JUDGE DREDD vs DREDD and the COMICS

Review, comparison and tribute...

Judge Dredd, starring Sylvester Stallone, 1995 with a budget of 90 million

vs

Dredd, starring Karl Urban, 2012, with a budget of 45 million.

Ok, so I'm going down that path of comparing the two, and why not? I am after all a fan of Judge Dredd since the age of around 10. Perhaps even younger (have to give credit to my brother for introducing me to it at such a small age).
Fandom aside, I loved the reboot of this iconic character (remake as some called it, yet they couldn't be more wrong and obviously haven't seen one of the two if not neither) and I can only do both the character and myself justice by dwelling into the depths of Megacity One's toughest law enforcer.

In a nutshell.

The short version of it all when it comes to the new DREDD film. I loved it. I loved the direction. I loved the action. I loved the effects. I loved the depiction of the character. I loved the nostalgia it offered, the simplicity of it, how much can be done with so little, and pretty much the fact that I finally saw an action film that didn't shy away from keeping to a linear story, along with a pace that barely ever left the viewer for yet even a minute feeling the drag of boredom.

Dredd (or Dredd 3D) gladly rises in my praises as the best action film of 2012, and also among the best action films to date period. Even if I wasn't a fan of the Judge I would have still loved it. Being a fan however added a whole lot more.

My score for it? 10/10. Very rarely do I ever see a film so fun that I can watch it a second time in a row! And yes, I did just that. Saw it twice in a row, and a third time some hours later with the company of my spouse (which also loved it even though she was not a fan of the comics. Let it not be said that the film is for male testosterone alone or the comic fans). Even on the third time round I loved it as much as the first, and that is the best measure of any critic that can be given to a film. The fun factor, the "replay-ability". (Tron Legacy was another rare film for me that fit this score).

If we dwell into realistic details and put logic into the equation Dredd starts to drop to around 8/10 perhaps at it's worst. But like I said, fun factor or how much a film was enjoyed should be the main drive of any criticism given and not the rest. The idea is not for every criticism out there to try and be objective, that misses the entire point in the end. The idea is to give subjective opinions and thoughts based on the personal experience we all have with a product.

Did I enjoy it enough to want to watch it a second time on the spot? Yes.

DREDD or otherwise known as DREDD 3D, was
simply an action-delight. My greatest regret ever
was not having seen it on the big screen.

Did I enjoy it enough the second time as well? Yes. Did I go to watch it yet even a third time after that, and still enjoyed it? Yes. So there it is. A rightfully deserved 10/10 for me just there.

Dredd is my most revisited title from any new releases in the last decade, and I foresee it staying there for a while.

Judge DREDD, '95

The then.....

Okay, so now lets take things from the start.

The first Judge Dredd hit theaters in 1995, starring Sylvester Stallone, and with a budget of 90 million it's box office numbers were up to just over 113 million dollars.

Did I personally like the film? To be honest, yes, I did. The reasons to this were as follows:

1) I was 11. Age obviously plays a big role in the films we enjoy, and to cut the film some slack, it didn't do every single thing wrong. To be honest with ourselves it was a pretty good M rated (at most) comic-to-film adaptation for the 90's from Hollywood, aimed mostly at the masses rather than the fans. God knows we have gotten and seen worse in the times that passed.

2) I didn't get my hands on anywhere near as many Judge Dredd comics as I would have wanted or should have. As a matter of fact, by that time, for a number of reasons, I had only 1 Judge Dredd comic to call my own. As much of a fan and as much as I loved Judge Dredd (it was indeed my favourite comic as a child alongside Spawn and Conan) I didn't have much content to compare to, rendering the mistakes of the film unseen to me. Therefore, it was very little spoiled for a child at that age. That child being me.

3) I was a Dredd fan, so obviously I was simply happy to get the character on the screen in the first place. How can something like that not appeal to a young comic fan in need of some Dredd exposure, no matter how cheesy a film may be?

The biggest mistake of the film, was Dredd taking
off the helmet... Even a version of the cover
itself depicted him without the helmet.

4) Lastly, the reason I kept enjoying it was a Dredd nostalgia. It became cheesier and cheesier every time, more and more of a bore, sillier and sillier, more and more childish, and in the end it only remained in my graces because I was so Dredd-hungry that nothing else really mattered to me.

And the now......

Trying to recap all the above points, what is left to say about the film after so many years today?

Even without a reboot, Judge Dredd didn't really make it to be anything more than a childhood favourite of mine for the above stated reasons. And tackling each of the four points again in the same order, those reasons to love it grew into the following reasons to dislike it over time:

1) Being no longer 11, every year that passed obviously added to the childishness and low quality of the film (in terms of plot and directing) dramatically. Whilst such characters as Rob Schneider for a "side-kick-like" comedian to the protagonist did nothing more than become an annoyance that was at times best fast forwarded through. The problem was that his one liners were so many and crammed into every scene, that you simply couldn't fast forward through most of them, unless you simply skipped the entire film altogether. It became a generic Hollywood film real fast real sudden to even a fan-crazed child's eyes.

2) I eventually got to learn of the lore depicted in the Judge Dredd comics more and more, and before long all the holes in the plot, the characters, and everything else, falls apart into becoming a film that wasn't really about Judge Dredd after all. Lastly, what had appealed to me on first viewing as a child as a huge moment, the very unmasking of Dredd, (obviously never having seen his face this was a big moment to my eyes) soon became the very undoing of the film itself. Once it became clear that we aren't supposed to ever see his face, that moment was ruined and gone. The entire plot line followed with everything else that was wrong with it.

3) Truth be said, it was still a film I would watch once in a blue moon if ever I remembered because hey, I adapt. If that was the best film a Judge Dredd fan could get on the character it didn't stop me from re-visiting it from time to time. It actually became quite a good laugh in the end.

4) The Dredd nostalgia turned to childhood nostalgia. In the end it only remained in my graces because of the good times it gave me when I was so young and Dredd-hungry. Still Dredd hungry even now, it became a split reason why the film was revisited at times with a "what could of been" notion, smirks over childhood memories followed by head shakes and ridiculed laughs at the film itself. Good times........

