If it already sounds unconvincing as we are describing it to you, trust us when we tell you it looks even more ridiculous on screen. Are we supposed to believe that within the span of one night, the North Koreans have suddenly made their way halfway across the globe to attack America? Are we supposed to believe that they could have come with all that firepower? And worst of all, are we supposed to even buy into the fact that they would even bother about a small town called Spokane?
Sure, we would willingly suspend our disbelief for a movie that bothers to make sense; but 'Red Dawn' makes no such attempt, and utterly baffles in how it thinks it can get away with such an absurd setup. Does it get better along the way? Absolutely not. Seeing his father executed before their eyes, Jed comes to the conclusion that they need to prepare for war — and just like that, he becomes training commander of a young team of rebels who call themselves the 'Wolverines'.
They learn to fight, to shoot and to hide, all in the name of preparing to wage an urban guerrilla campaign against the North Koreans who have taken over their town with their arsenal of soldiers, jeeps, and tanks.
And when they are finally ready, Matt decides to undermine their plans by scuttling off to rescue his girlfriend Erica Isabel Lucas , thereby igniting a brotherly conflict between the rational and responsible Jed and the impulsive and impetuous Matt. What a pathetic attempt at trying to make us care about two stock types who frankly are just in the movie so we have the good guys — the same goes for bringing Toni Adrianne Paliki and Erica into the fray and building some sort of romantic links between Jed and Matt respectively.
Even if we accept the tradeoffs in plot and character most B-movies would have their audience make, the least director Dan Bradley could have done is to mount some decently shot action sequences.
That is precisely Bradley should have done with his cameraman Mitchell Amundsen — shoot him point blank. Clearly trying too hard to emulate the 'Bourne' films to lend the action a sense of urgency, the shaky camera-work is downright frustrating to watch, and even more so because the sequences — especially the final one set within a huge circular room fronted on all sides with glass windows — are pretty promising to begin with.
No thanks to its abundant flaws, the movie also wastes its promising young cast. Hemsworth has good presence as the smart leader of the team he takes over Patrick Swayze's role in the original , while Josh Hutcherson who played Peeta in 'The Hunger Games' and here is in C. Thomas Howell's role brings naivety and temperance to the role of Robert Kitner, a bookish type who turns warrior because of circumstance. Less convincing is Peck, who mostly just looks too stoned to convey any sort of inner dilemma his character is supposed to face.
Nonetheless, the acting is the least of the flaws in a movie that is painfully illogical and utterly nonsensical. Its invasion scenario might have been able to fly with an audience in the '80s, but to try to transplant the same premise to today's context is just plain daftness. Ironically, there are some moments that appear to suggest that the filmmakers are wise enough to know not to take the movie too seriously — but those moments fade away as soon as the next unabashed war-mongering scene arrives.
Don't get us wrong — this isn't about whether we love B-action movies or not. We do, but it is movies that insult the intelligence of its audience that we truly detest, and 'Red Dawn' is one perfect example of that.
Watch only if you need to understand the meaning of stupid. I was not going to talk about this moving until I saw one of the actors interviewed on CNN. He talked about making it better than the original because today's audiences are more sophisticated that they were 30 years ago and need a better story and acting.
Please, this movie is full of special effects and CGI, the acting is sub par and, it's just a bad, bad movie. If this movies shows anything, it's that Hollywood has no respect for audiences and just recycles an old movie, loads it with pretty faces and special effects, makes it PC and throws it out at audiences.
Seems that every year, Hollywood throws out trash like this, fills it with CGI and special effects, lot's of fires and explosions and calls it "art".
A complete waste of time unless you are a male in his early teens. It will be in the bargain bin at Walmart for. I'm sure this movie shows more or less how it looked when US forces dropped in to say hello in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The 30 year old teenagers in this movie throw out mercilessly sub par dialog like "This is not their land. This is our back yard and we're going to fight for it," or "they killed our father, we have to fight or die. Aaameeerica, Aaameeerrrrriiiicaa!! God save them all, they do make me laugh and cry at the same time. Enough has already been said in previous reviews about the wildly idiotic plot and lazy directing.
Rather get the version. At least it had some heart in it, though the plot was just as ludicrous, playing on the strange fear of communism America has always fostered. One more thing! Modern movies this one being no exception way overuse the lazy technique of compressing together various sorts of character growth sequences into a few minutes.
It's very annoying and shows a lack of skill on everyones part. What ever you judged bad before- will appear brilliant compared to this crap here! Honestly you are better off going to North Korea than seeing this poor excuse of a movie. Honestly I wish N. Korea would invade us just so they could stop the distribution of this awful film. It is a shame that this movie was made in Michigan, not exactly a boost to our rep. I have no idea why they chose Josh Peck for one of the male leads.
