Judge Dredd Movie

Galvasean

constitutionus wrote: »

looks like even the ones that had slapped on the odd 2D have all stopped.

i was gonna go with the brother so he could see it. guess its the pirate route now.

Ah don't... It's an (reasonably) independent film. If people don't get behind it it wont get the sequel it deserves.

CastorTroy

If you want to see it in 2D you can go next week or the following week, I'd say. I know my local always moves the 3D only movies out of the 3D equipped screens and into a 2D screen

Mickeroo

CastorTroy wrote: »

If you want to see it in 2D you can go next week or the following week, I'd say. I know my local always moves the 3D only movies out of the 3D equipped screens and into a 2D screen

I'm not sure how it all works tbh but would they not need different print of the movie to do that?

CastorTroy

Mickeroo wrote: »

I'm not sure how it all works tbh but would they not need different print of the movie to do that?

I wouldn't know myself. I just know they do it so unless it's something to do with setup or filters or something. I just don't see them getting in a 2D print for the last week or 2 of its run

Sad Professor

I received replies from both Vue and Cineworld in response to my complaint about 3D-only showings.

Vue claims, rather unhelpfully, that Dredd was produced only in 3D and can't be shown any other way - but they are very sorry. I assume this means they didn't relieve any 2D prints from the distributor.

While Cineworld gave me a long, vaguely incoherent reply, stating that they have a limited number of 2D prints which are distributed to the cinemas with the greatest demand and their records to-date suggest that Dubliners love 3D, but they may consider more 2D showings if audiences show demand for this "genre". This was obviously a standard reply and applies to 3D films in general and not just Dredd.

Nervous Wreck

Had to see this in 3D cos of stupid cineworld... The 3D was annoying and distracting (as 3D always is) but the movie was great!

norrie rugger

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Had to see this in 3D cos of stupid cineworld... The 3D was annoying and distracting (as 3D always is) but the movie was great!

Your opinion of the 3D was not pre-clouded by any chance?
Because the 3D in this was used brilliantly, I barley noticed the shift (if at all) and only appreciated how vibrant the scenes were. It was after the scene passed that I realised what had happened.

johnny_ultimate

norrie rugger wrote: »

Your opinion of the 3D was not pre-clouded by any chance?

To use a strawman analogy:

Imagine poking yourself in the eye with a pen. It will hurt, and you'll be rightly turned off doing it again. Then someone on the Internet tells you that poking yourself in the eye with a pen is actually really good. So you poke yourself in the eye with a pen again, and it hurts again. You swear you won't do it again, until another person on the Internet tells you that no, no, poking yourself in the eye with a pen is actually really really good.

Eventually you stop poking yourself in the eye with a pen. This isn't an attack on people who enjoy poking themselves in the eye with pens (fair play to them), but ultimately just an acknowledgement that many people do not enjoy such an activity.

loveisdivine

Saw this over the weekend. Ive never read the comics or seen the stallone film. I thought it was entertaining enough, but not spectacular.
I would have liked to have known a little more about some of the characters.

I usually hate 3D as it gives me a headache. However this was one of the best uses of 3D I have seen.
That said, I will still be seeing films in 2D where possible.

CastorTroy

Looks like I was wrong about 2D showings here. Dredd 3D is showing here until Thursday then no Dredd listed for Friday on.

Nervous Wreck

norrie rugger wrote: »

Your opinion of the 3D was not pre-clouded by any chance?
Because the 3D in this was used brilliantly, I barley noticed the shift (if at all) and only appreciated how vibrant the scenes were. It was after the scene passed that I realised what had happened.

Not really. I've only previously seen 2 movies in 3D. The first was My Bloody Valentine (axe seemingly flying at my face was pretty cool!) and Up! (in which I spent more time actually trying to figure out what parts were meant to be 3D than enjoying them).