Critical Reception for Judge Dredd

It is no secret that the 1995 Judge Dredd got a very bad overall critical reception even for when it came out. I myself am surprised it made that much in the box office for being a film having done so many things wrong. Marketing? The Stallone name stamp on the poster? Who knows what, but it made a shocking (imo) 113 million, whereas the later Dredd didn't even make 30% of that sum.

Even John Wagner, creator of the comic character, stated in an interview: "the story had nothing to do with Judge Dredd, and Judge Dredd wasn't really Judge Dredd". That's gotta hurt the whole films reputation a lot when the creators of the lore themselves look down on the film as being wrong.

The film even earned a Golden Raspeberry Award nomination for Stallone as Worst Actor.

To be fair, I don't think Stallone was the worst part of the film, though he didn't help it either. The direction itself is what ruined the acting. If anything, I have to admit that his "I AM THE LAW" lines were simply Dredd and I loved them.

There are opinions flying around on the internet trying to give credit to the 1995 version, some actually deeming it better than the new. Funnily enough they themselves admit to the faulty plots and holes here and there, and the worst of all, Judge Dredd taking of his helmet, but they stick to some other small pointers to give excuse to their praise. (And yes, the helmet for those who don't know is very important. If you are going to neglect a basic attribute to a character then you might as well not depict him at all. It is on the same lines as a Superman with no cape)

I can respect an opinion as long as it can be backed with reason, we are all after all entitled to our own opinions and that is the best kind of flavour this world is ever going to give us, the flavour of variety. Any reasoning would do, even if the reason is as simple as "it reminds me of a good time in my life" or "I just like the actors". It is more than fair enough for me. However sticking to points that do not entirely exist, are objectively wrong, and so on, makes me think that those few critics are simply negligent of seeing the facts.

Apart from a few honest point of views from those even fewer that enjoy the old Dredd more, most encounters and comparisons made, along with the excuses used in arguments and articles, are simply narrow minded at best. I could go on about this for hours, but I would rather not. Instead, I will simply give a thorough enough view of the differences between the two films in the comparison that follows below.

Whatever the subjective scores for the 1995 Judge Dredd may be, the objective score for it is an obvious and small one at that. Making it barely to a 3 out of 10. And that unfortunately is something few to none should be able to argue with.

DREDD, 2012

Injustice for the Judge

Before the new Dredd film was made, there was a sum of opinions that claimed it was too soon for a reboot to the franchise. Again I beg to differ. 17 years after the first film and it is too soon? With the Amazing Spiderman out 5 years after Spiderman 3 and Batman Begins 8 years after the film before it, a new film for Judge Dredd was way overdue. Still glad it wasn't rushed and brought out sooner with a different studio, with a PG or even M rating on it and with all those extra faults that I am more than certain a larger studio would make (like rushing to get a big shot actor for more ticket sales, a move that doesn't convince me that they would have kept that damn helmet on throughout the entire film).

Being an on and off Judge Dredd fan there have been large periods of breaks from it from time to time, with all these other comics turned to films, and along with my expectations of a new Dredd film being shot (zero that is), the thought for a reboot had seldom crossed my mind.

The news of it came as a delight, and the very few shots that were released at the time put smiles on my face.

DREDD went through a lot of troubles apparently in production, the timing it had for the cinema was not the best it could choose and the marketing wasn't exactly the best for it either. Apparently. I myself was sold with the trailer for DREDD, I couldn't wait to see it. Not being able to make it to the theater was due to a variety of reasons and delays that pushed it back so far that I missed it completely. The media didn't seem to help much of remind of the films release either, and it kind of swept by me from theaters partially unnoticed (I don't live in the US by the way, so perhaps that had something to do with it). Later, an unjust rumour that the plot was copied from another film was wrongly claimed as well. So much hate and misguiding for nothing it seems. The script for Dredd had leaked. Dredd was already in production months before the other title (which I don't even want to bother to mention the name of) was. And rushing to be released months before Dredd was not a smart move from their behalf either, just showed like a cry of desperation to either ruin another studios' work, or to establish their own in time.

Sorry but I refuse to spend a single minute of my time to view something that is (from what some evidence gathered to form on one side of the story) stolen and has rushed itself to release in time to gain word over an original title. Such studios don't deserve to even have their films projected in my opinion let alone make money from them, let alone deserve my viewing, but, whatever.

Making a run for it's money, DREDD had indeed a hard time in both
production and ticket sales at theaters.

On its release, with a bad history from the old film overshadowing it, a not-so-well shot trailer as believed by some, a whole bunch of rumours of production problems it had (some perhaps were just rumours), a forced 3D viewing for most and a budget of 45 million (actually less as Garland stated) it was probably not the first choice out there for cinema-goers. The numbers at the box office? A small 36.5 million. A number not deserving for a title that did the Judge true Justice.

Critical Reception for DREDD

I remember a number of reviewers from newspapers and other sources from the internet as well making a mockery of the film, or giving undeserving critiques, helping I guess to sway the box office numbers even more into the direction they went.

We all know that Dredd was shot more or less like an independent movie, being also backed up with funds even from India (if I remember the details correct) and from what I gather it was in one way or another taken down a notch by an indirect offensive aimed at it from the "big boys of Hollywood". That is the only explanation I can come up with. Seeing review after review being abysmal at times, what else would one come to believe for a film that had a completely different reception from the viewers? Metacritic itself has it at 59/100 from the critics, and yet the user score is at 8.3/10. Shame on them really, since the critic scores from Metacritic along with so many other sources come out before a films release. Such a score wouldn't have convinced anyone to have visited the theaters for Dredd. Shame. When a title (either game or film or anything else) gets such a difference between critic and user receptions, then we can be sure that something isn't right.

