Why did Dredd fail at the box office?

(50 marks)
Many people wonder why the UK film Dredd failed at the box office, they predominantly assume its because it is British and therefore due to the lack of budget, thats it, it wont be anything special. However by looking into detail, there are many factors as to why this film isnt particular popular, and doesnt meet the required standards of the critics and general public audiences. Dredd (2012) was a film based on the comic book Judge Dredd which was a part of the media world in 1977. The character it was based upon (Judge Joseph Dredd) was a science fiction character/super hero that was designed as an officer to defend the city from crime and all evil. The film was based on this Comic book produced by DC comics, however adapted to become more modern and supposedly a best seller. It was awarded 7th greatest comic character by British Empire Magazine Empire in 2011, in which put the super hero up to 35th in IGNs top 100 comic book heroes. So if Judge Dredd had such a successful comic book series, why was the film such a disappointment? In this present day, Hollywood only develop film ideas and produce them if they are an 8 million dollar budget or multi-million dollar budget film, in other words a mainstream film. The reason they do this is so that they can guarantee that the film will make money back from all its spending. Dredd however had a 35 million dollar budget and therefore Hollywood had no interest in producing it as a film, because they couldnt be sure of its success even after the comics. After all Dredd was already produced by America in 1995 and nobody understood what it was all about. This was due to it only being a British comic and therefore the audiences were over this side of the Atlantic and money couldnt stretch far enough to have it released over in the UK. Even though Hollywood gave it a miss, UK production companies thought it was worth the money because superhero films are everywhere so it surely wouldnt be a massive disappointment. It was bombed by critics as it wasnt faithful to the comic books and therefore became a big disaster. CGI software was a gadget they could use to their advantage, as it allowed high graphical ideas to be brought from paper to the big screen. Even though films such as Iron Man (Marvel Comics) made a lot of money, it doesnt mean that Dredd will do the same thing, even if it is a superhero styled film. The reason why I say this is due to the fact that Dredd doesnt make such an impression in what we call The

Quadrant. The Quadrant basically outlines four different audiences, in which can show you roughly how well your film will appeal. Due to Dredd being a superhero film, without being stereotypical, you could count most female votes out; this basically halves the viewing rates already! Dredd cannot be classified as a family film due to it being rated 18, so the maximum amount of viewers is completely limited. Why on earth would institutions such as DNA films even believe this has a chance of making its money back? You could argue that it wouldnt do very well because the film doesnt include the stereotype of British Culture which audiences enjoy when watching a British film. Along with the rated 18 this film has, it was obvious to Hollywood that Dredd would just flop and receive a bad critique once produced as many factors outlined this to them early on, even if Dredd had convergence under its belt. Mark Kermode a British film critic makes remarks on the way in which modern films use three dimensional imagery as a part of their production. As we all know, Dredd used 3D throughout the whole of the film as Pete Travis thought it would bring a comic book idea to life more than 2D would. Kermode couldnt have such an explicit opposite opinion, he despises 3D productions as he said Its alienating which means it made it less life like than 2D would have. Also he quoted The glasses are a pain, Its expensive, the 30 per cent reduction in image brightness is unacceptable and the stereoscopic images confuse the brain in other words not only was it a waste of money, but it would require more concentration levels from the audience in order to understand fully what was going on. Kermode also states that Hollywood have basically turned to a Flop proof business model so any big budget film will make back its money, what he questions is why they dont be a bit smarter with the large sum of money, instead of wasting it on other effects such as 3D. Dredd therefore would be negatively critiqued by him as they didnt use the small budget wisely, it was predominantly used on the 3D filming, and converting the extra 2D filming clips into 3D so that it all fit together perfectly. Kermodes reasoning for 3D in his opinion is the basis on why it completely failed at the box office and didnt make back as much money as big Hollywood blockbuster films.

There are three main areas that should be evaluated to cover why Dredd failed at the box office, and they include Pre- Production, Production and Post-

Production. If you were to compare Dredd to a film such as Iron Man which is a Hollywood American blockbuster, you would see a significant difference between everything, even the smallest amount of detail. For starters, the budget difference is massive, Dredd had $35 million, and Iron Man had $140 million to work with. After the idea (which for both films came from a comic book), the budget in pre-production is really key, and you can tell whether you will make any money back from the idea and the budget combined. In order to create a big money blockbuster there are four areas in which need to be met, the budget which highlighted already, being one of them. Spectacular visuals is another element of the criteria, Pete Travis tried to do this by producing the whole film in 3D, however he didnt research enough into the debate over whether it was worth pretty much all the money they had. You can tell after being given the green light on 20th December 2008 that Pete Travis had his heart set on the 3D effects as he thought that it would tie into the spectacular visuals category. The film also required an A List star, someone who had won many big academy awards for their participation in a film. Dredd used money on their main leads of Karl Urban (New Zealand) and Olivia Thurlby (USA) who for a British audience wouldnt be recognisable; whereas Iron Man producers hired Robert Downey JR for the lead role in their film assisted by Terrence Howard and Gwyneth Paltrow. You can evaluate from the list of names why Dredd didnt do anywhere near as good as Iron Man at the box office, first of all the cast of Iron Man are very well known, which will increase the audience number straight away. By having an unknown cast, not only are you narrowing your audience which Dredd have done with other factors already, but you are risking the quality level of acting, and the level of experience the actor has which can affect the performance and deter critics from the film, allowing them to criticise why a sequel if an idea is presented shouldnt be produced. At the production stage Dredd found a cheap and ideal location in South Africa to shoot the film, which was situated in the heart of Cape Town. This was perfect as the production company teamed up with a South African company and therefore it made it easier to get their hands on the location. Hollywood film Iron Man however used California and Palmdale Airport as their main bases of operation for their location. You can identify the cost difference, however the types of scenes were relatively the same, this may still have an effect on critics and audience, because if it isnt to their taste you will have less

