Judge Dredd TV Show

[mrbadger]

Things wrong with Stallones movie:

1: Stallone took his helmet off....
2: Rico was an absurd version of that character.
3: Dredd did not act like Dredd at all.
4: What the hell was he riding off to at the end?
5: Stallone took his helmet off....

Neither of the movies were good. They were bothe box office flops for many reasons. The only good thing to come out of the second one was Karl Urban.

And I couldn't quite see what the problem with slo-mo was either...

But then suger was also a class A drug too in MC1 (a thing without which we actually die instantly), so there's that.

[Jericho]

The opening Slo-Mo sequence where we first see it in use and we first see "Ma-Ma", also known as "that lady with the scar who stares a lot", was about three and a half hours too friggin long.


----

And, what's the big deal, anyway? Slo-Mo isn't a big deal. It doesn't hurt anyone.

I believe the slo-mo effects were to show off the good-3D that the film was filmed in (not the fake 3d like most films, where they add it afterwards and everything is really dark). Apparently, those slo-mo effects were a big deal at the time.

I think 3D has more or less died since then.

As to "what's the big deal", that's Mega City 1 for you. Everything is illegal. Judges can do a Crime Blitz on your apartment at anytime. They pull everything apart, smash everything, and promise to pay for all repairs... If you are innocent.

No one is ever innocent of course. An overdue library book, a single grain of sugar, every one is guilty of something, because everything is illegal, and therefore anyone can be arrested at any time. How else are you going to keep control?

[birdtable]

There was one thing Stallone's Dredd had .... bigger shinier epaulettes, and they were big shiny epaulettes and I mean really big shiny epaulettes..... That is the film .. Big Shiny Epaulettes..

Edit ...After giving it some thought (after all the subject is worthy of some deep contemplation)..It demonstrates the dangers of straight transfers from comic to film,,, epaulettes (cannot think of better terminology) work fine in the comic but look out of place in a film.

[Jericho]

epaulettes (cannot think of better terminology) work fine in the comic but look out of place in a film.

Yes, also it didn't help that the shotgun Dredd had for most of the film (You know, Dredd famous for using a shotgun, sigh) looked like it weighed about 3oz. They should have added some lead to it.


Karl Urban's costume looked more realistic and practical (loved the scratched helmet too). But the stupid small shoulders gave the judges a very nasty body shape. Very odd design I thought. Should have added a bit of bulk to them.


Also, it depends on who draws Dredd. That eagle can be the size of a regular human sometimes, when the more 'out-there' artist is drawing.

Madness: https://goo.gl/images/axr39u
https://goo.gl/images/rzIjyu

[mrbadger]

I seem to recall the same thing happening to the Lawmaster as well, depending on who was drawing it.

I suppose this is the 'cannon' bike.

The 'I'm mostly eating salads, does it show?' bike

The 'I'm doing 80% of light speed' bike

The ''I've got to get this of off to be coloured in ten minutes' bike

There are better examples I'm sure, but that would again require the digging out of my collection.

[Jericho]

Apparently, for the Stallone version of the film, they did try making some practical versions of the Lawmaster with huge wide front wheels, but they wouldn't turn, they'd just keep going forward

So... They went with flying bikes instead. Because, of course they would.

[mrbadger]

Apparently, for the Stallone version of the film, they did try making some practical versions of the Lawmaster with huge wide front wheels, but they wouldn't turn, they'd just keep going forward

So... They went with flying bikes instead. Because, of course they would.

Not trying at all to excuse that Stallone garbage, but I thought there was at least one flying Lawmaster type in the comics, but I can find no reference to it online, so maybe I'm wrong.

If there was it would have been really early on, before all the lore was finalised, and not in MC1.

