Two way split, and it makes the "empty" noise, until he hits a mode with ammo, that blows the second last judges head off. I dont think its in reference to the money.
Wikipedia wrote: The gun has a maximum range of up to three miles and has six distinct settingsStandard execution - A standard bullet, with identical effects to normal kinetic energy projectile weapons.Heat Seeker or Hot Shot - A standard bullet propelled by the unstable element, 'Argon 886'. Heatseeker rounds lock onto the target's heat source, enabling the Judge to target fleeing perps, accurately fire in low-light situations and so forth.Ricochet - A metal bullet coated with rubber. Ricochet rounds can bounce off solid surfaces while retaining enough kinetic energy to penetrate flesh. This enables the Judge to, for example, kill a perp that is using a human shield, bouncing their shot off a back wall and hitting the target from behind.Incendiary - Capable of setting its target on fire. Less widely used due to practicalities of incinerating targets in built-up city areas, although useful against unconventional adversaries such as Judge Death.Armour Piercing - Armour piercing rounds are extremely dense and contain a more powerful charge for higher muzzle velocity. Useful against cybernetic criminals and armoured opponents. When used against human targets, it can travel through multiple targets.High-Explosive (Hi-Ex) - A round containing an amount of extremely concentrated high explosive. Judges must employ caution when using this extremely dangerous round; the blast caused by the exploding bullets can just as easily harm those firing as well as the target. Generally used rarely; against crowding attackers or large/dangerous foes. In the 2012 movie Dredd, a revised version of the Lawgiver II demonstrated seven types of ammunition, which again were voice activated : RAPID (Rapid fire), FMJ (Full Metal Jacket), AP (Armour Piercing), INC (Incendiary), HI-EX (High Explosive) Hotshot, and Stun. Alike the comic, if an individual other than a judge picked up the gun, it self-destructed, incapacitating the wielder.
Lamper.sffc wrote: » We where the same and its not that they where cheesy one liners like in an Arnie movie of old. Its that they where just cool kick ass things to say at the time. The one where Dredd references Anderson not having her helmet seemed to get the biggest laugh in our cinema
TheUsual wrote: » Wow. Just watched this now and I loved it.The Box Office profit is only 30 million dollars on the 50 million cost, but I think it will make a profit by next year. Hope so anyway. By the way www.boxofficemojo.com is very good for film costs and profits. I was a 2000A.D. fan back in the day and I didn't really like Dredd to tell the truth. It was good when he was more human like in "the cursed earth" and less like Robocop, or when they got a really good artist to work on the stories, but generally it was just same story with the same artists doing it each week. Rogue Trooper and ABC Warriors and Halo Jones were my highlights of 2000A.D. (A friend of mine met Simon Bisley, one of their best graphic artists, got his autograph and had a tattoo made of it.) The 1995 Dredd movie with Stallone is hated by everyone but was a lot closer to "Judge Dredd" canon than the new movie, in my opinion anyway. The new movie is great though, very different take on the Judge-executioner thing. I loved how Anderson knew it was wrong killing, but necessary.
seamus wrote: » I'm not sure what I thought of the ending Dredd's trademark is typically being uncompromising regardless of the circumstances; I would half expect Dredd to fail Anderson for losing her weapon, in spite of what she did after , but I don't think it was necessarily outside of canon, so I'm happy with that.
