Dredd trailer

WHAT?!?! It's naff!! The original Stallone one is the far better of the two.

"Ma-Ma" lol, Andersen's "power", the special effects, the crap gunplay, next to no physical fighting just people exploding with gore.

Pretty awful.

And the ending.... ??? Are we supposed to be bothered by her choice?
 
Just finished watching it in 2D. Picture looks great on my tv, not sure why reviewers say otherwise. The 5.1 DTS-MA mix is tremendous. 7.1 might have been better but I don't know what I was worried about. As for the film, it was as good second time around. I really, really hope they make another.
 
I am in two minds about whether to buy this now.

Pros:
Loved the film in the cinema, want to see it again.
Want to support the producers in case they get enough to finance a sequel.
My sound system is only 5.1 anyway.
Don't often watch extras.

Cons:
Not 7.1, so not future proof, but if I ever upgrade, it will probably be once the new format comes out.
Picture quality is said to be poor by some, good by others.
Missing most of the extras that are on the US release.

:confused::confused::confused:
 
ianh said:
I really enjoyed it in the cinema and though Urban did a fantastic job considering you could only see 1/2 his face (much better than Hardy/Bane IMHO). The lack of budget was the only real killer and it showed with the little things i.e poor bike, always in a corridor, few Megacity shots (although effective when shown) etc. I think some else mentioned they wished it had Total Recall's VFX and budget, imagine how awesome that'd have been!
Click to expand...

That would've been me :) (and yeah, the bikes were a bit poo...)
The only problem with that would've/could've been the extra studio crap that usually goes with more money being involved. Look at the Stallone version for example ;)

Speaking of which...

pioneer2000 said:
WHAT?!?! It's naff!! The original Stallone one is the far better of the two.

"Ma-Ma" lol, Andersen's "power", the special effects, the crap gunplay, next to no physical fighting just people exploding with gore.

Pretty awful.

And the ending.... ??? Are we supposed to be bothered by her choice?
Click to expand...

You didn't read the comics did you?
If you had, you'd see that the 2012 movie is by far the more faithful screen adaptation.
Stallone's version is typical Hollywood crap with the Dredd name attached to it.
The latest Urban movie is pretty much a two part comic put straight on screen. I will agree that the story is a little weak, however, this isn't supposed to be some kind of save the world epic. This is just a day in the life of Judge Dredd and is definitely for the fans of the source material who know exactly who and what Dredd is all about.

I saw the Stallone version at Odeon Leicester Square in the first day or two of release and I can still remember the amount of booing from the audience.
The city effects and the Angel gang (especially Mean Machine) were about the only things they did right imo.
 
Last edited:
Uncle Petey said:
You didn't read the comics did you?
If you had, you'd see that the 2012 movie is by far the more faithful screen adaptation.
Stallone's version is typical Hollywood crap with the Dredd name attached to it.
Click to expand...

I don't think it really matters if anyone knows the comic or not, the 2012 film is far superior even as a standalone piece with no previous 2000AD knowledge, Stallones version is embarrassing to watch.
 
I'm not saying you have to have been a fan of the comics to enjoy the film.
I'm saying that you'll have a better understanding or appreciation if you were.

Here's a more detailed opinion from someone who preferred the old one.

Yes I can see he might have been closer to the ACTUAL Dredd.... but that doesn't make it a good film or a good character...in this film his character was boring, the action was boring, the fights were basically boring and thats it.

As I said, the first film wasn't necessarily "Dredd" and was just a cop, but he was a likeable cop, a cop you wanted to win, and an actual, you know, plot. There were fights where you felt like he was actually in danger of being killed, there were fights that went on for more than 30 seconds, there was an enemy you could believe was bad ass and it was explained how he got to be who/where/why he was.

First film, friendship, betrayal, vengeance, hatred, bit of love, bit of comic relief, bit of growth, some actual action.

Second film, building, split second of boobs, end.

His lack of having a personality didn't mean they had to stop everyone else in the film having one, nor make EVERY single henchmen completely useless and pointless, nor make the action one sided simple rubbish at every single stage. Again I haven't read the comics, maybe their is character growth and its subtle, maybe there isn't, when you have a very plain main character which has happened in other books/films, you tend to make up for this by having varied interesting partners or enemys, you compensate elsewhere, I can't say if the comic does do that. If the comic is no characters, no back storys beyond the insanely basic, and no good action I have no idea why anyone likes it. I could live with his character, and appreciate the style of having a character like that, if they made the rest of the film good, but they didn't, the rest of the film was crap.
Click to expand...
 
Seems the 2D PQ is supposed to be average-crap in comparison to the great 3D :(

Loved 3D at the cinema but certainly am not investing in some silly 3D TV. Will still buy the film though, crank it up and try to ignore the PQ in 2D!
 
The Bluray does appear to be thrown together hastily just to get a bit of extra money. The menu system looks cheap and is barely legible. Most of the extras are all that has already been released on the internet. A pointless Lena headley interview.

Some places in the film in low lit areas are really noisy, thats probably the camera but doesnt look like they tried to clean it up. But otherwise its ok. Its doubtful there will be anymore releases or anything like that, this is all we are going to get.
 
Yeah, I read a review that said there's a noticeable drop in image quality on the 2d version. The 3d blu-ray looks great apparently...

I'm with -Ad- on the 'still not buying a 3d telly' though :p
 
Uncle Petey said:
I'm not saying you have to have been a fan of the comics to enjoy the film.
I'm saying that you'll have a better understanding or appreciation if you were.

Here's a more detailed opinion from someone who preferred the old one.

Click to expand...

Exactly this. The original film is by far the more entertaining movie.
 
I was more entertained by the faithful adaptation of the new one. That, and no Rob effin Schneider ;)

Karl Urban pulling authentic *old skool Ezquerra* Dredd faces was priceless. Tempted to post a few screencaps with comparisons to original artwork :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom