Judge Dredd first appeared in the British science fiction comic book 2000 AD in 1977. In 1995 he made his first screen appearance in the movie Judge Dredd starring Sylvester Stallone. This was the first mistake, in casting a megastar Dredd spent most of the movie without his helmet, Dredd’s face has never been seen in the comic book. They could have got away with this given a great script, unfortunately they didn’t have one. The story wasn’t bad, it just wasn’t very Dredd and it played things too funny and camp. Again they may have gotten away with this, but Rob Schneider as a sidekick was the movies final proverbial nail. Diane Lane, Armand Assante and Max von Sydow provide good support but this is a drop in the ocean in comparison to all the films problems. So how does this new version compare? Surprisingly well.
Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) is assigned to train and evaluate Cassandra Anderson (Olivia Thirlby), a rookie judge who may not be cut out for the job but is being given a chance because of her unprecedented psychic abilities. The pair attend a triple homicide at “Peach Trees” a 200-story slum tower block (essentially a small town/city within a single tower block) controlled by ruthless drug lord Ma-Ma (Lena Headey). When they become trapped in the building the judges suddenly have more to contend with than just the assessment as they have to fight for survival.
The beauty and dare I say it the brilliance of the movie is its simplicity. Sylvester Stallone’s Judge Dredd went through an epic story with a large but ultimately uncharacteristic character arc. The development of the character as portrayed by Karl Urban is tiny and only exists as a reaction to Anderson whose character is constantly developing and evolving throughout the movie. Judge Dredd had a budget of around $90million (around $135million adjusted for inflation) the new movie was made for a more modest $45 million. With financial constraints come artistic solutions. Dredd does this by confining the plot to a single tower block, think more The Raid (2011) than Die Hard (1988), and like these two movies it is set over a single day (and night). As a day in the life tale, the events are more significant to Anderson than to Dredd who is portrayed as an established character. The casting is good, with Karl Urban (or at least his chin) making a convincing Dredd. Olivia Thirlby and Lena Headey are also good. The rest of the cast is as disposable and insignificant as you would expect in a movie like this. Written by Alex Garland who is a self-confessed fan of the comic book and has ideas in place for a trilogy based on existing 2000 AD Dredd stories. As well as a striking look the production and costume design make for a more believable movie universe that the first film. Only enough information about the city and the judges is explained for the plot to make sense leaving the viewer wanting to know more.
It has its problems, the 3D is jus as pointless as you would expect it to be. The film is really well shot with artistic style and flair, but the 3D hampers rather than improves this. Looking down the 200-story tower block does not give the same sense of acrophobia that we got from the Burj Khalifa scenes in Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol. The “Slo-Mo” drug and the effect it causes are overused within the plot without the appeal of it as a recreational narcotic been explored. The action scenes are well choreographed and films but lack originality or finesse.
So back to the original question, how does it compare to the 1995 version? It is better in every way. Knowing just how seriously to take itself and focussing on being fun not funny it isn’t a classic but it is an enjoyable movie full of good ideas and with an unexpected visual flair. I don’t expect everyone to like it, I actually know a lot of people who will hate it. I would recommended it to any fan of action movies or comic book movies but they may be better served waiting for the DVD where they don’t have to suffer the 3D. You’re probably thinking “I knew you’d say that!”
It does look quite interesting…and, to be honest, it really doesn’t have to do much to be better then the 1995 film!
Sophie@AV4Home
Great movie! I was very impressed! The cast is amazing and the visuals are stunning! The simplicity of the story is very good! I hope they make a trilogy regardless the boxoffice numbers!
Ez a mostani Dredd ez nyuzga pasi arcát sem látni sőtt dzseki takarja sivár roncs testét nagyon gyenge az új Dredd
I thought Dredd was great, too, a huge improvement over the 1995 disaster. Stripping the story to its basics really worked.
If you didn’t see it when it was in theatres don’t fret, but it’s definitely worth a rent and I enjoyed watching it. I agree with the reviewer that the “Slo-Mo” drug sequences were overused, but other than that my only real gripe with the movie was the overly-excessive graphical gore. Don’t get me wrong I don’t mind gore, but either keep it within reason or go the stylistic route ala Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Dredd went the way of over the top sem-realistic gross-out blood and guts and I can’t help but feel like it took away from the movie a little. I’m sure a 15 year old boy will love the graphic blood and guts, but for me it was just rediculous. (funnily enough while the bad guys getting shot were all gorey, chunky messes, when Dredd and Anderson are wounded it’s much more tamed down and realistic…they should have done that for everything)
Dredd and Anderson wear body armor, this is why their wounds are much more “tamed down”.
I have mixed feelings about Dredd but overall I liked the movie but it seemed more like an episode in a series like the British 1h31m tv shows. Still I liked it an would like to see more. And in all fairness to Stallone’s costume that is what the character looked like in the comic book.
stallone’s costume is better it’s the same look like the comic books the story line and the figure’s in the 1995 movie are also nice only the helm off his had was a mistake of the movie but stallone was great Mr i’m the LAW!!! the new movie i didn’t see it jet so i can not say it is good or bad but the costume of stallone is afcorse better it’s seem’s like the same as the comic-books.
Comic books and movies are different mediums, what looks good in one can look silly in another like Dredd’s costume or the X-Men’s yellow and blue spandex.
Comic book films are hit and miss and this one truly was a big hit. I loved it in every sense of it. It makes you totally forget the abomination of Schneider and Stallone.
To me Stallone’s movie is even worse than “Batman & Robin”.
Bat Credit Card < Dredd revealing his face and not wearing his helmet for the rest of the movie.