Judge Dredd movie review podcast (as threatened)

[bluemeanie]

In this special episode Rich is joined by Lee and Stacey from the Small Press Big Mouth podcast, and also by 2000AD writer Alec Worley to discuss the Stallone Dredd movie. This is of course done over a few beers but as the table was split 50/50 between haters and supporters there probably isnt, for once, as much swearing as you'd expect.

Special guest appearance by my effin Zippo lighter in the last 20 minutes (sorry)

Links etc here :
http://2000ad.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/ep51-judge-dredd-movie-review/

*braces myself for backlash shitstorm*   

[Mike Carroll]

Just finished listening... Excellent stuff - a tremendously fun podcast featuring lots of top-quality swearing and as for that "effin' zippo lighter": yeah, best leave that thing at home next time!

Seriously, that was fun. More specials like that one, please!
-- Mike

[JOE SOAP]

Great podcas- expanding the debate:


Keeping the 'elmet on shouldn't be a problem, thinking of it has a hindrance as to how scenes are played is the wrong way to see it as it's something that cuts to the core of how a Dredd film should be made and shot. Shooting scenes with this in mind should exploit this fact, not cut-around or ignore it, make it an advantage. The helmet and face are an intimidating image, taking the helmet off reduces that intimidation when we know what lies beneath.  Producers/directors have always seen it as a problem when it never was. It's character. A good director will know how to shoot it dynamically. The '95 film is not a dynamically shot film there aren't even any decent close-ups of the helmet or visor.

Think of the cop-bots in THX1138, blank-faced, passive, calm, yet intimidating and relentless - pursuing you until it becomes too expensive- they don't over-act or throw-shapes, their stillness is their authority. The old hollywood reason for not seeing someone's face generally related to not seeing the eyes to feel empathy, however since Dredd the character is based on not really knowing his reaction or what he feels, seeing his eyes would be wrong in most cases and most stories. 'Dead Man' being an exception because it's 'his' story and Dredd probably won't be doing too much emoting other than breakin' heads and passing out time.

To extend this view, another reaction is 'if we can't relate to the character we can't empathise therefore we need  to have an emotional arc/relatable element to connect with', this is another flasehood that can be disputed and was the main problem in the '95 film. If you want the audience to empathise with the central character, make those conflict causing characters/forces/nemeses, with whom he is opposing, be more evil/more unconscienable in their acts/more cruel than the actions of the central character (even breaking the rules set for the morals/law of that world which are set-out to seem 'right'). The audience will root for the central character even if he still does bad things Dredd's sardonicism will help.

This is the morality of every Sergio Leone film, there is hardly anyone 'good' in his films. 'The good, the bad & the ugly is a playful joke as each character displays degrees of all three characteristics. Clint just seems to be 'the good' but he's as selfish and self-serving as the rest. Many times have we rooted for convicts (Assault on Precinct 13) and killers in films, Resevoir Dogs is another, it's really not a problem. With Dredd there is the added ambiguity of state or perceived moral authority.


The Dirty Harry/Dredd comparison still applies and is not confused since it's the persona people are comparing not exactly the character motivations/story or world and Dredd has indeed displayed Harry's more extreme lone actions many times in his objections to Justice Dept. policies etc, and the same humour/public relations too. Yes, there are differences but that's because Dredd represents/operates in a different system he mostly believes in, Harry doesn't because he's not allowed to dispense the kind of Justice he feels is needed for certian perps- he basically wants to be Dredd. It's the 'individualism' in the bloodline amongst the Judges that sets Dredd apart and makes him valuable as has been noted many times. Dredd ain't a vigilante cos he doesn't need to be. He can work within the law.


The closest thing to Harry becoming Dredd -in character and in film- is in the sequel Magnum Force, not a great film (bad script) but a great idea for a Dirty Harry sequel and a logical extension of the first:

[spoiler]A group of motorcycle patrol cops equally disillusioned with the weakness of their laws see Harry as an icon and his methods  something to aspire to, so they form their own death squad executing prominent gang leaders/perps. It further transpires that they intend this method almost to become part of the system, a fixture, something akin to the Judges and there may be reason to believe they have the power and connections to make it happen. When Harry realises his methods may become systemic, because being Harry the only judgement he can trust is his own, he revolts; his enemies are worse than he is because they're cops who've betrayed themselves by conspiring.[/spoiler]


Let's face it Dredd represents the retributive streak in us all tinged with the idea of doing right. We also love a bastard.

[COMMANDO FORCES]

A good laugh indeed 'click, click' and poor Stacey wondering if we'll all talk 'click, click' to her again because she liked the film, poor lass!
I also think you should have gone into 'click, click' more details about all the various mistakes that happened through out the 'click, click' film as well.

I agree with Mike, next time get 'click, click' rid of the bloody zippo 

[Pete Wells]

Yeah, I'm about half way through and really loving it.

