Red Dawn (1984) User Reviews

Of its time, but still entertaining.

[rocknrelics · 7/10 · 31 July 2020]

You can either sit there and pick plot holes in this or just enjoy the ride, I did the latter. Had never heard of this until recently, when I saw a synopsis, and thought it would be my kind of thing. As someone who grew up, during the cold War, it was a time where you never knew what could happen, so those that find this far fetched couldn't have been living at the time, anything was possible back then (is it much different now?).

The film is decently acted, and you're dropped into the action within minutes, there's very few places where the film drags.

I bought the blu ray to see it, and as an aside, if you can get it cheap fine, but don't pay over the odds as it's one of the worst blu rays picture quality wise in my collection.

Definitely worth seeing once and making your own mind up about it.

An entertaining action movie. Simple as that.

[Kharnivore2099 · 7/10 · 11 May 2019]

It's no masterpiece, but reading some of the reviews here...you'd think it was an affront to humanity and that some people has been personally harmed by its existence.

It's an action movie, folks. Don't get your communist panties in a twist. Just kick back, enjoy it and get off your soapbox.

It obviously touched a nerve

[doveshooter · 7/10 · 29 September 2005]

Reading previous commentary, I'm amused by the violent reaction this movie still elicits. The ranting of previous reviewers indicates the movie touched a nerve. I have seen really, really bad movies and Red Dawn is certainly not as bad as the ratings it has received here.

As is so often the case, many previous reviewers are criticizing the film because its premise conflicts with their political philosophy. I wonder how they would have rated this film had the characters been teen-aged members of an all-black football team who become partisans fighting bigoted southern whites in a 1960s civil war that never occurred. Would they be so harsh if the movie were about a group of teenage Jewish soccer team members fighting the Nazis in World War II? they might not have rated it nine or 10 stars but I'd bet they would have given it more than one star. Given the current political climate, they might even receive it more warmly if the characters were Iraqi teenagers fighting Americans.

I understand the temptation to judge movies based on your own preferences rather than the movie's own merits. I recently watched Easy Rider for the first time and absolutely could have kicked myself for wasting the two hours or so it took the silly drivel to play out. Were I to rate it strictly on the way I felt about the movie -- the silly situations at the commune where 50 hippies are supposed to live all winter on about a half acre of wheat, about enough to produce a loaf of bread, the laborious acid dropping scene, the cartoonishly villainous red necks, the lame acting (other than Nicholson) -- I guess I'd have to give it about a one-star rating. But it was a beautifully filmed movie and it obviously spoke to people at that time. So a more valid assessment from my perspective would be that it's an anachronism that seems a bit silly today but obviously had merit in context.

I believe Red Dawn touched something in young people of the mid-80s in the same way Easy Rider touched young people in the late 60s. Sift through the silliness of both movies and you find something people were looking for. Prior to this movie, young people were told that if World War III came, they would either be swallowed by an irresistible communist onslaught or fried in a matter of seconds by a nuclear explosion. Red Dawn said to them, "If the time comes, you will not be helpless. You will fight back and win." It was an entirely unique message at the time and one people were longing to hear. In fact, The United States was already fighting back and won it's greatest victory over its most formidable foe without direct armed conflict and bloodshed because of visionary and resolute political leadership.

From the time of its release until today, Red Dawn has been roundly criticized for the implausibility of the plot. It's quite true that the communist bloc was not capable of a successful invasion of the United States in 1984. But for those who failed to grasp this, Red Dawn was not a documentary. The prologue establishes the circumstances under which the invasion occurred and the action that proceeds from that premise is possible. Would communist troops shoot up a school? Their battle record indicates that if they saw it as or mistook it for a tactical objective, they most certainly would. Would they shoot civilians? Is there anybody out there so ignorant to suggest they wouldn't?