He makes Hayden Christiansen look like Marlon Brando in his prime. Now that I think about it, I might even have to suggest seeing that new Twilight instead of this. I know that's pretty extreme, but trust me it's really that bad.
It also makes sense that this was filmed back in and just now is being released. In hindsight, the studio should've just cut its losses and canned this thing for good. The one positive is perhaps it will cause people to watch the original film from the 80's which is actually watchable. Oh well, we've got Chris Hemsworth and Josh Hutcherson, right?
But wait, hell with them, let's have a greasy-looking, stoner-faced, mumbling Josh Peck as our war-torn hero. These "pretty faces" fill out the empty space where the rest of the story about a hostile North Korean attack on American soil should be.
Wait, where's the United States military? Hell with them, there's some device that shut them all down, and these kids are our last hope!
Yeah, right. If you can tie an anchor to every last one of your disbeliefs and drown them in the waters of horrible cinema, then maybe you can appreciate one or two of the well- orchestrated and intense action scenes that "Red Dawn 2.
Maybe you can even grow attached to some of the characters. But hell with all that, and hell with an ending. That's the reward for your investment. But hey, the studios probably made enough money for a sequel. So there's that. It's been a while, since I have seen something this bad.
In fact, I spent the whole screening time waiting for the movie to start making sense. To remedy the situation, US sends 3! They succeed and escape to Canada, leaving the insurgent kids alone against the enemy. The Koreans seem to be completely incompetent and untrained: Not one of them can hit a target, prisoners are rounded up at a high school football team with only a few guards, when laying siege to a building, they never bother to cover the exits, etc.
A mysterious Russian guy appears and is immediately identified as a counter insurgency expert. Despite this, he appears in the movie exactly twice and both time does nothing. On top of this, the product placement is pretty bad: at times it seems like the whole flick was shot by using ad money from rolling rock and hammermill.
I want my 12 dollars back. I came with somewhat high hopes, and I don't think I could have been more let down. The story is alright, since mostly follows the original and they didn't have much to write on their own.
But they really screwed the pooch on this one. Best Movies Of Action Films. Share this page:. Clear your history. The use of synths is almost like an arabesque, gracing the acoustic instruments with new timbres. Their use is never obvious, even when halfway through the cue the music turns more martial. But overall, I found the score to be as dated in sound as the movie is in subject. The release is beautifully done, cleanly remastered, lovely to hear, and a nice tribute, but there are better scores if you want to hear Poledouris at his peak.
If any information appears to be missing from this page, contact us and let us know! Net Soundtrack. Net Search Register Login. Music From Red Dawn Music By Basil Poledouris. Purchase Soundtrack Official Site. So too did other directors. They tried again at that studio when it was being run by Frank Yablans. Senior vice-president for production Peter Bart , who remembers it as a "sharply written anti-war movie The script's chances of being filmed increased when Kevin Reynolds became mentored by Steven Spielberg who helped him make Fandango.
Bart recalls that things changed when "the chieftains at MGM got a better idea. Instead of making a poignant little antiwar movie, why not make a teen Rambo and turn the project over to John Milius, a genial and rotund filmmaker who loved war movies and also loved war? The idea was especially popular with a member of the MGM board of directors, General Alexander Haig , the former Nixon chief of staff, who yearned to supervise the film personally and develop a movie career.
Bart claims he made a last minute attempt to get Reynolds to direct the film and went to see Spielberg. However, by this stage Fandango was in rough cut, and Bart sensed that Spielberg was disappointed in the film and would not speak up for Reynolds. Milius set about rewriting the script.
He and Haig devised a backstory in which the circumstances of the invasion would take place; this was reportedly based on Hitler's proposed plans to invade the USA. Milius saw the story as a Third World liberation struggle in reverse; Haig introduced Nicaragua and suggested that, with the collapse of NATO, a left-wing Mexican regime would participate in the Soviet invasion, effectively splitting the U.
Other changes included a shift in focus from conflict within the group to conflict between the teens and their oppressors, and the acceleration of the ages of some of the characters from early teens to high school age and beyond. Milius later said, "I see this as an anti-war movie in the sense that if both sides could see this, maybe it wouldn't have to happen. I think it would be good for Americans to see what a war would be like. The film isn't even that violent — the war shows none of the horrors that could happen in World War III.
In fact, everything that happened in the movie happened in World War Two. Bart says Yablans pushed through filming faster than Milius wanted because MGM needed a movie over the summer. Milius wanted more time to plan, including devising futuristic weaponry and to not shoot over winter, but had to accede.
