The BBC announced tonight that Rebellion is starting to develop a Judge Dredd TV Series...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-39873020

...dang that's enough to make any grab a munce bar and go futsie :)

Hopefully it's going to air on a cable channel rather than a normal tv station, otherwise PG rating at best with lots of changes.

Hope it's not on cable, in the UK we only have Sky and Virgin. Neither of which is cheap and not all areas have Virgin.

Stick it on Beeb 2 at 11pm on a saturday or sunday and you'd be surprised at what can be shown on telly! :) Just hope they don't stuff it up. If it works 2000AD is a very rich vein to harvest from. I think Strontium Dog would be good too.

mrsparky posted at 4:31PM Sat, 13 May 2017 - #4305030

Hope it's not on cable, in the UK we only have Sky and Virgin. Neither of which is cheap and not all areas have Virgin.

There's also Amazon, Netflix, BT Vision and numerous Freesat channels, but, if the BBC is involved, it'll be on terrestrial telly.

Doctor Who manages to be pretty violent and gory for a family show - it's officially regarded as a family show by the Beeb - so Dredd could work in that remit.

Anyhow, forget Dredd - Twin Peaks is back! Weeee!

Yea I'm more of a terrestrial fan, and that's mostly down to cost. Take the new Top Gear as an example, spend 80 quid on prime, no thanks. Also we just don't watch enough TV to make it worthwhile to invest in freesat or pay netflix subs.

Instead we're usually doing something creatively stupid, sometimes aspects of that find it's way into poser stuff, usually with varying degrees of danger or success

This week ? Using 3d models as formers for vacforming or those cool Timberkits as a source for making some simple Poser freebies. Though the best results - and the next freebie - came from stuff lying around the computer.

SamTherapy posted at 8:53PM Sat, 13 May 2017 - #4305137

Doctor Who manages to be pretty violent and gory for a family show - it's officially regarded as a family show by the Beeb - so Dredd could work in that remit.

Yea and this weeks was scarily brilliant.

If you don't watch any terrestrial tv, you don't have to fork out the license fee, which means you free up some cash to shop elsewhere. Me and PurpleJelly never get chance to watch any damn thing due to our two little darlings, and they only ever want to watch Spongebob or Scaredy Squrrel* or something of that nature, so we just don't watch anything other than Netflix.

• <--- this is supposed to be an asterisk but shows up in my browser as a dot.

How the blinking flip did the makers of Scaredy Squrrel ever get away with ripping off Spongebob so completely without being sued? Here's a short and by no means comprehensive list of Scaredy Squirrel plot points and characters:

He works in a menial job with little or no recognition but has a very strong work ethic and is fiercely loyal to the company.

His boss is a tyrant, with no regard for employee rights, safety, job satisfaction or anything remotely "good".

His main work colleague hates him and will undermine him at every opportunity.

His closest friend is an unhygienic moron.

He is obsessed with totally stupid and pointless pastimes.

He has a somewhat strange pet which displays some uncharacteristic - given its species - abilitles.

He has some sort of compulsive/obsessive disorder.

He is scrupulously honest and when forced to tell a lie, becomes very distressed.

Most tellingly of all, his initials are S and S.

Yes, I have seen far too much children's telly.

As an aside, the book, "Scaredy Squirrel", on which the show is based, is almost nothing like the show itself.

Oh, and did I mention... Twin Peaks is back!

Wahooo! Yippee! Yay!

Can I be controversial and hope they keep it more OTT comic-book in style rather than gritty and realistic like the recent film. I actually preferred the Stallone version

ypvs posted at 12:01AM Mon, 15 May 2017 - #4305224

Can I be controversial and hope they keep it more OTT comic-book in style rather than gritty and realistic like the recent film. I actually preferred the Stallone version

Haven't yet seen the recent film but I thought the Stallone version was ok in parts, unbearable in others. One thing I didn't like about the Stallone version for was that he had his face uncovered much of the time, totally against the comic book continuity.

I'd like a totally OTT comic book style more than anything but I very much doubt that's what we'd get.

As an unrepentant comic book geek it's my heartfelt wish that film makers wouldn't faff around with established continuity. I haven't bothered seeing the Dawn of Justice thing because of how Batman has been changed. Batfleck and co can go jump in the lake. Haven't seen any of the Marvel films, either. But that's because I really, really don't care for Marvel characters.

Sam, I KNEW you were going to say that! (couldn't resist)

Maybe it's because they're messing with stuff from my childhood but the only comic film I've been totally satisfied with has been Guardians of the Galaxy. The same with the Star Trek reboot- Ok as stand alone films but they've thrown away too much. Then again maybe I'm looking back with too much rose tint.

Yea I also like the Stallone one over the darker Karl Urban one. Which also chimes in with the 80's Dredd annuals as the attached shows The 1st film also had something the 2nd didn't, it's own comic - Lawman of the Future.

It's kinda like comparing the 60's TV batman to that gloomy dark knight stuff. Probably why both Guardians of the Galaxy films where so much fun.

Don't think this is all rosy tinted either, I think with60/70's kids TV in particular we where well lucky in terms of what we had. OK sure some of the productions wheren't all Gerry Anderson masterpieces, most where done on the cheap - but the programme makers cared about the concepts of stories, characters etc.

