Fortunately, after that brief stumble, Dredd gets back on track, moving straight into a high-adrenalin motorbike chase that should have been the opening. It’s a far more satisfying introduction to the character, and tells us a great deal more about the world than the shoehorned-in monologue.
Unfortunately, while the chase is great, the design work isn’t. Dredd might look like he’s just stepped off the pages of 2000AD, but the perps and civilians don’t. Instead they look like they’ve just stepped out of H&M. It’s jarring, but not as jarring as Dredd riding a bizarre looking motorbike that’s being used to chase down an unmodified late-90s VW Transporter.
The film finally finds its feet when we get to the interior scenes. The design quibbles disappear, which means that we’re not thrown out of the story every couple of minutes. We’re also introduced to Dredd’s sidekick, Cassie Anderson. Dredd’s a mean bastard, well played by Urban, but not exactly easy for the audience to connect with. Anderson is much more appealing – a rookie on her first day, unsure of herself. She’s very much the emotional heart of the story, with a much clearer character arc than Dredd, and Thirlby’s performance is compelling.
The dynamic between the two characters makes the simple story engaging. That said, while it works very well, we never get any real idea of the scale of the world in which it takes place. It’s unlikely we could have ever seen anything much grander, particularly with the limited budget available, but it would have been nice to have had a little more background detail. Perhaps some more scenes in the justice building, or a shot of a perp in an Iso Cube. Anything really, because as it stands the world feels very much like it consists entirely of a tower block, a few streets and couple of rooms in a police station.
In spite of this, the movie is still thoroughly enjoyable. Lena Headey is a great villain, and almost unrecognisable as Ma Ma, Urban and Thirlby are also excellent, as are the supporting cast. It’s well shot, and the slow motion sequences work well, and at no time feel overused.
All told, everything about Dredd is pretty good, and it should appeal to both action film fans and 2000 AD readers alike, even if Old Stony Face seems to take a little too much pleasure in punishing the wrongdoers of Mega City. It does however, lack the conviction, originality and sadly the budget that would take this from being a good movie to an excellent one.
It’s perfectly enjoyable and worth watching for Urban, Thirlby and Headey if nothing else, but its hard not to wonder what might have been had Garland and co been given a little more money. Hopefully if it does well enough to get a sequel it will have a little more ambition, and we’ll end up with a film set in Mega City One rather than District 9.
[Rating:4/5]
As if Lionsgate will ever invest a lot of money into one of their films..
Because this looks like District 9.
Wait… nevermind.
The comparison to District 9 was a reference to budget.
It’s easy to illustrate something large, at a distance.
It’s a lot harder to put detail into something up close – to the point of making it believable, as expected.
When choices need to be made, production comes down to doing things well and spending on a few choice elements, rather than all over.
Dredd was a UK film with a UK budget.
Approximately $45 million (nb “$”, not “£”) was spent on it. It’s not unusual for a modern blockbuster to have three times that, spent on it.
The production team did a phenomenal job, but that blessing then becomes part of the problem.
With a film as good as this, had it been given greater means, one can’t help but wonder how much greater it could have become.
In an ideal world, we’d have a UK film with a US budget.
Let’s hope that this will prove potential to investors and that the sequel will be given what it deserves.
I dont think the review gets DREDD at all, based on his observations. First of all, ur not supposed to ‘relate’ to Dredd. He’s the rock of unflinching brutality and justice that the world revolves around. He is a constant. Thats why Anderson exists as ‘our eyes’ into the world. Our empathy is shown thru her. 2nd, Dredd is the star and focus of DREDD in this film. It’s reintroducing a character who’s last screen outing was considered by most as a total debacle and travesty. So, to expand the wider world would be to potentially detract from reacquaniting / introducing DREDD back onto the big screen. We can hope that any sequel with a bigger budget will open up the world he inhabits. U do alude to the budget in ur review which is the main factor over why u dont get more ‘bang for ur buck’ as u allude to with the points u make. Still, u award it 4/5 stars which is great. Just a shame you didnt see in more depth the points the writer and director are trying to make. Perhaps some Slo-Mo would help? 🙂
If only the film featured a shot that looked like that. Sadly it doesn’t.
To be fair Lionsgate didn’t produce the film they picked up the distribution rights after the fact.
Nice review Ben. As I’m not a longtime fan of 2000 AD and only recently got into it I am maybe more forgiving. I preferred the lack of “big” scope, especially after the overly cartoony display in Stallone’s movie (bleh). Personally I feel the small budget helped the film by forcing them to minimize the story, though I really hope if a sequel is greenlit it does get a bit more money to play with.
nicely said willy2fly
So would you be so kind to inaugurate some ignoramuses like me, which points the writer and director were trying to make ? Except for the cosmetic surgery Dredd had to undergo to guarantee constantly drawn down labial angle (this deep) ? Or the image of an old rude punk who likes glowing slo-mo water stars besides some men skinned ? Or some deep lines like “if I see her first I will shoot her, If she sees me first, she hesitates, I will shoot her” ? Or that a Volkswagen Transporter aged around 150 yrs won’t be worth a fortune in a future where the Reichsadler is the symbol of the (weak) justice department ?