To further add to this with some more details and examples, we have Aliens Colonial Marines (released on PC, XBOX 360 and PS3). The scores and previews (some were reviews that came out before the games' release) put the game on PC on average at around 7/10 and on XBOX roughly 8/10. User reception dropped it down to 3/10. Whilst critics dropped as well, but not as far, marginally at 4/10 and 5/10. What happened with Dredd was appalling, even after release and even after viewer praise, many critics continued to try and dwarf it's true size to something mediocre. 

If this is how indie films or projects outside of Hollywood are to be treated like then I am really disappointed. Then again, when was I not disappointed with critics? Especially the sore ones that simply couldn't make it in an industry and take that role out of bitterness. Best sources by far are individuals that enjoy and experience the medium they are reviewing.

The film is no doubt, as John Wagner himself stated,
"a true representation of Judge Dredd... The character
and storyline are pure Dredd"

The general reception from viewers was great, as opposed to an 80% of the population disliking the 1995 Judge Dredd, the new Dredd is quite the opposite with 80% of the population that saw it liking it. A very unjustified 36.5 million dollars at box office as opposed to the 113.5 million dollars of it's predecessor. Word of mouth has turned the success around however making it number one in DVD and Blu-Ray sales. The sums collected thus far making the possibility for a sequel marginal. The first didn't get a sequel (thankfully) due to its failure to capture Dredd, lets hope the second does not suffer to the same fall due to perhaps wrong timing and marketing.

The end result speaks in flying colours as Dredd is the film for the Judge that we were, especially the fans, waiting for. To further add to it's successful critical response, John Wagner took to a few words himself once again for the new title, this time praising the film that was made for the character he had created with the following statement: "I liked the movie. It was, unlike the first film, a true representation of Judge Dredd... Karl Urban was a fine Dredd and I'd be more than happy to see him in the follow-up. Olivia Thirlby excelled as Anderson... The character and storyline are pure Dredd."

I don't know about the rest of you out there, but for me, when the creator of a work himself praises a film made after his own work with positive feedback, then it is hard to turn head and believe otherwise. Especially when the film was so much damn fun to watch.

As a fan it was exactly what I needed from a Dredd film. My score as stated before remains to a subjective 10/10. It was the most enjoyable action film ever, and the best Dredd comic to film adaptation I could expect as well. I had doubts, but no more. An objective score for the film would be an 8/10. It has room to improve, but not with regards to the film itself. The room for improvement is simply content that should be added to a future sequel. The room for improvement on the Dredd film itself is marginal. It is in almost every way exactly what it should be for a Judge Dredd film. Short of perfect perhaps, but still spot on. As spot on as any attempt will get from what Hollywood has taught us in the last decades.

Now for the more thorough details on it all... Dredd fans, this part is mostly for you.

The Comparison

Now for the detailed breakdown between the two films.

Here is where I get to nitpick on the details, as a fan of the comic, as a fan of the film, and also as someone who simply cares enough or too much perhaps to dwell into all the comparisons. Comparisons that have been already made thus far here and there or used and misused from different sources, many times again dwarfing some elements of the new Dredd film or in general the lore itself.

Character Portrayal

1995 - Stallone

I'm trying to go easy on the old Judge Dredd, I hate being yet just another person bashing the film like everybody else. Ok it had many wrongs and didn't stay true to the comic, but like I said we have seen worse. Much worse. Lets not forget Batman and Robin (which also came out 2 years after Judge Dredd). Now that was the most eye hurting thing I have ever come across in my life. Even for the age of 13 it was painful.

I'm trying to give credit where I can to the old-timer 1995 Joe Dredd in this entire comparison (it's mostly a little hard) and even after trying to pick out the best or most badass shot I could find of him lying around on the internet a quick comparison of the two still shows I think which is the better.

Ok, provided it is an entire 17 years later, so graphically anything and everything that is made today would most likely look superior, and given that the new Dredd (right) is also an artwork as opposed to an actual photo, the differences in design alone still scream out a true JUDGE DREDD look in the later. Funnily enough I find the actual shots and photos of the character from within the new film to look even better than this, keeping to an identical look in design.

For a 1995 film, the first does not look entirely as crap as one would think. For a true Dredd fan however, it really looks wrong for one reason and one reason alone above all...

The helmet design!

But I am getting ahead of myself here, that is a detail to be covered later still in the costume comparison.

As a first shot and first quick look at the two, comics and designs aside, the second is simply more badass. It looks more like a law enforcer from the future as opposed to a sci-fi mercenary from space which is depicted in the first. Apart from looking like a sci-fi warrior from Warhammer 40K Dawn of War crossed with the Fifth Element, the first also looks a lot like a toy soldier, a cartoon figure, or perhaps even a very high quality cosplay production, a power ranger character that would most likely be walking around in Disneyland waving at fans pretending to be the Judge. It just doesn't feel as believable or seem to belong.

It is obvious that the direction of the 1995 Dredd was more comical, but at the same time it tried to be gritty? Or something that didn't work anyway. It just didn't add up. It was clear that the directors/writers etc had not really read into the comics with depth (if at all, Judge Dredd isn't exactly some mind blowing comic hard to follow to require depth for it to be understood, some issues in total less than the script size itself would have been enough to set them in the right direction). In the 95 version they simply took the word "comic" and that straight away registered to the studio as a child-film to them, and it shows. Perhaps this was received also as a disrespect to the material. Not caring enough to keep true to it and hence simply make whatever one could make of it.

Perhaps one of the fewest scene that shows hints of the true character,
yet even so a shot that truly depicts the comical nature of the film
at a glance. It could have been after all a great kids film (if they
had kept that helmet on)

Stallone as Dredd brought out that fascist side to the true character only once if I recall. That part was his judging at the beginning of the film in the streets which later moved on to the part where he is "misjudging" Rob. The rest of the time he seems more of a guy that dedicated himself to the law, not someone that was the law. At times Stallone hints elements of a superhero (or someone very comically arrogant) a characteristic that was not Dredd-like. He takes his helmet off and keeps it off for a nice 80% of the film, if not more. Once he was no longer a Judge and exiled from Megacity One, he pretty much had to take it off (so many wrongs with that plotline, I'll get to my opinions of that in time). However, he didn't take it off just there... He took it off the very moment he got off the street. We see him in change rooms, giving a class, and pretty much everywhere else without his helmet.