[birdtable]

Agree with Jericho regarding the suit, far more realistic but as I wrote earlier tended to look like a thin man in a large suit,,, needed some bulk added.
The bike (I know it's heresy) needs some thought ...still think the best Film bike was Batman Dark Knights version.
The helmet will have to come off for TV series (just plain audience preference for commercial success) as long as there is a personality shift when the helmet is donned ..... never did the Hulk series any harm ..."don't make me angry".
There will have to be some adaptations from the comic for the TV series to be a commercial proposition but if they have gone through the effort of getting Karl Urban for the part chances are it will be pretty good.

[mrbadger]

The helmet will have to come off for TV series (just plain audience preference for commercial success) as long as there is a personality shift when the helmet is donned ..... never did the Hulk series any harm ..."don't make me angry".

The Hulk was two people, Dr Bannon and the Hulk. Dredd is Dredd.

Ok, maybe Dredd in the bath with his helmet on as happened in the comics was a bit too much.

And Dredd on the operating table having new eyes grafted with his filthy helmet still on after he got back from Judge Deaths dimension was a bit silly...


Goddammit. Stop making sense!!!!!

[Morkonan]

Just a couple of things:

Notice how the majority of criticisms are focused on "fan" expectations for both films. (All of them in this thread, perhaps? Well, except some of mine, I think.)

We just had a really wonderful movie released - Batman vs Superman vs Can Expectations BE Any Lower. I saw a few minutes of it, here and there, before my bowels forced me to change channels. They should show that to prospective astronauts in lieu of the expenses of putting them in the vomit-chair... I'd say it'd save us some money, but I'm not sure it would, since Hollywood will throw away money with wild abandon anytime mentions the possibility of a superhero IP. (Never speak of Catwoman.... never.)

What does all this stuff boil down to?

Story.

Superhero movies are character-based stories. They're not "Transformers" movies where the audience just expects cool 'splosions and fancy CGI. The best of all of the superhero movies focus on the parts of the characters that aren't "super", but are more like those of everyday people. Yes, they're in extraordinary situations, but they have to make hard choices, challenge their own values, sacrifice even though they're "super."

So, in Dredd, which is supposedly a character based superhero story, how did Dredd change? What is his character arc?

His friggin arc is a straight line, that's what it is. When Dredd and his protege' enter the block, there's a beggar there. So, what does this rigid, inflexible, dispenser of The Law do? He warns the beggar to leave. Why was that scene there? It was only there to set up the beggar getting squished by the doors... A friggin crime of writing, IMO. A perfectly good "shotgun" wasted or, rather, one that should have never been there in the first place.

So, what was Dredd's arc? In these stories, we're watching the character navigate through a series of trials, quests, hardships, defeats, victories, sacrifices, consequences, and all the other things that go with being a "hero." What trials did he face? Quests, sacrifices, defeats, victories, consequences? And, more importantly, what choices did he make that reflect the unfolding growth and development we expect?

Meh... nothing.

But, that's OK too, really. The other part of character stories are the inflexible characters that do not change. Instead, their determination, will, drive, etc, force the story to change merely because of their presence. Think of a classic noble knight that holds to their oath despite all tragedies and trials. These "flat" characters are relatively uninteresting unless we see them thrust into situations where they are sorely challenged.

That seems to be a good sort of character for Dredd, right? At least, in a movie about Dredd where he doesn't change, but his devotion to his values wins through, we could get behind that if he was sufficiently challenged, right?

Dredd let the beggar go.

...

Weaksauce. With that act, any devotion to a cause that required Dredd to be a "flat" character, even if only for a little while, was destroyed. It demonstrated, right from the very beginning, that Dredd was flexible, was willing to "bend" the law to suit his needs or the situation, however he saw fit.

In short - It's terrible writing. A horrid story that pays no attention to how stories really need to be told. Dredd shoots stuff, other people shoot stuff, some antagonist nobody should give two craps about, since she basically does nothing and makes a drug that isn't harmful, some walled-up fortress with some moron in an infirmary that is more armored than any other place in the entire friggin building... for some dumbass reason that is never explained just so some character we know nothing about can get shot for some reason that makes no friggin sense...

