The new Dredd movie from 2012 is good, solid entertainment. The story is mostly a case study of Dredd and rookie Judge Anderson (a quite important figure in the comics it is nice to see her included in the adaption) working a single case. The result of this focus is a well rounded and satisfying story which looks a lot like a "pilot episode" with the extra quality of being able to stand alone (rather than just introducing characters and suggesting future plot lines without actually telling a story).
But it fails in capturing the "feel" of the comic books. Without meaning this in a strictly purist way, I still think the one quality that would really make a Dredd movie stand out - and above - from the majority of superhero movies ... would be to do a good job of capturing the characteristics that makes the comic book a success - in a way that clearly stands apart from anything else.
The new "Dredd" fails to do so for a number of reasons. While more popular than the 1995 "Judge Dredd" with Sylvester Stallone, that version remains an arguably better interpretation of the comic books in a number of ways.
Overall, the Stallone version had two flaws. First and foremost: Judge Dredd takes off his helmet. This rightly put off a lot of fans - he NEVER does that in the comics. It *is* an error, huge enough in itself to say the Stallone adaption fails to be a "true" Judge Dredd adaption. Secondly, it actually tried too hard to be a loyal adaption of the comic book in other respects, e.g. by including a robot from the marginal ABC Warriors from the books - and many other "well known details". It's more a showcase than good story telling.
But this also makes the Stallone movie more colorful, absurd, and over-the-top in a way that - despite the helmet issue - does a vastly better job at capturing several important qualities that make the books stand apart.
The new "Dredd" does a better job at telling a story - but it fails completely in being "real" Dredd. "Judge Dredd" surely wasn't perfect - but neither is "Dredd". It lacks in the extreme contrasts that hallmark the Dredd comic books.
The comic books have a lot of special traits that makes them great fun; more absurd British humor than the new movie succeeds in capturing. This *is* a loss because a more loyal adaption would have been more unique, better-looking and overall funnier than the entertaining but far from unique result at hand.
For example: Judge Dredd is NOT a "future cop", he is a "judge". All judges are brainwashed with principles of justice to a degree where they are more "robocops" than human beings. There are no corrupt judges. And they do not "uphold the law": Their mandate is to *make* the law - on the spot, for the occasion.
Megacity One is *not* a gigantic slum. It is a clean and colorful city of enormous buildings in absurd designs. There are no 1, 2, or 3 story buildings, there simply isn't room for that. The huge population *must* be packed into gigantic beehive buildings. The air traffic is of course TIGHT.
Megacity One is held in an iron grip by the Department of Justice - the Judges. They are *NOT* - quote - "losing control of the city" - they constantly have to fight extreme crime and disturbances in an extremely large population, but ... "losing control"? ... The Judges? -NEVER! Dredd of the comic books is first and foremost fun because he is the ultimate parody of the ultimate control freak.
Much of the problem here would be the lack of money to (re-)create a convincingly correct Judge Dredd universe. In order to cover this a bit the movie mostly takes place in darkly lit corridors.
But thus is lost the contrast between an amusement park-like colorful city, and dark and absurd violence, and extreme measures of justice, of the comic book, which combine into a unique world of absurd contrasts in the comics. The less visible but extremely important point that the Judge Dredd is a true hero and a true anti-hero both in one bag is also lost. The new "Dredd" seems too serious to fully capture that.
The lesson from this movie is; if you cannot get the money for a real adaptation, do something else. A completely new version with a much bigger budget is our only hope for ever seeing a "real" Dredd adaptation.
As a dark, gritty, violent low-budget action sci-fi this movie is a 6 out of 10. But for posturing as a "Dredd" movie without capturing anything of the look, feel, humour, or points of the source material, it ends up a 1.
But it fails in capturing the "feel" of the comic books. Without meaning this in a strictly purist way, I still think the one quality that would really make a Dredd movie stand out - and above - from the majority of superhero movies ... would be to do a good job of capturing the characteristics that makes the comic book a success - in a way that clearly stands apart from anything else.
The new "Dredd" fails to do so for a number of reasons. While more popular than the 1995 "Judge Dredd" with Sylvester Stallone, that version remains an arguably better interpretation of the comic books in a number of ways.
Overall, the Stallone version had two flaws. First and foremost: Judge Dredd takes off his helmet. This rightly put off a lot of fans - he NEVER does that in the comics. It *is* an error, huge enough in itself to say the Stallone adaption fails to be a "true" Judge Dredd adaption. Secondly, it actually tried too hard to be a loyal adaption of the comic book in other respects, e.g. by including a robot from the marginal ABC Warriors from the books - and many other "well known details". It's more a showcase than good story telling.
But this also makes the Stallone movie more colorful, absurd, and over-the-top in a way that - despite the helmet issue - does a vastly better job at capturing several important qualities that make the books stand apart.
The new "Dredd" does a better job at telling a story - but it fails completely in being "real" Dredd. "Judge Dredd" surely wasn't perfect - but neither is "Dredd". It lacks in the extreme contrasts that hallmark the Dredd comic books.
The comic books have a lot of special traits that makes them great fun; more absurd British humor than the new movie succeeds in capturing. This *is* a loss because a more loyal adaption would have been more unique, better-looking and overall funnier than the entertaining but far from unique result at hand.
For example: Judge Dredd is NOT a "future cop", he is a "judge". All judges are brainwashed with principles of justice to a degree where they are more "robocops" than human beings. There are no corrupt judges. And they do not "uphold the law": Their mandate is to *make* the law - on the spot, for the occasion.
Megacity One is *not* a gigantic slum. It is a clean and colorful city of enormous buildings in absurd designs. There are no 1, 2, or 3 story buildings, there simply isn't room for that. The huge population *must* be packed into gigantic beehive buildings. The air traffic is of course TIGHT.
Megacity One is held in an iron grip by the Department of Justice - the Judges. They are *NOT* - quote - "losing control of the city" - they constantly have to fight extreme crime and disturbances in an extremely large population, but ... "losing control"? ... The Judges? -NEVER! Dredd of the comic books is first and foremost fun because he is the ultimate parody of the ultimate control freak.
Much of the problem here would be the lack of money to (re-)create a convincingly correct Judge Dredd universe. In order to cover this a bit the movie mostly takes place in darkly lit corridors.
But thus is lost the contrast between an amusement park-like colorful city, and dark and absurd violence, and extreme measures of justice, of the comic book, which combine into a unique world of absurd contrasts in the comics. The less visible but extremely important point that the Judge Dredd is a true hero and a true anti-hero both in one bag is also lost. The new "Dredd" seems too serious to fully capture that.
The lesson from this movie is; if you cannot get the money for a real adaptation, do something else. A completely new version with a much bigger budget is our only hope for ever seeing a "real" Dredd adaptation.
As a dark, gritty, violent low-budget action sci-fi this movie is a 6 out of 10. But for posturing as a "Dredd" movie without capturing anything of the look, feel, humour, or points of the source material, it ends up a 1.