The old version of the film made him look so balanced with many soft or sentimental character tones that never existed in the original Dredd, not at that extent. Although in the comics there were small glimpses of his humanity here and there, even those were still sprinkled with the law all over them. He was depicted as a good man deep down but distant even from that good. Soft was almost never his colour apart from a very small few scenes in so many comic issues that were written. His primary concern the law, no matter what the situation. Clearly some of the points to the character that they added in the old film were not completely absent in the comics, however they were neither in that manner neither in that quantity. The soft talks were over-powered, the sentimental side to Dredd and his understanding that the law made mistakes was (for a character that was always certain about the law) completely off bearing. He even took to Judge Hershey in the end? The character was far from Dredd in so many ways that it overshadowed the parts that they might have got right either because they were too few or done wrong.

Moments into the film, and, well, I've said it so many times
already, the helmet is gone! Revealing a much more humane
character and ruining the effect the comics
had created for so many years.

As far as characters go, I am going to try and overlook Sly's accent and speech mumbling (which made it difficult to understand him at times) because in one way yes, it was mumbling, in another way it still felt Dredd like at times. Some of his more angered tones and one-liners were well played, adding a small darkness to the character where it was otherwise absent. People feel this was also a part to the character that was badly brought across, the speech, however it didn't bother me as much and I have come to terms in believing that this is probably a subjective matter.

Lastly the chin. The defining characteristic of the Judge Dredd character. At points, it felt it fit in, at others it didn't feel as so. Hard to say in the end with the helmet off almost the entire time. Mostly, the expression on his face was normal (hence wrong), with a couple hints of that classic Dredd lower face look only when he screamed. His chin, although it wasn't entirely Dredd, it did help a lot with making him a pretty good fit at times. Personally I would give Stallone a 5/10 for the role with some scenes falling to a 3/10. That is not as low a score as I would give to the film itself. Although the character was so wrongly portrayed, it was in a large way fault of the direction itself and the entire union of all things wrong about the film.

2012 - Karl Urban

I was so glad and also hyped to see the first shots released for the new Dredd film back in 2012. And it was a funny story actually too. After yet another very large break from the futures meanest law enforcer, I decidedly felt the urge to search for Judge Dredd comic wallpapers for my Android. Good timing perhaps, it was in fact the very same time when the first shots for the film were released. An irresistible smile came over my face at that moment.

Even though one of the first images that circled the internet was not of Dredd himself but from another character (Judge Lex) my first impressions were that it looks gritty, realistic, and damaged like the world of Dredd itself. First impressions on me was that I liked it. I was skeptical on the direction of the costume design at a second glance, however it still felt right.

After seeing more "first" shots I was convinced. The costume looked great, the characters looked like proper judges, and it looked so fitting. I was sold. Since the reboot Chris Nolans' Batman, it has been perhaps a trend for studios to head in the darker, more realistic or more gritty approach to comics. Some believe this is now a tiring practice. I couldn't disagree more. This was all that was missing from such titles. As a matter of fact, for many years I had been waiting for such an approach to comic to film productions, and needless to say Batman Begins blew my mind when I saw it. It was exactly that. Dredd seemed to follow that same trend, and I was more than delighted to see this, since it was a title for which this approach was very fitting.

Seeing Dredd 3D, I was glad it was made from the first second, and this feeling didn't stop for the entire film.

One of the main reasons, if not the main reason, why the new film was a success is Karl Urban. He was one of the best Dredd impersonations one could muster. Brilliant. One liners, doesn't say much, hides inside him much more than meets the eye, and always an instrument of the law. Precise, exacting the laws of Megacity One on creeps that seek to break them without hesitation. Even his posture was very Dredd. So just, that even his final verdict on Anderson (spoiler alert for those still having not seen the new film) being a pass, despite the fact that she had seemingly got a fail, showed that he was more than a law machine, able to pass judgement based on everything at hand including and above all, performance in the field.

His voice at some points reminded a little of Bale's Batman, but only rarely (the only thing that was kinda off in my opinion but it was so small it was barely noticeable). Mostly, even the voice was great, dark and gritty, clear, and Dredd! And the line was there, without overusing it like it was done in the 1995 version, "I am the law...". Even his seemingly calm voice during this line, echoing in the megablocks' speakers, was frightening. In general the depiction in sound and character was spectacular, perhaps only inches short of perfect. A margin with which I am more than happy to live with in hopes that Karl Urban plays the Judge again in future possible sequels. I am more or less certain that the amount of actors that can fit the role more than Karl now are limited if any.

Because the character was portrayed so nicely and true to the material, the film felt like kicking back to an actual issue from the Judge Dredd comics. The character had very subtle emotion, and the rest of him was simply Dredd.

Most important of all..... he did not take off the helmet! And a fine looking helmet at that too which it was.








The only scene that partially depicts the character without a helmet (yet not seeing his face) at the begining of the film further adds to the fact that his face is never shown, and also reminds of some seldom issues from the comics where his helmet was absent yet the face never shown (with either a censored box over it or seeing the character from behind to hide the face).

Between the two, Karl Urban (left) is a much more fitting
representation of Judge Dredd than Kirkwood (right) ever
was in the film (as some wrongly compared).

The direction and acting was great. The script was great and with it the lines the character had as well. What is left for the actor after nailing all the above from here on to further add to the role of Dredd is one thing and one thing alone. The lower half of the face. And Karl Urban nailed it.

Appart from the helmet being always on the other visually defining characteristic of Dredd was and always has been the lower half of his face. To be precise, the mouth, chin and nostrils. And they have been drawn a specific single way for the bigger part of the years of the Judge Dredd comics if not all.