positive feedback and receive a lower rating at the box office. Also at this stage the idea of 3D is brought to life through the graphics from the phantom flex, Red One MX and Zeiss Ultra Prime Lens cameras. Most of Dredds budget will have been spent on Pete Traviss vision of the film being in 3D. Iron Man however used Panavisionprimo, Arriflex 235, Panavisionpanaflex and Optimo and Cooke lenses in which gave better graphics, even though it was only in 3D. This will have had an effect on Box Office ratings, because if the graphics arent up to standard in the more modern films then no one will want to go to the cinema for the experience of brilliant graphics on the big screen. Pete Travis really should have gone about his decisions differently because this meant films such as Iron Man which were released before Dredd had better ratings even though newer technology had been released in the production period of Dredd. Both the UK film Dredd and the US film Iron Man used Dolby Digital sound, however accompanying that Dredd used Datasat, a more lower budget sound system which wouldnt project as much in as much quality as the likes of SDDS and DTS which Iron Man used. Dredd used stereoscopic colour to enhance the 3D features, however as Kermode said, it can confuse the brain and make it harder to concentrate, so spending more of the budget there may have been a mistake which could also lead to why Dredd flopped. The production companies also take a large margin of the films budget in order to actually produce the film so that it can either go on to be marketed globally, internationally or regionally, and whether it will go to cinema or straight to exhibition mode, so on to DVD and Blu-ray. Dredds producers were a mix of South African and British companies such as DNA Films, IM Global and Peach Trees. The reason for this was to keep the low cut budget and still have a wide audience to market the film to. Not only that but these companies have produced films like Never Let Me Go which not only was a fantastic, really positively critiqued film, but also was nominated and won some big awards. You could argue however that this film managed this because of the actors such as Keira Knightley and Andrew Garfield playing the lead roles, Dredds lead character line up doesnt come close to the cast of Never Let Me Go and therefore is why it was not as successful. The final stage is Post-Production, so how the companies went about marketing Dredd, evaluating whether they did it all the right way or whether there are elements they should have taken away or added in to maybe boost

the viewer ratings. There was a premiere for Dredd in San Diego at the Comiccon international on July 11th 2012, this is one way in which the film can be marketed, however if you were going to compare it to Iron Man again that also had a premiere on April 14th 2008 in Sydney which was a global event. Most films have premiers, depending on how well they have been marketed will determine the outcome of the audience, so therefore it is down to smaller things such as posters, flyers, trailers, adverts, websites, merchandise and other methods of getting the word spread so that people go to watch the film. It is important like anything in your career life that the marketing process is gone about with a professional manor including an outstanding work ethic; in order to impress critics and audiences which will boost ratings all types of advertisement need to be slick, and really on point to get the target market on side straight away. After all the marketing footage such as a trailer and images printed on posters is out in the public that is when exchange can occur. This is one of the biggest and easiest ways of a film losing money as when the film is released to the public illegal acts such as piracy take place. There is only so much security you can have in cinemas, online and out on the street and therefore not every act can be caught, so this will forever be an on-going process in which will always subtract amounts from the maximum profits. Iron Man and Dredd both went down the same root when it came to marketing, they both had a trailer, posters and comic books before to kind of give the public the idea of what they are all about, however one thing that Dredd did that Iron Man didnt was have its own official fake website which allowed users to interact and feel like they were a part of the world in the film. This was a brilliant idea as it would allow people to find out a bit more of what the film is about, however I would say that a website with games on would be more aimed at younger children, and Dredd isnt a suitable film for that audience type. Iron Man did something different and released high quality merchandise and toys so that even the younger generation of their audience would be attracted. This film is a 12A and therefore any age may watch as long as if under 12 you are accompanied by an adult. Releasing action figures, t-shirts, lunch boxes and bottles is a really effective way of making a bit of extra money on the top of cinema and DVD sales. Dredd failed to do this as the budget obviously couldnt stretch far enough, leading to a smaller profit, and not great reviews.

On the whole Dredd really came out below any average film around the globe at this present moment in time. It all starts from the idea, and without the general key factors such as youre A List star, or your multi-million dollar budget lets face it, the film will just be a disaster. In my personal opinion I feel very strongly about the fact that Pete Travis had no desire to involve a British culture into the film, as this is where I believe it lost many viewers. I can understand why Mark Kermode makes valid reasons as to be so opposed to 3D, Dredd could have used more of the budget effectively in other fields rather than putting all time, effort, money and energy into having the film in 3D just to make it more modernised. It is quite a difficult watch, as it takes a while for the storyline to get going, but without the long concentration span or the will to watch it Dredd really isnt the ideal film. I believe Dredd failed at the Box Office for many reasons however the person I blame for this is Pete Travis the Director, it is his job to make sure that the maximum amount of profit is made, from the highest quality film possible and in my eyes I dont believe he did this.

Nat Clarke Year 12 Mr Smith