It's a terribad story. Seriously.

Contrast that, though, with the Stallone story. I don't care about the fan expectations, though I do agree they're important. All I care about here is the "story." The Judge Dredd movie had a story. It had a character that changed over time, from being inflexible to learning that "justice" shouldn't always be blind. The character confronts his past, betrayal, returns to his mentor, is given a quest, learns to accept the help of others, even if one of them is a brazen thief, overcomes trials, fights "monsters" sent against him, with the help of his friends of course, and then confronts his nemesis, all within a backdrop steeped in the corruption of power, etc, etc...

As far as stories go, Judge Dredd had a decently, not perfectly, constructed story and character arc. Dredd had zilch and that hurt it more than any possible non-canon inclusions could have.

[mrbadger]

So in that case Judge Dredd the movie (which bombed, it was a box office flop) could have been based on any IP, because it wasn't really true to the Dredd IP. They could have just done what was done with Starship Troopers and Blade Runner, mostly ignored the base IP but still made great movies.

Blade Runner was an amazing movie, not just great, but it barely touches the book.

If they'd gone that route they might have fared better, but they triggered the fanboy equivilent of the uncanny valley instead by staying too close and getting it badly wrong in important places.

Also, Dredd is an unrelatable superhero. He's no Superman, Spiderman or Ironman. To the general public he's just dull.

Dredd needs backstory to let the audience to connect with him. That's why the movie failed so badly, no-one cared about Dredd.

The TV series needs to correct that issue.

I didn't dislike everything about the Stallone movie. The sets were good, often spot on to the look of the comic.

One thing that amused me was LandRover claiming they'd designed a whole new type of car just for the movie. But it subsequently turned out that the car they provided was just their new base design with some extra bits glued on.

[Morkonan]

So in that case Judge Dredd the movie (which bombed, it was a box office flop) could have been based on any IP, because it wasn't really true to the Dredd IP. They could have just done what was done with Starship Troopers and Blade Runner, mostly ignored the base IP but still made great movies.

Essentially, yes, but with a few changes to introduce elements that the fans would have otherwise brought with them into movies about an IP they know something about.

Blade Runner was an amazing movie, not just great, but it barely touches the book.

Agreed. In this case, it may be one of the few crossovers that exceeds its original inspiration.

If they'd gone that route they might have fared better, but they triggered the fanboy equivilent of the uncanny valley instead by staying too close and getting it badly wrong in important places.

A good point and its one every IP/Franchise faces, from the "TNG" Star Trek shows/movies to endless remakes of "King Kong" and "Spiderman." These are the sorts of IPs on which angels fear to tread... unless they think they can make a mint.

Dredd needs backstory to let the audience to connect with him. That's why the movie failed so badly, no-one cared about Dredd.

Agreed. However, "backstory" doesn't even have to be "backstory." In the end, all you're doing is trying to fill in the character so that the audience knows what sort of person they are, how past experiences have shaped who they are at this moment, what some of their traits are, etc... Traditionally, "backstory" is "what has gone on before" in the lives of the characters, setting, etc.. But, it's not necessary that one elaborate on that a great deal for these sorts of movies. But.... for some reason, producers/directors/writers insist on repetitions of origin stories so they can set up the next Big Fail for an IP.

What's Korbin Dallas's backstory?

...

Well, the only thing we know, and it's not because it's "told" to us, is that he was in the military. He works for a cab company that an old military buddy runs or, at least, got him his job. Aaaaand.... boom, we're off with his story. He likes having intimate noodle dinners with a friendly, quircky, noodle-stand owner. He's trying to quit smoking. He's pretty much "overqualified" to defend himself, but he's no bully and only uses force if he has to. His mother is a nag, but he loves her. He's a normal working stiff... That is the end of his backstory and not one bit of film is wasted on needless ramblings about his past. It's all built into the story that the viewer is participating in on the screen. The viewer doesn't have to wait for this information, it's fed to them on the silver platter that is "The Fifth Element." And, what is most important is that all of this information is intrinsic to the story, itself. It flows well. If it was taken out, the movie and the character would be made less. (Plus, the confrontation with the gunman in the early part of the movie, demonstrating Dallas's competence and military background, is something of a foreshadowing for the police search as it sets the scene.)