The bits of Dredd with

glass floating around in slo-mo etc

were pretty nice looking actually. But most of the 3D was distracting. Examples being the villain being right in front of the camera holding a hostage towards the start. It looked like someone was standing up in front of the projector. Other bits were just pointless. The entire scene was in regular focus but there was a vertical beam sticking out of the screen for no reason. It threw off my visual focus and distracted me from the film cos when my eyes were distracted, I was left thinking "Why's that beam 3D? It's totally distracting and- wait, what'd he say?!"

Tayleur

Seen it for the second time. Stands up very well to a second viewing. Still very impressed with the 3d slo mo scenes. Especially the last one. This will definitely be going in my dvd collection when out.

folan

really enjoyed this last night. Dont mind 3D, but can see why folks dont like it.

thought the 3d added to the style of the film.

enjoyed the story, was nice and simple, but got the gist across well.

only thing it needed was slightly more chin.

Duggy747

Loved it.

Best elements of 80's and early 90's action movies rolled into one. I haven't read a 2000AD comic since I was a kid but the feel and tone of the movie instantly reminded me of the Dredd comics.

Urban was perfect in it, the pictures we got 1st didn't do him any justice as you really did need to see him in action. From the side profile when he grimmaced you were seeing the live version of Dredd. The trailers didn't help this movie and most people I asked thought the film looked shìt (even I thought it looked a bit dodge)

He really was channeling Eastwood, every time he would growl "Yeeeaaah" it instantly reminded me of Unforgiven.

Violent, no romantic bullshìt, no silly or typical pun-tastic one-liners and well-paced. It was refreshing to see a movie based on material actually done by people who understood the universe they were using and knew what to do with it. No heavy exposition or revealing too many things about Dredd, he is an already established character to those who knew him and the film catered to that audience, not teens in order to get their arses into the seats and set up yet another bland franchise.

The 3D didn't really add much for me though they were nice to see during the Slo-Mo sequences which never felt drawn out or tacked on. Didn't harm the film but I would have been just as happy seeing the 2D version.

I'm sure if I knew more about the Dredd world I would've appreciated all the nods since I could only recognise a handful of things.

The movie constantly reminded me of the likes of Robocop ("You have 20 seconds to comply" :pac:) with a future that didn't look too alien to us and the fact that all of cop cars were painted black. Also reminded me of The Thing with it's, at times, subtle soundtrack.

Definitely one of the most enjoyable violent and mature action movies I've seen in a long time. Have very little to complain about other than I would've liked to have seen more of the city, but that's a minor quibble.

Looking forward to the sequel, if they don't try to tone it down for the sake of a wider audience.

KilOit

Went to see this as it was only thing on at the time. Holy crap it was freaking awsome! i'm not really into the dredd comic stuff but loved it so much and so did the girlfriend. the acting, action, characters, soundtrack all 10/10

Very similar to The Raid of course but imho this was better!

oxygen

Cheers lads, I was on the fence about whether to see this or Killing them Softly later on.
The two post above convinced me to go see this before it leaves the cinema.

Cantona's Collars

Original Stallone version is on Channel 5 now if anyone wants a laugh or to gouge their eyes out.

red dave

zerks wrote: »

Original Stallone version is on Channel 5 now if anyone wants a laugh or to gouge their eyes out.

Surely this is a bannable post?!?

KilOit

New movie needed more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJiYrRcfQo

Meesared

KilOit wrote: »

New movie needed more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJiYrRcfQo

LAWWWWWWWWWW

FrostyJack

Saw it in 2D and loved it. Only 2 things that put me off it were the size of the Building was meant to be huge, but it looked as big as Ballymun flats inside and the ending

which could have been taken out of any Steven Segal movie, too obvious and too easy

. Visuals and soundtrack really set the mood. Look forward to a sequel.

norrie rugger

KilOit wrote: »

New movie needed more LAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW

It only needs it once and it gets it at 2min01sec

norrie rugger

bollocks.
A $6.3Mil opening weekend is not helpful, for a sequel

1. House at the End of the Street $13 million
2. End of Watch $13 million
3. Trouble With The Curve $12.7 million
4. Finding Nemo 3D $9.4 million
5. Resident Evil: Retribution 3D $6.7 million
6. Dredd 3D $6.3 million