Good Points about Red Dawn: *The action sequences are well done and look realistic. For instance, there's a scene where a plane drops a bomb. You see the fireball first and then hear the sounds. That's a nice, realistic touch. *The actors handle their weapons properly *Beautiful photography *There's some good chemistry between some of the actors *The outcome is typical of what happens in partisan fighting. Partisans typically enjoy initial success because of surprise and knowledge of the terrain. But they usually eventually succumb to better-trained, better-equipped troops *I liked the musical score

Bad points about Red Dawn: *The communists are a tad too stupid for too long *The use of horses is a stretch. *Some of the teenage high-fiving and exuberance will make you groan *Some (but not all) of the dialog and acting is awfully stiff

In short, it's an action picture that will entertain people who like action pictures. It has a unique plot line that has now become an anachronism. At it takes a jab at one of Hollywood's scared cows, communism which is refreshing. Nobody should be ashamed of making it, acting in it or enjoying watching it.

Politically, the real question is not why Hollywood made a film like Red Dawn. It is rather, why did 50 years of totalitarian communist oppression spawn so few films critical of communism? Why are there seemingly scores of movies about McCarthyism and none about the Soviet gulag system? Schindler's List shows that Hollywood can make an incredible film, a film so compelling you can't take your eyes off of it, about something so horrible you can hardly bear to think about it. Stalin's body count exceeds Hitler's yet there is no Schindler's List for the Gulag. And that is something to be ashamed of.

Fascinating relic from the 80s

[Wizard-8 · 1 February 1999]

I saw this movie as a teenage not long after it was released on video for the first (and not the last!) time. I watched a large part of it tonight on TBS, and while watching, I tried to recall my initial thoughts when I saw it as a youth.

I do remember liking it as a teenager, though I also remember that I did find the premise a bit hard to swallow. (America placed in such a vulnerable position and without any real allies? And being overrun so quickly?) Still, there WAS still a threat of some kind between the two superpowers. Seeing people my age forced to flee, and then fight back for their freedom was something I'd never seen before - usually teenagers were characters in sex comedies. I suppose that's why this movie stuck so much in my mind, and I'd imagine myself in such a situation, fighting and killing those damned bloodthirsty commies!

Seeing the movie again was very interesting. The action scenes are still good, the movie travels at a swift pace, the cinematography is impressive. I also saw signs that writer/director Milius, though right-wing in real life, wasn't taking everything seriously here. Witness the scene where a tank pulls up to a small gas station and we hear "ding-ding!"

While watching, though, I was struck by my change of viewing, due to the end of the cold war. Did I really feel any kind of fear or threat? Of course, times are different now. But still...quite interesting to see how different your feelings are fifteen years later.

It makes you wonder: In 15 years, how will we react to the politics of action movies in the late 90s, with our enemies now being Arab terrorist. Could we be thinking differently in 2014? Quite possible.

Triggered?

[brianehill · 7/10 · 23 March 2020]

The problem with people/critics now days, is they take themselves way too serious. Just grab some popcorn and relax! And yes, those of us that grew up during the cold war sometimes took our patriotism to the limit even with good old fashioned corny action flics.

Misunderstood? What's to misunderstand?

[Gungrave · 7/10 · 24 January 2006]

Well, I cant honestly say this movie evoked any sort of political argument or emotive response from myself, unlike a lot of some of the reviewers on here (in fact a few seem to have taken the film or its reviews as a personal affront!). The film was an entertaining, nostalgic and highly commercial action movie from a time past.....and on a base level I just plain enjoyed it. It made me smile! 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!) the opening parachute invasion got quite a buzz. 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...well....not there really, but I don't think that was down to a lack of talent. 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.....?" and an amusing 80's Hollywood schtick action movie, no more, no less. 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...who know?

A Good War Movie

[ThomasColquith · 7/10 · 27 November 2021]

"Red Dawn" (from 1984) is a solid entry in the war movie genre. It's a genre I'm not a big fan of, but one which can provide a needed break of mindless action in between all those talkative dramas and rom coms out there. It's well made and offers a plausible fictional scenario for the action. Good scenery abounds as well. I thought that it was well acted and had emotion and depth, not becoming too shallow or hokey, though the dialogue is sparse. It's not earth shattering though, as war is war, and there are only so many ways to tell that story. But I would recommend this film if you are looking for something of this persuasion. I do not see this as a political piece or propaganda for any side at all. I see it as a film about humans and what they sometimes do. My rating 7/10.

