Don't think this has been posted previously. New(ish) Dredd clip. Should be awesome in 3D. A bit splattery so might be NSFW.

Looks like it.

Mark

Hollywood - We had new ideas but they left a while ago.

And here's another to add to the list : ALF

Mark

When was this then?
Hollywood's constantly recycled stories and themes.

Really? Again?
(8+D

Think of it as the modern day version of folklore tales.
They were always passed down from one generation to another with things changing, details added, details omitted.
Hollywood is just doing the same sort of thing.

Mark

Check this out!
Did anyone else here know that the U.K. Version of that film was missing 30 minutes of stuff that the U.S. version has had all along?
I certainly didn't.

Mark

Um, not really. OK, there is the notion that there are only actually seven stories to be told, the greeks invented them and everyone since then has just been doing variants of them. That's fair enough. However what Hollywood has come to is something different altogther. The whole 'reboot' thing is a sign of utter corporate cowardice and intellectual bankruptcy. They're not reworking and retelling stories that were told to a previous generation (see, for example, 'The Thing From Another World' and 'The Thing'). They're remaking stories that are only a decade old at most and doing pretty much nothing new in the process simply on the hope that the people who paid before will pay again because it's something familiar. It's vacuous and depressing. It's not your parents telling you the stories they were told when they were children, it's some bloke in the pub telling you a joke somebody else told you half an hour before.

(as an aside, 1951 saw the release of 'The Thing From Another World', 'The Day The Earth Stood Still' and 'When Worlds Collide', That was a hell of a year for sci-fi)

Jon

I think I'd want to know why those particular scenes were missing. Personally I'd want to watch the version that Kubrick intended to be shown because frankly there are very, very few people who have a right to suggest they know better than Stanley Kubrick.

According to IMDB the short version was preferred by Kubrick. That's good enough for me.

Jon, I can see your point, I just don't really agree with it.
I think we are coming at the subject from two very different angles. Yes, there's always going to be a degree of corporate greed in doing these reboots and remakes … Hollywood is a business, and if it doesn't make money, then it's not doing it right.
Today's audience expectations differ from the audience of ten years ago, on the whole.
Yeah, sure, a lot of people that went to the cinema ten years are still going now, but that's not the majority of where the cinema audience is, and for those the newer versions of the films are going to be where it's at.
We may not like it, but that's the economics of the business.
We just have to be a little more picky about the films we watch at the pictures.

Mark

That seems to be the case, but why didn't he cut the US version the same?
I'm intrigued.

Mark

Jon, for some perspective on this, I overheard a group of kids on the way out of the cinema after seeing The Dark Knight Rises.
'Yeah, I saw the first one, it was like a really old film, from the 90s.'
That's the reality of a lot of the audience, for better or worse.

I don't disagree with either of you tbh. I understand the commercial reality of why it's happening. However that doesn't stop me from lamenting it on an artistic level. There's always the 'independent sector' of course and european cinema doesn't seem to be afflicted with the same problem to as great a degree so there is plenty of cinema to watch, if you're willing to find it and you have a cinema nearby willing to show it (which is another issue entirely).

Bob Hoskings has Parkinson's, retires from Hollywood

Mark