The Pentagon withdrew its cooperation from the film. Powers Boothe was selected instead. Thomas Howell as Robert Morris. Lea Thompson as Erica Mason. Charlie Sheen as Matt Eckert. Darren Dalton as Daryl Bates. Jennifer Grey as Toni Mason. Brad Savage as Danny. Doug Toby as Arturo "Aardvark" Mondragon. The movie was filmed in and around the city of Las Vegas, New Mexico. Many of the buildings and structures which appear in the film, including a historic Fred Harvey Company hotel adjacent to the train depot, the train yard, and a building near downtown, which was repainted with the name of "Calumet, Colorado", are still there today.
An old Safeway grocery store was converted to a sound stage and used for several scenes in the movie. Before starting work on the movie, the cast underwent an intensive eight-week military training course. During that time, production crews designed and built special combat vehicles in Newhall, California. Soldier of Fortune reported that the movie's T tank was such a precise replica that "while it was being carted around Los Angeles, two CIA intelligence officers followed it to the studio and wanted to know where it had come from".
Powers Boothe later claimed, "Milius cut out the emotional life of its characters. Originally, my character was anti-war, as well as a rightist. I was supposed to be the voice of reason in that movie. But certain cuts negated my character. Lea Thompson says the original cut featured a love scene between her and Powers Boothe but it "was cut out after some previews because of the age difference.
And that was the main reason I took the movie—it was such a terrific scene. Some of the weaponry devised for the film did not work. The trailer reminded me of a video game called Freedom Fighters set in New York, you play the part of a plumber leading a resistance force against a Russian invasion which I had enjoyed too, i liked the premise, so my flatmates and I 2 English, 1 Irish and 1 American sat through the movie last night.
Once the giggles from the girls had subsided yes Swayze and Sheen look like babies and have not aged too well!
Handled clumsily and probably with an extremely limited budget it took a good 20 minutes for the B-movie ethic to settle in, but once over that the premise really started to work, and you could actually begin to empathise with the kids in their situation. The story became a bit strung out in places, the action was cardboardy and basic and the acting was But it hung together, and we all enjoyed it.
Where peoples readings of political messages come from I have no idea. I understand that America has it's extremists who hide in the mountains, stash mountains of weapons and food for just such an event, but the movie certainly doesn't satirise them. The joke in the film of the NRA bumper sticker and the dead guys "cold, dead hand" falls flat if it was intended as a purposeful message and therefore seems more to be an attempt at acknowledging the certain irony of such events in the states.
The rhetoric of the kids in their internal arguments is hollow and situational, not political, and just about manage to hold some water. The movie is and was just a great "what if? If a backstory of a continued Cold War was introduced I can well see this being ripe for a remake, and perhaps then you can apply your knee-jerk reactionary theories to it with more basis then More complex than the naysayers would have you believe sychonic 20 June Minor Spoilers Included: This movie seems to irritate certain groups of people, normally those who actually felt there wasn't much difference between the Soviet Union and the United States.
Those folks were very vocal back in the seventies and eighties, advocated a "nuclear freeze" and "U. So its not much of a surprise that they would dislike a movie that obviously heralded American values, traditions, and clearly warned against weakness in the face of enemies. Yet the move doesn't gloss over a great deal, in places its quite brutal and its hardly a glorification of violence. In one of the more interesting scenes a Russian soldier, young, funny, wants to have his picture taken.
Minutes later, he's desperately crawling up hill as he fearfully cries out that "Help, they're killing me! It's actually quite a disturbing scene. In another, the partisans, high school students mostly, end up executing both a helpless Russian soldier and an American turncoat.
Though I thought that the fighting between an American resistance and heavily armed Russian Army wasn't particularly well done, the basic idea was sound. In fact, I think it might be interesting to watch this movie after watching "The Beast" with George Dzundza, the only movie I can think of that portrays the guerilla war in Afganistan in the eighties.
Both the guerilla fighers, many young and poorly trained, of Afganistan and Vietnam should instruct those who think a lightly armed American resistance couldn't give a mechanized, brutal Red Army fits. Maybe they ought to look into Chechnya as well. I find the movie to be a bit more complex than those who simplistically assign it to the jingoistic flag waving bin; rather I think it is more a warning to Americans to avoid taking liberties for granted, that we are not immune from the dangers lurking in the world, and that there are those who wish us ill, and that martial virtues should not be so easily dismissed.
Its rather unsettling to watch American citizens machine gunned by a foreign tank in a small western town, but it happens in this movie. And suffice it to say that the story hardly has a very happy ending. I'd suggest this to anyone who has an interest in understanding the Cold War, particularly as it developed in the Eighties to its successful conclusion under the basic ideas advocated by this movie.
What started out as one-sided conservative propaganda turned into a unique war movie that is beautifully shot and masterfully plays on your emotions. I was not prepared to like this movie starting out.
I saw things like, "Commies are the devil" and "Boys shouldn't cry" and "Here boys, protect these girls" and "Murrica is awesome and of course we will win. The boys in the group still showed emotional vulnerability. The girl characters became just as capable in combat as the boys. The young freedom fighters representing America experienced many triumphs, but also a lot of grief and suffering. Even the Communist villains showed signs of humanity, particularly towards the end.