I wanted to comment with regards to Rob Schneider's Fergie character. Stace asked just why there is such a level of venom aimed at him, I think the reason (other than the fact that he really is very annoying) is that he was named after such an important and well loved character for no reason. So, if he was just some prick throughout I think he'd have simply got on peoples nerves, but the fact that he's a right prick AND sullying the name of Fergie, really annoys folk. It does for me, anyhow...

[Steve Green]

It's a great podcast - certainly agree with the 'if you're gonna take off the helmet, leave it to the exile bit and make it signify something'

It's odd, when I first saw the film, I didn't actually mind it that much as an action movie, but I was so jazzed to see MC-1, Mean Machine, the ABC Warrior etc on screen, and I thought the scenes of the judges en-masse rounding up people gave more of a feel for Dredd than Stallone as Dredd did.

[bluemeanie]

Just on the helmet bit, theres one scene they frame that perfectly IMHO thought they do spoil it slightly with the "I KNEW you'd say that" line.
Just before he blows up the guys car when he looms over him and actually looks pretty damn intimidating

And again, sorry for the lighter.Beer plus having fun doing it kinda made me forget slightly it was all being recorded and that it'd get picked up. It'll be kept out of reach next time.

Glad you enjoyed it though. Open to suggesions or even contributions for future "specials". Im paying for the feed each month, might as well use it up.

[Dandontdare]

It wasn't so much that he took the helmet off (after all we all know what Sly looks like so it's not a big reveal or anything) but that he never puts the bloody thing back on again!

And Joe Soap's right about the Dirty Harry comparison - it's not that the stories are the same, as Harry is a lone hardnut fighting a wimpy system, whereas Justice Dept is made up entirely of Harry Callahans, of which Dredd is the most extreme. I've always imagined Dredd's voice and delivery as being like Clint's, just a bit more shouty.

Great podcast, although the funniest line (about Stacey's "flicking") didn't get the big laughs/outraged offense that it deserved.

[JOE SOAP]

Just on the helmet bit, theres one scene they frame that perfectly IMHO thought they do spoil it slightly with the "I KNEW you'd say that" line.
Just before he blows up the guys car when he looms over him and actually looks pretty damn intimidating

As you pointed out in the podcast though, the scene is reuined by 'Dredd's' upstaging of Hershey.

[JOE SOAP]

It wasn't so much that he took the helmet off (after all we all know what Sly looks like so it's not a big reveal or anything) but that he never puts the bloody thing back on again!

Vanity = stupidity.


What I see as a failure and dare I say blatant 'missed oppurtunity', is that since Rico is in the film, why didn't Stallone play both 'clone' parts?

Ditch the 'family' history/Fargo cover-up bullshit  -Fargo could be either dead or face-changed to prevent fascistic accusations- have Stallone as Rico runnin' 'round without the helmet plus Stallone as Joe for the entire film helmeted. Stallone could have had it both ways, his over-rated face on-screen playing a villain and also as a fully helmeted Dredd.

The benefit of this most imporatant story element, actually in his and the film's favour, was lost. He may have gotten more respect for stretching himself a bit acting wise and I may have begrudgingly admired the film as an 'alt' rather than hate it.  The desire for Stallone to be equated always with his hero/innocent-man-on-the-run trope damaged even the clone-logic of the story.



For balance , I will say the only thing I liked was Fargo's Long Walk plus Sly isn't in there to ruin it.

[radiator]

Ditch the 'family' history/Fargo cover-up bullshit  -Fargo could be either dead or face-changed to prevent fascistic accusations- have Stallone as Rico runnin' 'round without the helmet plus Stallone as Joe for the entire film helmeted. Stallone could have had it both ways, his over-rated face on-screen playing a villain and also as a fully helmeted Dredd.

It's a good idea, but I can't help thinking that the majority of the audience would leave the cinema wondering why Stallone only played the villain...

[SmallBlueThing]

...which would have given the opportunity for a nice 'head to head/ chin to chin' poster, and a 'stallone vs stallone' above the title.
SBT

[JOE SOAP]

It's a good idea, but I can't help thinking that the majority of the audience would leave the cinema wondering why Stallone only played the villain...

What audience?

[bluemeanie]

Just checking... it made $113 million worldwide

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=judgedredd.htm

Not that great when the budget was 90mil but still, not the flop its often portrayed as.
Most of that was outside the US though to be fair. It kinda bombed there.

[Mike Carroll]

For me, the Yuppie's car scene is the prefect example that the movie-makers didn't really "get" Dredd...

Aside from Dredd undermining Hershey's authority (and the fact that the scene was pretty badly truncated: one of the first things that the yuppies says to Hershey is "When I say I've got powerful friends..." - which he never did), Dredd blows up the car as punishment for it being illegally parked or whatever. It's a public street and Dredd - a Judge whose task is to protect the public - deliberately causes a massive explosion with no warning. I mean, that makes no sense whatsoever! Wouldn't the more logical approach be to arrest the driver then confiscate the car and have e Justice Department auction it to cover their costs?

With judgement like that, the man's not fit to wear the badge - no wonder the Judge Hunters turn up immediately afterwards!

-- Mike