Still lmao...

[anangrygerbil · 1/10 · 27 March 2008]

Well wow... just wow.

This film is about the fictional Soviet invasion of the U.S. and the resistance movement formed by some American teenagers.

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.

Even if you can suspend disbelief to the point where it's plausible that a handful of untrained teenagers can massacre scores of elite paratroopers the movie will still force-feed you clichés until you feel physically ill.

The invading Soviets enjoy nothing more than wholesale destruction, not to mention killing and/or raping just about every American they can find, while the stoic young resistance fighters variously avenge their parents or 'become men' in a yawn inspiring fashion.

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.

Great Flick

[Akos5372 · 8/10 · 2 May 2006]

Being a Russian American I found myself switching allegiances during this movie. I must say I loved this flick. I've always been fascinated with the cold war, and the what if scenarios. If you can relate, then this movie is a must see. I thought this movie showed a very strong human side to the realities of a partisan's life, and I believe it was fair. It wasn't an American Rambo, where one man takes down a whole Soviet battalion. No it was a powerful story of what people must conform to in order to deal with the outcome of invasion of ones motherland, and how people, the ordinary person deals with this reality and how they're transformed by it. The United States has never been invaded, and I found this film to be a great prediction of how if an invasion ever took place the American people would fight to the bitter end if they had to. In a way these partisans reminded me of the Soviet partisans of WW2, and how they fought on. This is a great movie which is not overdone, but is very realistic, and fair. The acting is not brilliant, but is good, and the whole movie works. I absolutely loved it!

Avenge me. Avenge me!

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 22 May 2017]

Political paranoia time. This obviously very memorable 80s product of the Cold War puts forth a chilling "what if" scenario. In this case, the Cold War has a different outcome, and legions of Russians, Nicaraguans, and Cubans aggressively invade the U.S. of A. However, a small band of high school students in Colorado are able to head for the hills. While they are in seclusion, they begin to use whatever supplies and weapons they've acquired, and rise up righteous to kick tons of evil Commie ass.

If you can lay aside your personal political beliefs, this does function as an interesting, sometimes believable action thriller that forces people to answer a serious question. If your own country were invaded like this, would YOU be able to rise to the challenge? It's because the premise touches people in that way that makes it a compelling enough entertainment. Obviously, the war and violence here are not glorified, but are treated as something unavoidable. Our band of heroes do have quite a bit of success, but they're also not infallible, and aren't experienced soldiers despite whatever training they might have had.

Many of the bad guys are pretty one dimensional, but not all of them. One of the most intriguing characters is a Cuban colonel (Ron "Superfly" O'Neal) who has his doubts about the whole conflict, and who yearns to be back home with his beloved.

Action scenes and stunts are well executed by Terry Leonard, and the movie does manage to have some fairly punchy gore despite a PG-13 rating. At its best, "Red Dawn" is vivid, disconcerting, and rousing, perfectly punctuated by Basil Poledouris' soaring score.

The kids are played by Patrick Swayze, Charlie Sheen, Lea Thompson, C. Thomas Howell, Jennifer Grey, and others, and they do alright, but the older generation is particularly strong: Ben Johnson, Lane Smith, Harry Dean Stanton, Frank McRae, Roy Jenson, etc. "Red Dawn" does hit its stride upon the introduction of the Powers Boothe character, and then the top dog villain played by the eternally bad ass William Smith (who speaks fluent Russian).

"Red Dawn" is the kind of film that can engender purely personal responses. Still, it's undeniable that it truly does hit a nerve. It would make a fine double feature with "Invasion U.S.A.", a Chuck Norris vehicle from the following year.

Directed by John Milius, who also receives screenplay credit with Kevin Reynolds.

Seven out of 10.