Though this movie appears to be a pro-American propaganda piece playing on a prevalent fear in the 80's, it is actually an emotional drama that shows a young group of people as they cope with trauma and struggle to survive in a hellish landscape.
It is a work of art and should be treated as such. Well wow This film is about the fictional Soviet invasion of the U. The motivation of the enemy seems to be to spread world communism Wait, a major world superpower forcibly invading a sovereign country with the intention of installing it's own style of government?
Throw in the references to the Soviet's despicable invasion of Afghanistan Its the 80's remember and this movie is perfect for anyone who can enjoy a big, yummy, spoonful of socratic irony. All in all this is a film for those who just want to laugh at what filmmakers used to get away with or Patrick Swayze's attempts to be a brooding, manly leader. Uriah43 6 June This film begins in a small town in Colorado some time in the month of September with Cuban soldiers parachuting next to the local high school and opening fire on everyone within sight.
Soon a massive army has taken over the town with only a few teenagers being able to escape the hail of bullets all around. So with nowhere else to go they load up on supplies and head to the mountains not too far away to plan their next move. Not long afterward they learn that World War III has broken out and with the death or imprisonment of everyone they love they decide to form their own small partisan army and take the fight to enemy. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that even though the entire premise is totally absurd, the movie itself wasn't too bad overall.
At least, it wasn't when it first came out. However, having seen it again 35 years later I can honestly say that it hasn't aged very well and has to be taken within the context of being a product of its time. That being said, while it certainly wasn't a great film by any means, I still got some enjoyment out of it and for that reason I have rated it accordingly.
Purposely Misunderstood cyberbronson-1 13 February I've yet to see a serious review of John Milius' magnum opus, Red Dawn. For the most part, the liberal critics dismiss any discussion of its technical and dramatic strengths and instead focus entirely on the message. The thrust of complaints against Milius and Red Dawn amount to probably some of the most disingenuous criticisms in cinematic history.
I've always wondered how liberals, who draw the line at "it's bad" when it comes to understanding war, have the gall to judge the credulity of any piece in the genre.
My main objection with the Left's attack on "Red Dawn" is their refusal to acknowledge that Milius' focus on the Wolverines represents only a snapshot of a far larger, broader story the remains ever present in the background.
When critics complain about how incredulous it is for the Soviets and their Latin allies to attack a small town in Colorado, they purposely misunderstand the message Milius explicitly delivered through the Wolverine's conversation with Col. Tanner--these kids are only a small set of actors in a much larger war.
It doesn't take that much of a mental exercise necessary to justify the period's well thought out belief that the Soviets could exploit their adventures in Latin America to invade the United States.
Between Vietnam and the "nuclear freeze" movement, right before the Reagan build up, the West was essentially in retreat throughout the entire globe. Whether or not the Soviets could've succeeded in this gamble is another debate, but "Red Dawn" is a story of extraordinary times and circumstances albeit with careful attention to the real world.
Even so, the focus on the realism of Red Dawn's background story is an attempt to get away from the really other stunning aspects of the film. You may disagree with the conservative themes in this film, but one thing John Milius does very well is let his views flow naturally from the experiences of his characters and the realities of war. There is no Rush Limbaugh avatar reaching into the film to preach through Patrick Swayze or Harry Dean Stanton, something Aaron Sorkin can't help but injecting into the endless banter that has become staple to the "The West Wing.
Yet more often than not they dismiss this important part of the film's success without a single attempt to specify their objections.
You might ask what people should expect in the way of expressions and dialogue from high school kids who've been conditioned into guerillas , and I can't say that the kids in the "Lord of the Flies" featured the timely emoting that we see from say Swayze's character when they first arrive in the mountains. The terse, yet clearly emotional and meaningful chatter between the Wolverines is strikingly credible, and surpassed only by Harry Dean Stanton's powerful performance as a Midwestern blue collar thrown into a detention center and Ron O'Neal's slow yet well paced descent into disillusionment with his tiny slice of the war.
There's wide agreement that the cinematics were decent given the budget involved and the technology of the time. The art direction apparantly was so successful that two CIA case officers were alarmed by the attention to detail given to the T main battle tank mock ups.
Over all, Red Dawn maybe one of the most original, well done pieces from the s. I like watching movies and love to write good reviews of movies and Red Dawn was a film that I had missed in its original release back in the 80s.
I was looking forward to seeing it.If Tom Cruise believes "it worked for Will Smith" when he also attempted to make his own son a star in Red Dawn, he's probably just jumping on another couch. An EMP can apparently shut down not only the country's entire electrical system, but also the whole U.S. government, armed forces, police, firemen, ambulances, backup systems,