Many people (fans included at times) mix the characteristics of Judge Dredd in the comics and come to believe that the chin is that which makes the character who he is. On the contrary many characters seemed similar in the drawings with bigger and smaller chins, at times even mixing the eye up as to who is who. A great effect since the judges are meant to be faceless, adding more to the notion that when the citizens look at them they do not define facial characteristics but a whole. This was nicely seen in the film as well, I noticed my eye get mixed up for a moment when Dredd is fighting hand to hand with another judge, as one should.

Back to my point however, the chin was not actually the defining characteristic of Dredd. The defining characteristic of Dredd was his grumpy, disapproving, disappointed, bad ass, determined and  mean tough guy mouth that kinda made you feel at times that he is about to clonk someone over the head with his bat just for the sake of it. An image that Karl Urban portrayed fantastically.

My eye has come across some comparisons that some made, deeming Judeg Lex in the film a better look for Dredd with such phrase "he out-chinned Karl Urban". This couldn't be more wrong, as I said, the chin was not the defining characteristic and although it was at times exaggerated (as were many chins in the comic) it was in fact the facial expression of the mouth that was mostly important, along side a straighter chin that at times was also pressed in. Looking back at the original first issues that I have been reading of late, looking at the progression of Judge Dredd and how his image slowly evolved, it is at most clear that the mouth does the difference.

After a quick glance it is clear what style the figure of Dredd
is after.

Karl Urban more than brought justice to the role of Dredd. The
character was so well depicted I completely forgot it was
Karl Urban under that helmet for the
most part if not the whole film entirely.

Going as far back as the first issues of the comic, a small collection from
the many images available again show the emphasis on the mouth.
(Not the best of qualities, a phone can only do so much in
night-time conditions)

The look that the character is going for should be quite clear by now, and by comparing back and forth from the above images the most common characteristic of the mouth is visible in the big screen version of the comic book character.

On all fronts, the new Judge Dredd depiction hit the spot with flying colours, resulting in perhaps one of the best comic to film adaptations to date in my opinion. Just short of perfect due to some very small reasons (perhaps unimportant to some) my score is a 9/10 for 2012's Joe Dredd.

Costume Designs

Ok, this is probably the next most important thing, the costume. After nailing the characters mind and attitude  the stuff that's on him is what should complement and complete the effect of Judge Dredd as well as the image that it all wants to bring out.

Starting with the Stallone version again I will try to give kudos where it is deserved. 1st of all, he isn't wearing green boots and gloves! Ok, it sounds irrelevant but I'll have you know it could have gone even more wrong than it was. It was many years ago but I clearly remember Stallone stating that he would not play Dredd if he was to wear green gloves and boots (now I wonder if it was a joke, yet I clearly recall an argument in the studio based on this incident making the headlines of "cinema news"). In a way, he saved the film from falling even lower and the incident proves that the studio was indeed aiming for making it as cartoon as it gets. On the other hand now that I think of it, if they had kept to the true character of Dredd (helmet taped on and the rest of it), even by making it much more childish the green gloves and boots would have been the least of worries in the film since they would actually end up being very fitting for a younger audience.

Funnily enough, Judge Dredd seamed to be the only
judge with this armour, while the rest of the judges
were absent the eagle for some strange reason.
They are all supposed to be of the same rank
as Dredd, not lower.

Further breaking down the costume design of the older Dredd into two parts, body and helmet, I would have to say that one of the two keeps truer to the comic character that we have come to know (armour), and the other doesn't (helmet). With the new Dredd, this is in fact the opposite. Well, almost.

The old film depicts the shoulders (surely with some small mistakes here and there like the buckle joining the two shoulder pads together) in a more precise manner, the chain hanging from the neck that leads to the judges' badge is also correct and perhaps neckline as well. We could do without the crotch piece please, but it was something minor overall with the body armour that was designed. (Oh my God, 90's and those crotch pieces....)

The new Dredd on the other hand does not keep as true to the Judge Dredd that we have all got used to seeing on the armour. There is no neck chain, there is no large eagle on the right shoulder and another relatively large piece on the other and this in it's own aims for a look that straight away may turn hardcore fans away from the film perhaps. I have seen conversations or arguments on what is what with the new Judge Dredd armour, and there have been a few that do not completely agree with the design approach.

Although even I myself stress on and on over the point of keeping as true to the comic as possible, I do not see the new look to be a bad thing for the judge. Personally, as much as I love that large eagle on the right shoulder and the almost equally large pad on the left, I know that something like this in real life simply doesn't work. Further more, it looks very much like a cartoon and completely unrealistic.

Surely from there on we also go to notice that the chain from the neck is missing whilst the chest is padded with a bulletproof vest and the back with equally protecting scales. However, the leather is present, and that is always a plus. It did always feel like he was wearing leather.

So where do we draw the line of changing an entire look just to make it more realistic or more fitting into a world, theme or setting? That really depends in the end and it can be a subjective matter, however, it soon came to my attention that the new armour is not entirely wrong after all. And following are the photos to prove this notion.

Again shot from my phone, these pictures from the first issues of the Judge Dredd comics show that perhaps the new film has not wandered off too far after all to find it's more realistic look.

The drawing in the middle is actually captioned as the first ever Judge Dredd comic, which was not released until the newly published versions of late, which now featured this comic strip.

The eagle is not as exagerated, neither is the left shoulder pad, and the both of them are very similar to the new Dredd. The left shoulder is pretty much exactly the same in the film, while the right is a larger version of the left and instead of adding a protruding eagle onto it they have engraved this eagle into the pad itself. The resemblance between the original first Dredd comics and the new film is striking after seeing this, rendering thoughts of "not keeping true to the material" long forgotten.

Notice something else about the new costume designed? Yes, there is a shade of Green in the gloves and boots. After all, in many ways not only did they not stray away from the material in the comics, but were able to subtly bring into it even more elements from the comic as opposed to the older version. The differences to the details and the back and chest pieces are as big a difference as the crotch wielding, non-leather older version.

