did you see this in 3D? in 2D it would be 'meh'

I don't know. I saw it in 2D first, and I thought it was pretty damn great even then.

Maybe it just wasn't his cup of tea. Even Raiders of the Lost Ark only has a 95% on RottenTomatoes... there's no accounting for taste. I recommended it to several friends, all of whom loved it.

Yes, I saw it in 3D. Go big or go home.

The 3D effect added nothing to the film as there was no depth of field throughout the picture. There were a handful of 3D effects throughout that worked (such as the awesome bullet through the head shot and the final kill sequence), but it wasn't enough to justify the need for 3D.

My biggest beef is the film feels too long at 98 minutes. For a film like this to truly work, it needs to move from set piece to set piece with the plot merely existing just for that mechanism to operate. However, save for three-to-four moments, there are no real set pieces. It's just plot followed by violence. Rinse, recycle and repeat. After awhile, people shooting at each other gets boring.

What I'm trying to say is, I needed even more memorable graphic violence.

what? They moved around a lot.

Sitting at 21 millions world wide

Domestic: $11,201,341 52.6%
+ Foreign: $10,100,000 47.4%
= Worldwide: $21,301,341

Mini guns scene was a pretty big set piece.

What was the budget? Sucks that this failed horribly at the box office.

That was one of the "three-to-four" moments I was referring to, which I dug simply due to all of the innocent bystanders that got murdered. The same would apply to all of the "slo-mo" sequences and the fights between Dredd and the various judges.

To be honest, I wish they would've killed a child or two. Hear me out on this. If Sylvester Stallone can film small children being thrown into flaming canisters, we could've had a kid get blown to bits.

$50 Million

you and I must have seen an entirely different movie - I saw this on a Sony 3D DP system and the depth of the field was constant, whether looking down a hall or up/down in the courtyard - the 3D was damn impressive.

your thoughts of this film was what I had problems with 'Resident Evil: Retribution' - talk about a film that was all style and no substance (or a plot that was waffer thin) - that was a pointless gratuitous movie.

in terms of the gore, I wonder what Verhoeven would have done with the violence. And speaking of Stallone, his 2008 'Rambo' film took film violence /gore to another level - it felt and looked like a Troma film with a huge budget.

I saw it on a Barco Dolby Digital 3D system. Other films I've seen on the same setup looked better in 3D (such as Katy Perry: Part of Me and Step Up Revolution).

EDIT: The Barco projector in question is capable of doing 4K a la Sony's setups in Regal theaters. Now that MoviePass is everywhere, I can go to Regal for 3D more often. I'll take Barco's Dolby Digital 3D setup at my local independent theater or Sony's RealD setup at Regal any day rather than Rave's fucking awful Christie RealD setup.

My theater uses Barco and I think they're shit. Give me a Christie any day.

interesting - the Barco's at the Cinemark Egyptian are top notch - excellent dark levels - better than the Christies I've seen

The double projector Christie systems I've seen in action - Tyson's ETX and Uptown are lacklustre. Tyson's has the constant problem of not being aligned correctly [ugh - I want to find the projectionist and kick him in the shin]

Sony projector's on smaller screens have impressed me. But I find it interesting that the Landmark chain (E Street and Bethesda), the Angelika Mosaic, Cinema Arts all have Barco systems - so far what I've seen has impressed me. 'Chicken with Plums' picture clarity almost looked like watching the movie through a window.

The Barco projector 'Xtreme' screen (to the left of the concession stand - I'm forgetting which screen that is) over at Rave Cinema Fairfax Corner - is mediocre - darkness levels are weak and it really doesn't have any pop - the second 'Xtreme' screen/auditorium though is superior - go figure?

Maybe it's just my theater, then. I know we haven't had a technician out here in years to do any kind of recalibrations or even regular maintenance.

The Rave out here uses single Christie projectors that are at least four-to-five years old and haven't had any recalibrations as far as I can tell. While I've seen films like that have had amazing 3D like Final Destination 5, Hugo and Nitro Circus: The Movie in their auditoriums, their presentations are plagued with issues galore. Specifically brightness, ghosting and a lack of depth of field. I saw Final Destination 5 again in a Sony 3D setup at a local Regal after the fact and it was a night-and-day difference.

Clearly the issue here is not the company supplying the projectors but the theaters doing the exhibition.

A very positive write-up about the way women are portrayed in the film: http://www.comicbookgrrrl.com/2012/1...men-in-comics/

Damn good article! Thanks for posting that.

Great article, Supermallet. Thanks for posting it.

Saw this last night. The film was only just released in Australia.

Is it as good as the effusive praise given to it here? No, it is not.
Is it better than the Stallone version? Yes.

My main issue with it is that 80% of the film takes place within the block. I got bored of the set by the time we got to the final fight, and would've preferred to see something outside of the dark building.

That's about it though. The music, the acting, the setpieces... they all worked. I just have a feeling that the "keep it all in a building" was a budget, not a creative, constraint.

Wait. I thought you were in China? You were weren't you at some point...I think.

You'd be wrong, I'm afraid.

This officially closed yesterday with a grand domestic total of... $13.4m. Ouch.

Such a bummer. American audiences are lame.

That really stinks. Not a chance in hell a sequel gets greenlit. Maybe direct to video with a $20m budget if they are lucky.