Movie Theater New Red Dawn

I read the script back in 2008 because the studio I worked for at the time was going to work on it. It was planned as a trilogy with very little to do with the original other than the names of characters.
 
I liked it. The original was pretty low quality but still great. This one was better quality. I didn't like thor's brother, his character was a deuch but the actor was also...not very good.
 
Lots of political messages. It was not as good as the first. It does give a better how to get into fighting than the first one. It was worth watching I have seen some real bad movies. It could have been much better but it was not horrible compared to what is being put out.
 
It was entertaining but it didn't motivate me as much as the 1st one did. I saw the first one when it was new and we hated Russians back then. I will say I feel better being prepared for N Koreans than zombies
 
I had heard from everyone I knew that had seen it that it was a total piece of garbage but still felt like it needed to watch it just to be sure on the off chance it was alright since I loved the original. It definitely wasn't great but it did exceed my very low expectations. Not exactly a glowing review I guess.
 
I didn't see it because of the number of people that said it was horrible. That's too bad because it could have been a great movie. Even the original was a little far fetched and they lacked the technology to make a realistic invasion movie in the budget they had. The remake could have been infinitely better in those terms and the trailers made it look like they had succeeded. Unfortunately, political correctness got in the way because we wouldn't want to piss off our good friends the Chi-Coms. What was a plausible story had to be reworked into a ridiculous one because apparently the North Koreans are the only people left that can be villains.
 
Remake was atrocious. Had none of what made the original work and if you are between the ages of 35 and 50 then you know what I'm referring to. They did a lot more with much less in the original and honestly unless you were a military expert at the time, the Soviet equipment looked so authentic the CIA sent agents to the area where they were filming due to reports of Soviet tanks in the area.

The scenery and location of the original brought so much character to the movie you just felt like you wanted to be there, and the story's timing couldn't have been better.
 
the Soviet equipment looked so authentic the CIA sent agents to the area where they were filming due to reports of Soviet tanks in the area.

I went to a screening of the original a few years ago in LA and they had a Q&A afterwards with the production designer and he talked about how they made the Mi-24s from leased Puma helicopters that serviced oil platforms, but the ZSU-23-4 they built was so accurate that one day two guys showed up at the fabrication shop and asked about it. "There's only one of these in the US and this isn't it. Where did you get this?" Apparently the CIA was shocked they had built such an accurate replica, immediately making them verify the only one they had in US possession at the time which had been captured by the Israelis.
 
The new one sucked balls. Basically they took a great movie and turned it into a lame ass celebration of state worship. It struck me as another shitty C or D grade flick.
 
Made a great movie into a pile of shit.

I was even willing to give it the benefit of the doubt until the end. I was pissed off at the ending...and trying to explain to my 20 year old nephew why it pissed me off compared to the original was even harder, mainly because of the nanny state that has been so ingrained into the younger generation now.
 
I can't believe so many of you have watched what was so obviously a bad idea for a movie. I still haven't seen it and won't. The whole premise is flawed, NK? Come on, the old movie was good because it was realistic (Ruskies). What this movie needed to be good was a no-name cast and a legit enemy that the people watching could actually believe i.e China/Mexico/US/etc..
 
I didn't think it was a bad redo of the original movie based on today's times. Though it sucked compared to the original, most sequel's do, it wasn't too bad. What we have to remember is what we were working with at the time. The "kids" of today will look at the new rendition in the same way we saw the original.


Was the new Star Trek worthy by original standards, no. Was the new Star Trek a good movie, yes

Was the new Total Recall worthy by original standards, no...decent movie, yes

Were the newer Star Wars movies worthy of the title "Star wars", No, were they decent movies...ok, bad example

Which was better the original True Grit or the Remake?

Point being, we always thing the original is better...sometimes it is but not always.
 
Last edited:
The new Red Dawn movie sucked donkey balls. There is no getting around that fact. The character development was not done in the script, which means it didn't happen in the movie. The "action" was pretty weak. The acting was just bad. Those key facts make a bad movie, regardless of a remake or not.

The original movie came out when tensions were high with the Commies and the threat of war was very real. Today, we have a threat of terrorists, but no on really fears an all out war with any country that could threaten our shores.
Just a bad movie. My wife got off of the couch after about 45 minutes, she was the smart one.
 
I enjoyed it, It was not the same as the first but if you let it stand alone it was not bad. amd a lot of the the gun play was accurate at least for a hollywood production. sorry you all didn't like it.