Of the two, the new look in my opinion is not only more realistic, but whilst also keeping true to original material and not being completely redone, looks so much better and fitting to the whole setting as well. It is as many birds as can be taken down with one stone.

Now for the next and most important part. The helmet. Honestly, what can I say about the helmet? It is quite obvious that the one (1995) is a completely remade and different version inspired by the comics and the other (2012) is the comics themselves coming to life. It has been modeled almost to precision after the most commonly drawn Judge Dredd helmet, and above all keeps true to the X on the front of the visor. No X, no judge helmet in my opinion, simple.

no X means that it's simply not a Judges' helmet...

At one end of the spectrum we have this:

And at the other end we have this:

No, just... no.

The time the film was released has nothing to do with it and the fact that Dredd 3D is newer plays no part, they had twice the budget and on the contrary probably spent even more time to make that design if not the same. Large eagles on shoulders (which was harder) were possible but the helmet wasn't? With 45 million dollars more they had funds to make miniature space rockets, that actually work!

After putting so many pages from the comic itself in the titles when the film begins, one would think they have taken the matter seriously, and yet it seems that it was there just so they could pay at least some tribute to the name and then move on.

They put so much effort into keeping some designs that were harder to work on, and yet they completely re-designed the helmet into a version that I don't think I have ever seen being remotely similar to any comic. And that is yet another blow that is kind of hard to get over perhaps. Changing the basic look and characteristics from one of the most basic pieces of the character, then taking it off despite the fact that it should not have been so, shows how poorly they respected the initial material at hand much less want to follow it. It almost feels as though the studio saw some things they liked, wished to use them in their own film, change what they didnt like and go on about making their own film regardless of anything else.

The Judge Dredd and Stallone names were simply their marketing strengths to sell their own ideas.

Either that or they were just another studio making just another film and saw opportunity in that fanbase. Lesson learned, no-one should ever get their hands on any franchise or story unless they are fans of it or respect it enough for it to be made truthfully to the material. Big studios have always proved they are none of the above.

To all those pointing out that the new helmet looks a little big. Surely it does, so would any helmet that is meant to protect rather than simply decorate someones head. That aside, the helmet seldom ever looked too big during the film. On the contrary, with the angles and shots used as well as the whole action sequences etc, the helmet looked fitting and perfectly fine.

My final verdict obviously rain-dances to Indian folk circles around the new Dredd look. Although initially seeming to be less truthful to the comics, the fact that it proves to be truthful in a traditional way perhaps, makes the props for the new film even more to envy. As for that X at the front of the eyes... It simply does it for me to earn a whopping 10/10. Subjectively/objectively, either way, the new look deserves that score both ways in my opinion. I'll have to give the old timer a 5/10, maybe even 4 or perhaps as low as 3. That helmet really does ruin it for me beyond anything else. Not that it is even worn during the film but whatever.

Plot/Story (spoilers alert for both films, of course)

On one end we have a generic science fiction film, on the other we have a Dredd film. That is pretty much the gist of it when summing it all up into one phrase.

The 1995 version is a tale about Rob Schneider....

Okay seriously now, jokes aside (although the film did start with Rob as an attempt to also show MegaCity One and we didn't see Dredd until 5-10 mins into the film, waste of film and money in my opinion) the story was about a corrupt few that framed Judge Dredd for a murder he did not commit. After tricking the Chief of Justice into resigning and by being next in line they assume power over the Judges, wipe hundreds of them out, and move forward with their plans of creating a clone army of Judges (I assume?) so as to take control over MegaCity One. Chief dies, Judge Dredd befriends an idiot (Rob) and after a short time spent in the cursed earth finds his way back to fight against the bad guys (who pretty much ate themselves apart anyway, leaving just one of them for Dredd to confront) who is Joe's clone brother in an attempt to stop the "clone madness" and bring power back to proper hands.

Oh, extra story plotlines are that Rico and Joe are both brothers, clones in fact, Joe judged Rico years ago, Rico is the actual murderer (same DNA thus framing Joe) and the story then dwells in a sibling rivalry as well between Kain and Abel, I mean Rico and Joe.

Filled with many plot-points that didn't really fit in to the story, this tale at a quick glance (for any who know of the Dredd comics) is not entirely that bad of a plot line. The way it was executed however was wrong, all the character relationships were wrong, details about characters were wrong, and doing half tales and changing the rest around to fit whatever meaning and story one sees fit is also wrong. Keeping that plot line alone it could have been (in the right hands) turned into a good film about Judge Joseph Dredd and MegaCity One, despite it's cliche and generic nature.

less of this... (what is he wearing by the way?)

How could it work? Well, there is a tale where Judge Dredd is framed for a murder, Chief of Justice dies, the next in line (that framed Dredd) assumes his role, chases Dredd because Dredd uncovered the truth whilst ruling a city through tyrannical means, Griffin (actually a tutor) and others join Dredd to form a resistance, and they retaliate through many attempts to finally overthrow the tyrant against them. Griffin then becomes Chief. Thus a similar plot did actually exist in the comics even though the characters were changed around too much perhaps. Like I said, the execution of the film was completely wrong. Dredd didnt act like Dredd, did nothing Dredd-like most of the time, and the plot fell apart because although the theme was similar it felt like we were seeing another Judge in perhaps MegaCity Two and how he would have delt with it all. It felt, well, nothing like Dredd.

Other story points that did exist in the comic books was the Rico tale (more or less).

From what I have gathered (still plenty of Judge Dredd comics to get my hands on so I can familiarize myself with the entire lore if possible and Origins is another on my list I started to read) Ricco was indeed Joe's brother, they were both cloned after Fargo, Rico went bad, sent to Titan and Joe killed him many years later. That is as far as the clones go as far as I know. There is a nice portion of material out there to go through and I am curious to find out if perhaps there are other clone-plots in the comics.

and more of this, with the helmet on
(as much as I didnt like it)

Again, these plots are somewhat in the film and somewhat not. The brothers were not cloned by Fargo's DNA, and the whooooole play on clones and clone armies was an over-focused part of the plot line that only served as to take away from the character of Judge Dredd yet even more.

