I saw Dredd 3D yesterday (and then Ted at a second-run theater, on was on an -ed thing apparently.) I have to admit to rather enjoying it. It’s violent and simple. Sadly, nobody bothered to see it. So why? Is it because people still have a bad taste in their mouth over the 1995 Judge Dredd movie? It seems like a difficult task for movie promoters, especially in an era of reboots and remakes, to explain to an audience exactly what their expectations ought to be. It also doesn’t help that some 17 years after the last movie, Judge Dredd is still a relative unknown to the American public. Since their only frame of reference, then, was the previous movie the assumption that this new Dredd movie had to be connected to it (aside from sharing the same character, of course) was natural (despite the unusual length of time since the last movie.) But why should that matter? Many people who are fond of the James Bond movies are unaware that they are (very loosely) based on a series of books, and don’t really allow their experiences with the previous movies affect their outlook on other ones. I mean, most fans will insist that at least one of the seven actors who have portrayed the actor in major motion pictures was the worst. Yet they stuck with the series. Even after the failures that were Batman Forever and Batman & Robin people flocked to see Batman Begins; I never heard anyone balk at it, saying “oh, Batman? From that lousy George Clooney movie?!” Is it because these were established series that people were willing/able to put up with a bad installment?