Think of something like Tommorow People compared to the anodyne corporate pile of Pippa Pig clones. The latter isn't about entertainment that's about pushing a massive assortment of licenced crud.

@ypvs - There are as yet undiscovered tribes in the Amazon who knew I'd say that.

@mrsparky - Peppa Pig and Little Kingdom are pretty good. Don't diss da Pig! My memories of 70s kids telly is somewhat different from yours. Apart from the Anderson stuff there was little or nowt I enjoyed, Doctor Who being the exception.

Stallone made a good Dredd film, the thing is it was called Demolition Man!! :) The Karl Urban one was a much better portrayal of Dredd, although the Stallone version did have some good bits. The Angel gang were a great but wasted opportunity, Mean Angel was especially good. But don't get me started on Fergie! The King of the Big Smelly was a nicely dim, big ol' bruiser of a guy, not some poxy little hacker, standard Rob Schneider type of character.

Wikipedia has an interesting entry on the Stallone version:

Stallone's Dredd

Sam - obviously no offence meant to any fictional characters Though what you didn't like about 70's kids TV compared to now? BTW - good wikipedia link.

Raven - Yea with you about the that version of the Fergee character, at least they could've put flies around his head! But I guess someone thought a "fun" character like the Leo Getz sidekick in Lethal Weapon 2 would be a better idea. Also agree about the Angel Gang, Mean was a great depiction, but they missed some a good choice with Fink Angel.

Well...

[Rant Mode ON]

Most of the stuff I remember were mainly the bloody awful and not at all funny Hanna-Barberra cartoon shows such as Wait Till Your Father Gets Home, Scooby Doo and so forth. There was also Blue Peter (okay at times) Magpie (terrible) and stuff like Ace of Wands and Timeslip. Ace of Wands was just unbelievably boring and Timeslip, although promising, moved at a snail's pace. Even at that age, I used to be able to see through all the plot devices, all the contrivances and the almost inevitable deus ex machina being wheeled out to save the day.

Don't even get me started on the unadulterated tosh of the Double Deckers, the sleazy, creepy Crackerjack and the sheer teeth grinding awfulness of stuff like Hector's House.

I was prepared to forgive Anderson's stuff for its many faults because at least they put some effort into making it look good and some of the stories were half decent. Well, right up to Joe 90, which was complete and utter bobbins. UFO wasn't bad in parts but a bit hamstrung by the (ahem) production values of the time. I'd love to see a reboot, properly done, with some kind of development and expansion but I guess that territory's already been done to death by stuff like V, X Files and the appalling Falling Skies.

I have the same trouble with most (non children's) telly nowadays; watching just about any crime drama all I can think is, "I'm a damn sight smarter than them and they're supposed to be paid professionals, why the blinking flip can't they work out who dunnit and how?" That and the dreadful acting, improbable scenarios, tedious "character" scenes and the obligatory exposition scenes for the hard of thinking. Regular drama shows don't interest me because most of the characters are either improbable stereotypes, idiots or plain horrible.

Even allowing for Sturgeon's Law, telly in general is garbage. Which is probably why I lost interest a long time ago. My ex wife used to complain that I'd not sit and watch stuff for long, other than the odd thing here and there. I used to watch Father Ted, Twin Peaks, Vic Reeves and the odd episode of Frasier. TBH, I'd rather draw, paint, listen to music or play me guitar.

[Rant Mode OFF]

So there you have it.

Sam?

Children of the Stones.

You'll find it on YouTube...... If you missed it in the 70s.... Still brilliant.

Cheers, chap! ISTR something about it but don't think I ever watched it.

I'm guessing it's nowt to do with Jade Jagger. ;)

Ah, I just thought the title reminded me of something...

Paperhouse, a damn good film, based on a book we had as a radio broadcast at school, "Marianne Dreams". It was also made into a tv show "Escape Into Night", but I never saw that version.

The film is well worth a look.

Will not work because the BBC will make it politically correct. And some BBC people want to make the next Doctor a transgender Doctor. If they do that lot of countries around the world will ban it. Judge Dredd TV series has to be made without any BBC control whatsoever.

The thing is, it was just reported on the Beeb site that's all. Rebellion are teaming up with IM Global to make the series. Also on a cool if it happens note, there have been talks with Karl Urban to see if he may be able to be Dredd.

http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/tv/dredd/49331/judge-dredd-tv-series-karl-urban-has-had-talks

jugoth posted at 8:27PM Tue, 23 May 2017 - #4305767

Will not work because the BBC will make it politically correct. And some BBC people want to make the next Doctor a transgender Doctor. If they do that lot of countries around the world will ban it. Judge Dredd TV series has to be made without any BBC control whatsoever.

Nope; if it's made for an older audience, anything goes. Also incorrect is your assertion the BBC want to make the Doctor transgender. They are considering the possibility of a female Doctor. That's totally different from transgender. In any case, it's happened before in one of the charity shows where Joanna Lumley played the Doc and it's now established that Time Lords can change gender when they regenerate.

But, as Raven pointed out there's no certainty the BBC will be involved anyhow.