The cursed earth was downplayed, and the whole directing and style of the film just didn't add up. Whilst adding a million and one reasons to keep that helmet off at all times didn't much help the film either. Changing things in the story here and there, mixing characters around, focusing on the wrong ends, and above all depicting Judge Dredd and the way he fights back for justice in a manner other than Dredd is a bundle of fails one after the other.

The notion that once existed of old "it is just a comic, who cares about the details" is no longer satisfactory. One should respect a comic or any creation at that in the same way they would respect a book written by Tolkien. And I am glad to say that I think finally that the practice of studios just grabbing a title, taking it's characters here and there and throwing them all in one bucket mixing them up to give their own desired result, is a thing of the past and long over. One can only hope.

The Judge himself would be out of order after
seeing his character being so mistreated.

The result we got in the 1995 version was that characters were changed (5/10 for attempt or plain inclusion of characters), plots were borrowed and mixed (5/10 for the fact that some essence of the comics was used even though changed), the direction of the film was nothing like the comics (3/10, seems they didn't even care to try and any similarities to the comic were by fluke) and above all, Dredd was not Dredd (2/10, the thing had almost no attempt and the depiction of the character was ridiculous). A total of just over 3.5/10 for the plot-line (and I'm being nice here).

The 2012 version of Judge Dredd did not resemble its predecessor in almost any way at all, and that alone is reason for applause.

The story is simple, Judge Dredd takes on a rookie to assess her in the field and give judgement of pass or fail. They go to a crime scene to investigate and are locked in a city block building were they are hunted. They kill all that oppose them and their gang leader and job well done. End Credits.

Ok, lets elaborate on this a little. The film starts with Dredd talking and into Dredd chasing creeps (already a plus) and leads into the story of a new drug making it's way to several city blocks. Dredd is partnered with a rookie and his job for the day is to assess the rookie in the field to pass judgement on her if she is to become a judge or not. They find themselves solving a random case that leads to them being in the heart of the queen of this new drug and organisation spreading. The city block is locked down with purpose to kill the Judges so they do not leave with any evidence (in the form of a creep from the drug gang itself with purpose of interrogating him) and there the Judges fight back, climb the city levels in the city block, find the "queen" leader, and kill her. Simple, straight forward, and no strings attached.

Side plots? 1) The rookie is Anderson (a mutant with psychic abilities) and 2) Judges that have turned bad are paid to take Dredd out, adding to the action with their failure.

as simple and as straight forward as a bullet to the head, the action and
progression of the film was shot in an extremely precise direction to
make way for one of the best films to establish and introduce the character.

By comparison the 1995 plot looks like a winner with a much more "depthed" (if one dare call it that) script. Right? Well. Wrong.

After the execution of both plot lines (as we have clearly seen from both films), the winner is the simpler and linear second. It establishes the character which is an important thing after all. Quite a lot of the first issues of the Dredd comics had none of these big schemes and plans and crazy plots, it was simpler and in doing so the character was established and made recognizable to the fans. Each issue was pretty much just another case in the streets. That is what Dredd was about. Plot twists and more depth came to be as it evolved and as we got to know more and more about the character, however it remained quite simple at times in the very same way that the new Dredd film does.

The 2012 Dredd establishes the character (thankfully in a flawless manner with relation to the material) and introduces us to the world of Dredd by taking us to just another day in the field. The last villain or "boss" and the way Dredd takes her out is not a huge climatic battle scene over rooftops and spaceships flying about with laser beams chasing Dredd and Anderson controlling with psychic abilities the pilots to crash them into a finale that blows up the upper half of the city block destroying everything in the ruin leaving Dredd half alive under stones and ripped to shreds to walk off triumphant once more in the sence of "justice is done here today"... I overdid it a little bit? Perhaps. But that is what I would expect from someone following the steps of the previous studio. I would also expect characters to be wrong (maybe we can make Anderson at the end of this new film turn against Dredd just for the twist of it), change costumes, and take that helmet off for at least half the film again. Like I was saying, the new Dredd film was nothing of the above. The villain was judged and executed on the spot, nothing more nothing less, ending her story there.

simple, and yet when the dust settles the void is left filled
after each and every action scene that never seems to
feel forced on you just for the sake of being there.

And that is what most Dredd comics were about and if not, that is how they started, that is how a day in the streets for a Judge is spent, and that is the best way to properly introduce the character to the big screen.

All the extra added flush is not bad however after seeing the new Dredd film all that extra stuff just doesn't fit in as much in my opinion. With hopes of a sequel, one would guess or perhaps expect such depth to be added to slowly bring us into a much more involving story. The plot as simple as it was it was done right. For this reason it felt like Dredd, and above all, because Dredd felt like Dredd, it felt even more right. He acted like Dredd, thought like Dredd, and pretty much was Dredd. Garland spoke of his intention to make two more films and what they were to be about more or less. And indeed the next titles were scheduled with much more going on as well as a story around Judge Death in the final part of the three. I couldn't agree more with this approach, and if this was the plan all along, damn, they nailed the first part perfectly.

Although there wasn't much depth, it was Dredd. 7/10 to 8/10 for the simplicity I guess, 10/10 for keeping true to the material, and 9/10 for the way it was filmed. Averaging at 8/10 for plot. (Subjectively like I stated at the beginning of the article it is a 10/10 for me, but if we are going to get into the details and analyse things here and there then I would have to drop it to around 8/10. Maybe bump it up a little to 9/10 for being so true to the comic)

With room for improvement, I find the plot to the new film short of perfect just marginally. The room for improvement in my opinion is for a sequel alone. They owe it to us now after such a great introduction to the hero, they owe it to continue down the same path and deliver the very same way they already did with the first film. And although many sequels end up sucking, I do not believe it to be the case when a writer/producer/director or whatever he may be, has a vision. Creating a trilogy out of a film just because it made lots of money is very much different to pursuing the completion of a trilogy regardless of money made just to tell/show the story you want to tell/show. I have faith in them, and I only hope that they actually do go forth with making a sequel by sticking to the same routes as they have already done.