Red Dawn??? False Dawn more like....

[markymark70 · 2/10 · 16 January 2009]

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. I would have been 14 at the time of release and maybe it would have hit a more resonant nerve if I had seen it at that age - but now it is simply dreadful.

In 1983 - The Outsiders - directed by Coppola starred Howell, Swayze and Dalton. It is a fantastic film, a great story, good acting and superb directing. The next year - 1984 - all three combine again in Red Dawn to abysmal results. What happened? The cast for Red Dawn was a good one - Charlie Sheen, Lea Thompson and Jennifer Grey adding more youth and Powers Boothe and Harry Dean Stanton providing some experience. But Milius' handling of the script, dialogue, action scenes, sound, everything is terrible.

A quick summary of the film's premise is this - soviet troops invade America at the start of WW3. A few teenagers escape to the mountains and wage a guerrilla style attack on the forces over a number of months.

What is wrong with this movie?

1. The characters. No time is given to their background before the attack starts. And they are so cardboard that they do not even come close to discussing the situation they find themselves in - they simply accept it. Their whole lives change in the blink of an eye and they act as if they are ordering Pepsi because there is no Coke left.

2. The acting. If the characters were poorly developed - the acting was embarrassing. Howell lost all he had gained from The Outsiders within 2 minutes of being on-screen. I blame Milius for this as Howell was great in Outsiders and subsequently great in The Hitcher. In between those films Howell lost out on the Marty McFly part in BTTF and subsequently - lost the franchise to being a very successful actor. All Milius' fault? Maybe not - but seeing as Lea Thompson was in BTTF and in this too - Howell must feel aggrieved. Stanton's 'Avenge me' scene is toe-curdling bad.

3. The action scenes. Repetitive scenes of our unknown cast of Brat-Packers wandering around the Rockies blasting everything with a red star. The scenes are slow, tedious and downright boring after the umpteenth scenario. The scandal here is that you can see the amount of money spent on explosions / tanks etc. is quite a lot - but there is zero tension in the build up to these. It is like watching a series of unrelated incidents carried out by a bunch of different people every time. You cannot even make out who is doing what.

4. The Dialogue. The amount of times dreadful lines are delivered by incompetent actors is astounding. Did anyone even read this script beforehand? Sometimes, I thought the editing room was having a laugh - for in some scenes it looks like the kids are not even fully ready for the upcoming scene. Their delivery is abysmal but in truth the words that were on the paper, embarrassingly bad. Boothe's death scene is especially bad. As he is shot through the back and hanging from the turret of a soviet tank - he has to deliver his last words to the kids "Shoot straight. For a change." Then he dies. My God, I'd say he was delighted that day to finally get off home with his cheque. Not one to show his grandkids that's for sure.

5. The Camera-work. Bar the set-up introductory shots for the changing of the seasons - which consisted of 2 or 3 shots of the Rockies during December, January etc. - the cinematography was downright shoddy. Everything seemed too far away. The camera was too far from the actors to hear what they were saying (the sound obviously re-dubbed on a sound stage afterwards) and to see emotion in their faces. If the audience is not close enough to the actors to feel their emotions - then we cannot identify with them. The whole thing looked like watching a football match from the very highest seat in the stadium.

6. The Music. Overbearing, intrusive and dominating every scene it is involved with by beating it down so hard - your ears start to bleed.

7. The Plot. The overall premise is not bad but the execution of it terrible. The soviets must have been thick as planks for we learn during the movie that they are on high lookout for our teenage gang - yet they can walk freely among the town, among the soldiers as if they were invisible. Remember, this is a small hick town - not New York - they should be noticed. Where did the Wolerines get all the ammo, guns, RPGs, Claymores, machine guns for their attacks? Okay they got some supplies from Howell's father's shop - a very convenient gun/grocery/camping shop - but do they sell Claymores? I don't think so. It's also hard to swallow the fact that a well organised machine like the Russian army will succumb to a bunch of kids running around the mountains - it just does not ring true. Howell's last stand against the Russian helicopters beggars belief. He is so careful all through the movie not to expose himself but yet decides out of the blue to stand in the open and fire a tiddlywink gun at 2 Russian attack choppers - only to get killed. Why? Too much stuff here to mention but take it on faith that it was bad.