Now, take how Dallas's backstory and initial character is presented to us and then look at how Deckard's character is built in many of the same ways. We see Deckard's apartment, watch him eating, watch his interactions with the "police" and gain knowledge of his relationships. We see he's something of a loaner, somewhat the worse for wear, vulnerable, etc.. And... that's it. Boom, we're off with the story and Deckard's character doesn't suffer one little bit for a lack of a more complete "backstory." We watch him grow and watch his traits get demonstrated right on the screen.

The TV series needs to correct that issue.

If it does, it needs to do it Korbin Dallas style. No "backstory episodes", no stupid "flashbacks", no endless monologues about "woe is me, I didn't have enough toys as a kid", etc... It needs to be built into the story, perhaps spread over several early episodes and at least marginally linked to the stories those are telling, not focused on "here is the backstory of Judge Dredd." There should also be a bit of mystery... forever. Nobody ever, ever, really wants to know everything. They don't want flashbacks of their hero taking hundreds of dumps on a toilet... They want "just enough" and not one bit more. Seriously - Not one bit more. In the end, this purposeful lack of backstory helps make that character who it is to the person experiencing it.

..
One thing that amused me was LandRover claiming they'd designed a whole new type of car just for the movie. But it subsequently turned out that the car they provided was just their new base design with some extra bits glued on.

Yeah, I remember that bit of hype. A lot of things proposed for movies just don't work, like the motorcycle issues that Jericho mentioned. Maybe they ran into that issue or, perhaps, they took the storyboard props they had and were commenting on them before actually clearing it with the prop department.

[Jericho]

All of this is why the show shouldn't be about Dredd. It should be about a couple of different judges, in the city. Maybe Dredd can be a peripheral character that they all look up to.

Everytime a superhero movie is made/remade, they always do the origins. How many Spidermans have there been now? How many times can that baby crashland into a texas farm? The "hero's journey" is the easiest thing to write and is what the audience exepcts.

Do we really want a 2 hour film of Superman being superman? Endless scenes of him rescuing cats from trees, stopping trains from jumping the tracks, stopping falling helicopters etc etc etc. All those little things you see for a couple of minutes in a superhero movie make it fun. But the whole movie about a super powered man saving people is dull dull dull.

Hence the Hero's Journey.
Even Superman 2 filmed back-to-back with the first Superman (Christopher Reeve I'm talking here), was pretty much the hero's journey, except that he lost his powers and regained them, rather than just gaining them.

60 minutes a week of Dredd just being Dredd and busting skulls will be terrible. Dredd training rookies and watching their fresh-faces getting disillusioned with the city could be interesting.

[mrbadger]

60 minutes a week of Dredd just being Dredd and busting skulls will be terrible.

You are not wrong, but I get the feeling this isn't where they're going.

Dredd training rookies and watching their fresh-faces getting disillusioned with the city could be interesting.

That happened in the comics a few times. It would be fun seeing it in the series.

On the Back Story thing:

I'm pretty certain they didn't bother even touching on Dredds back story for a long time in the comics.

There just wasn't a need, the target audience was young boys who didn't know they would want it, I certainly didn't. Even then it was dripped out over years. Even Dredd himself didn't know some of it.

Honestly you could probably cover a lot of it in a single episode, which indicates a lot of it doesn't matter. Who cares that he was geneticaly grown from Judge Fargo's cells, who was Judge Fargo? He was never in the comic.

Exposition dumps are never a good thing, having Dredds character evolve through whatever story they put in the series would be a much better plan. A second character causing that evolution, like Judge Anderson would be good. That was the role she played in the comic for the most part.