Lastly, the acting from behalf of the other characters in the new film was also something to be happy with. From Anderson to the bad Judges, to the creep they drag around and the gang members crawling through the city block, to of course the big "MaMa", Lena Headey, which played one of the most important roles in the film remarkably. It seems as though every important part of the film was taken by an actor that truly got into the skin of the character, helping bring across such a great performance and satisfying film, as simple as it even was.

Setting

As is tradition in this article (apparently, it just feels more fitting) I will once again start with the 1995 version.

Surprisingly, the setting of the old film was not at all that bad! Yes, indeed, I said it. I give credit where I must. In some interior shots (especially at the Hall of Justice) the buildings really felt at times much more like they came from the future and also reminded somewhat of the comics from their design as opposed to a more realistic and current day look that was present in the new film. With regards to design direction, I would have to give the old film more credit. The new film didn't shy away from looking hi-tech at points as well, but the old version of the Hall of Justice (interior) was much more like the comic in my opinion. I will have to give however the exterior design over to the new film. Although it didn't look as faithful to the comic, it looked really badass. The interior of the city blocks on the other hand were pretty much the same or felt the same in both films and I was pleased with that grungy destroyed and damaged look in both occasions. Of course the newer one looks more refined and all, but we have after all evolved and for a film made in 1995, the direction that they had in mind was just right in the old Judge Dredd.

The city itself on the other hand (exterior) was a mix of feelings. Although the 1995 version was much more true to the comics than the new film, it felt at times crammed up, wrong, or just graphically crowded. Provided that MegaCity One on the other hand is meant to have or create that feeling, I don't know how much I actually like it to be honest. Even in the comics at some points it felt too much with too many rounded objects here and there. Chaos pretty much, which justifies the design of the old film, however I really don't know how great it comes across on the big screen. Some shots of the old MegaCity One were spectacular, others felt just like a couple of overcrowded images in front of us.

The new city as an idea however works, it doesn't tire the eye and the damaged future shown relates to our own present (as the comics did at times) and the chaos is not entirely or so much in the design of the city as it is in its mass, its society and its weathering.

For the big screen, the new look works better I guess and makes much more sense.

To be honest I wasn't entirely a fan of the too round, too mixed, too complicated design of the older comics. I am (as a designer myself) much more pleased with a design that finds some kind of harmony to the eye even in all the chaos. The old city did not do that, at points (in comic and film) it felt like smashed garbage cans rising from the floor with no logic to some of their designs and ergonomics at that either. Going also for a more realistic look, I think the new film made a great choice to head into that direction. The overall effect was great and with such an enormously large scale for a MegaCity, it has more than enough space for new locations to be added to bring in some resemblance to other designs from the comics.

It seems in the end that whatever they changed in the new film from the comic it was done with badassery in mind, and the new city at times does have that appeal.

Another example for one of the things related to  settings and props that is changed in the new film is the bike. The old bike did remind more of the comics indeed, yet on the other hand, it was completely wrong in terms of efficiency and simply couldn't ever work. The new bike on the other hand, reminding also of the helmet with it's design colours, was much more fitting and it actually worked as well. I mean it actually worked! They used a 500cc bike (if my memory serves me well) and built on top of that, whilst the scene was actually shot in realtime motion. It doesnt get any more realistic than that. As a result, many things that they kept in the film and other that they changed are all chalked up to functionality and realism. It had to look believable and sometimes you have to know what to change and what not. Example: Judge Dredd's helmet = You do not change!

My final scores would have to be 5/10 for both films if I take everything to account. The old is pretty much 3/10 for aesthetic appeal and realism or how believable it is, and 7/10 for the fact that it tried to keep true to the sets. The new, although very promising for a start, would have to be for my liking 3/10 for keeping true to material, 7/10 for  appeal, and 8/10 for being believable, perhaps at points too believable. Personally I am much happier with the new MegaCity and the new props, as long as they add in future sequels (fingers crossed) more elements and characteristics to further enrich the world from even such designs as the following two pictures below. One can hope.

Trying to steer clear from technological comparisons, having advanced so much in film making and technique since 1995 it would be wrong, so I seek more to compare the the design idea and concept in mind as well as directing and script/acting. Even so, the sound and the visual filters etc in Dredd 3D are a must to refer to as well since they were achieved with such quality. I wont include them in the comparison however I should say that they used some filters very cleverly, along with shots (from the city-blocks cameras) subtly and smartly used to bring the feel or even look of a grungy comic to the screen, whilst the slow motion scenes (apart from being so dramatically mind blowing and fitting) used the saturation of colours to such a great extent that it further reminded of the comic with all those beautiful colours used. As for the music, it was straight away added to my list of loved soundtracks.

Final Verdict

Ok, so lets count those scores up in order from Character Portrayal to Costume Designs and from Plot to Settings respectively.

1995 Judge Dredd
                4/10
                4/10
                3/10
                5/10
Total
      4/10

2012 Dredd
                9/10
                10/10
                8/10
                5/10
Total
      8/10

As far as fun factor goes, I still stand by that 10/10 for Dredd 3D, but seeing as that is perhaps too subjective for some to agree with, I would give my objective score at 8/10. The film did Justice to the legendary law enforcer of MegaCity One, and I would be more than glad to see a sequel come out in the future (two sequels would be quite nice actually). A "don't miss" title for any Dredd fan out there and generally friends of action films as well, and once we break it down it is also a very loyal and faithful approach to the original material created for the character in most ways possible. Not much more can be asked from a comic to film adaptation. Dredd 3D, being also the clearer choice over the two, is the result of great work, proving also that more can be done with less if done right. A title that should be respected as being truly worthy of the name DREDD. Lets hope there is a repeat on this success with future titles to come, for the Dredd franchise and the film industry in general.

And now I am off to experience this marvel of a work yet one more time. See you in the streets.