Bad opening weekend

Goldstein

norrie rugger wrote: »

bollocks.
A $6.3Mil opening weekend is not helpful, for a sequel

1. House at the End of the Street $13 million
2. End of Watch $13 million
3. Trouble With The Curve $12.7 million
4. Finding Nemo 3D $9.4 million
5. Resident Evil: Retribution 3D $6.7 million
6. Dredd 3D $6.3 million

Bad opening weekend

Oh man, beaten even by that Resident Evil dredge. They've supported almost every abysmal comic book movie in recent years but shun one of the handful of worthy ones that made it to the big screen against all odds. That is doing the "Americans are not idiots" cause no good at all. Comic book nerds, hang your heads in shame.

pixelburp

Wow, amazing that Res Evil 5 is in the top 5, nevermind that it beats Dredd. How that series make money at all is beyond me. Even so, I still think it's impressive a hard-R rated film like Dredd manages to get that high in the box offices, and surely though DVD profits would also count towards whether a sequel gets greenlit?

phil1nj

pixelburp wrote: »

Wow, amazing that Res Evil 5 is in the top 5, nevermind that it beats Dredd. How that series make money at all is beyond me. Even so, I still think it's impressive a hard-R rated film like Dredd manages to get that high in the box offices, and surely though DVD profits would also count towards whether a sequel gets greenlit?

I'm absolutely crushed about this TBH but want to look on the bright side. The movie still has to open in other territories which will undoubtably push up the worldwide gross but the opening weekend in the US is a let down (despite some serious buzz and overall very positive reviews AND it's a damn good action flick IMHO). I'm sure that DVD/Blu-Ray sales and cable movie deals will also push up the final take but I'm not a 100% sure if this will be enough to get a sequel greenlit (fingers crossed).

One thing that is confusing the hell out of me though is that several months back I read a blurb in Total Film that claimed that presale tickets for this in the US had hit the $20million mark. Now either this was complete bollocks or those people don't plan on seeing it during the opening week run.

Anyway........:(

Joeface

Finally got to see this last nite .

Enjoyed it start to finish. IMO it lives up to what I hoped it would be.
I have a feeling there will be a follow up which will also be good.

Sarxos

To greenlight an immediate sequel this needed at least a 10m box-office opening. With a $50m budget and $30m marketing spend it needed to make at least $50m cumulative at the domestic box office for the studio execs to feel comfortable sanctioning a sequel.

Dredd 2 would need an $80m budget at least to expand on the original and sadly that just does not seem possible with those figures.

Duggy747

norrie rugger wrote: »

bollocks.
A $6.3Mil opening weekend is not helpful, for a sequel

1. House at the End of the Street $13 million
2. End of Watch $13 million
3. Trouble With The Curve $12.7 million
4. Finding Nemo 3D $9.4 million
5. Resident Evil: Retribution 3D $6.7 million
6. Dredd 3D $6.3 million

Bullshìt results, deserves better than that.

As awful as the RE series is, it's an established name and a good percentage of people love them...........I dunno how but, still.

Hopefully word of mouth will pick it up and it'll clean up on home release as it really does deserve to make a healthy profit.

phil1nj

Sarxos wrote: »

To greenlight an immediate sequel this needed at least a 10m box-office opening. With a $50m budget and $30m marketing spend it needed to make at least $50m cumulative at the domestic box office for the studio execs to feel comfortable sanctioning a sequel.

Dredd 2 would need an $80m budget at least to expand on the original and sadly that just does not seem possible with those figures.

The budget for this has been listed as being $45million (I'm not a 100% certain if that budget also included the marketing spend). Realistically, the marketing of this movie wasn't particularly excessive so $30million for marketing seems quite a lot to me. Here's hoping that it becomes a hit on the rental and/or home retail markets. Might just get the suits interested in a sequel.