manwihtheplan
Posts: 100
Joined: 11/9/2012
|
It's easy to prove how poor this film is. The villain in Dredd 3D is a hooker. Sheesh, 35 years of colourful, weird, Judge Dredd villains and the best they come up with for the film is a prossy? Talk about short-changing Judge Dredd fans. Batman fans get the Joker, Bane, Cat Woman etc in those films, Spider-man gets Doctor Octopus and the Lizard and us Dredd fans wait for this so-called 'faithful Judge Dredd film' and we get Dredd vs a.............. hooker. It's just laughable. Pathetic. That's the best Garland could come up with? A hooker?! It's just lame. People with true knowledge of Judge Dredd will know this film is a watered down version of the source material. The film even has Dredd saying "shit!" You can't get more 20th century movie speak than that. The film is so generic and Hollywood-ized. This film has the supreme irony of being made outside the Hollywood studio system but it's as unoriginal, by the book, join-the-dots as any Hollywood 'written by a team of writers' film. Surely an independent British sci-fi film (financed by Indian money) could be a bit different? Perhaps a bit more left field or unusual? Have a bit of British eccentricity? But nope, this is just a video game plot - shoot perps, go up level, shoot more perps, meet end boss, game over! - and also clearly ripped from Die Hard - and set in some watered down slummy Dredd world. No imagination, nothing. Garland killed off Dredd 3D with his unoriginal storyline. If you're gonna do an unoriginal storyline try and throw in a few surprises. Nope, none in Dredd 3D. Go look at the scene with Judge Lex vs Judge Dredd. It was so cliché. "I'm gonna kill you Dredd but first I'll talk to you so Anderson can appear and shoot me." Come on, it's just unoriginal. Sweet Grud, that was so 'done before in other films' and yet Garland had to do it again, stick it in his film. Proof of his zero talent for originality or even twisting an unoriginal idea and coming up with a new spin on it. He couldn't even do that. For all the people praising this film I'd love to know one bit of the plot that actually felt fresh or remotely original? I found nothing and surely that is the film's greatest failing. With three decades of source material to plunder/be inspired by - and the film doesn't feel remotely fresh. In this respect, Dredd 3D is an epic failure (but sure, people can enjoy it but that doesn't remove how desperately unoriginal it feels). People should actually read the original Judge Dredd strips - they were full of imagination, humour, eccentricity. What does Dredd 3D have - two heroes going up stairs and lifts to kill a hooker. That says it all, that says it all. If you hire a talentless 'no imagination' writer to do a Judge Dredd screenplay, that's exactly what you get: a screenplay with no imagination. And hasn't it dawned on every person alive - had Garland come up with a more Dredd world specific storyline - no-one would be comparing Dredd 3D to The Raid? No-one actually mentions this obvious line of logic but it's painfully obvious! Had he adapted The Hunters Club/The Mega-Rackets/The Stupid Gun etc (classic 2000AD Judge Dredd stories) no-one would be comparing Dredd 3D to The Raid. He created a problem that never needed to exist in the first place. Proof of his lack of talent. I accept people didn't embrace the character, that's unfortunate, it now seems clear Judge Dredd is one tough character to make appealing to a worldwide audience, but Alex Garland sabotaged this film's chances by writing such an unimaginative storyline. This review brilliantly sums up Dredd 3D's problem: quote:
So up they go, through one nondescript corridor after another, and the film grows grimmer and less distinctive with each floor. Alex Garland’s script lays out the Judge Dredd world early, then more or less forgets about it, turning Urban and Thirlby into just another pair of cops, albeit cops in possession of some futuristic guns. Locked in a scowl and doing his best Clint Eastwood, Urban is a fine Dredd, though a flavorless one. And Thirlby invests her character with enough vulnerability and determination to avoid getting lost in the noise. Headey’s eerily soft-spoken villain gets some good moments, but the film is mostly a bunch of flatly staged bits of action shot against anonymous backgrounds. (In 3-D. Because it’s 2012.) It’s 98 minutes of no fun and much gunfire, and though it’s true in some respects to the Dredd of the comics, the spirit of the original remains stubbornly on the page. http://www.avclub.com/articles/dredd,85173/
< Message edited by manwihtheplan -- 8/10/2012 2:05:36 AM >
|