5 Reasons Why Dredd Sucked

5. The 3D

3D has outstayed its welcome by over three years and Dredd only continues its banal existence. I thankfully caught one of the few 2D showings available, but that it is itself an achievement to do so says it all. Dredd may have been shot in 3D, but that€™s no reason to say there can€™t be a 2D showing. It seems distributor Entertainment disagree; my local Cineworld had seven showings a day in 3D and only one 2D showing placed too late to be in the daytime, but too early for people who€™ve been working all day. This is forcing people to go for the 3D option, which was fine in the early days, but now with the ridiculous ticket surcharge its just plain greedy. In a couple of months time, when Dredd€™s performance at the box office is used as a case for why 3D is far from dead, just remember they forced you to see it in the expensive, colour reducing format. As for whether the 3D itself is effective, there has been little discussion in reviews as to its quality; a sure sign that it has little impact. There were a few moments in the film where you can imagine the effect attempting to dazzle you, but the only thing that stood out was (SPOILER) when MaMa€™s face splattered over the screen. This struck me as a pointless feature; use a medium designed to pull the audience in to create a barrier between the audience and the film.
In this post: 
Dredd
 
Posted On: 
Contributor
Contributor

Film Editor (2014-2016). Loves The Usual Suspects. Hates Transformers 2. Everything else lies somewhere in the middle. Once met the Chuckle Brothers.