All in all a really bad film made by a terrible director.

2/10 - Avoid at all costs.

well shaped propaganda piece

[jthaule · 9/10 · 31 May 2018]

As propaganda artists go John Milius is up there with Eisenstein and Riefenstahl. In terms of right wing paranoia in the eighties this film is not only the perfect showcase specimen, it is also full of desirable teenage heart throb actors making the paranoia so much more relatable to the average movie goer.

Technically speaking the film is a testament to a perfectionistic preoccupation with the Soviet union as the enemy. Rarely will you see a film from the eighties with actual Soviet weaponry (usually you'll see Chinese copies, such as in Rambo) or this attention to detail. And as far as the plot is concerned, it might seem ridiculous today given that we know perfectly well that the Soviet Union was collapsing from within at the time the film was made, however this film is based on contemporary strategic analysis from various US defence and intelligence institutions.

One often overlooked aspect of this film, as well as Milius' other efforts, is that while the film is certainly pro war, pro guns and masculine to the point of being kitsch is that war is realistically portrayed as having human costs. psychological trauma, death and suffering is integral to the story, and never glossed over.

While this film is far from my own political views, it's truly a masterpiece and deserves attention as a diorama of a prolific world view in the eighties.

In Defense of Red Dawn

[ka2006 · 6/10 · 20 December 2007]

Somebody called this "possibly the worst film of all time" which is ridiculous. I've seen Red Dawn numerous times & although the film is very flawed, it's just asinine to think this might even 'possibly' be the 'worst film of all time'. By contemporary standards it's pure fargin' ART compared to say, Fantastic 4. In it's own time...how 'bout Dirty Dancing? But, "OF ALL TIME"!?!?! You can't just throw a statement like that around when there's garbage like Day of the Dead 2: Contagium out there. Red Dawn at least has a certain amount of entertainment value in it's well executed vicariously cathartic vengeance theme (suckers me in every time)....AND you can laugh at all the little goofs like Colonel Bella expressing his previous allegiance to insurgents in such countries as "ANGOLIA", or the main premise of a modern day ground attack on this country...until you start thinking about how many of our troops are currently really far away....hmmm....

Plus, this is a definitive 80's flick (like Weird Science or ET)...and Patrick Cheeezy, C. Thomas Howell, Lea Thompson & Powers Boothe provide memorable presences....if not performances.

Although director John Milius appears to have rested on his dubious laurels through much of the production, I still feel that this film, over time, has achieved iconic placement in the grand scheme of things. It belongs in the time capsule, faults and all.

WOLVERINES!

Great if your ten years old or seriously crazy. Amazingly bad otherwise.

[malachiX2000-1 · 1/10 · 19 April 2007]

So lets cover what happens in this movie. The Russians decide to invade the USA by sneaking in via Mexico. The first target the Russians chose to hit when invading the world's greatest super-power is none other than............a local high school in a small town in the middle of no where (a strategic stroke of genius if ever I saw one). Unfortunately for us, the high school was apparently the majority of the USA's military and now the whole country is on the verge of being ruled by the Soviet Union. And the Soviets aren't taking prisoners either. After murdering everyone in the school, they proceed to execute every American who they deem as a threat and eventually reach Nazi-levels of genocide. But when all seems darkest, a force of freedom and righteousness comes to liberate the Country. A force powerful enough to halt the Soviets in their tracks. A force made up of............about six teens with a few civilian guns. Ummm....yeah.

I remember when my friends and I used to play war as a kid. We came up with much more easy-to swallow scenarios than the one this movie is based on. I have a feeling that if we'd ever taken the time to film one of these games, our movie would have been a lot better acted than this one too. Most of the brat pack cast give some of their worst performances of the 80s (which is saying a lot) and the Russians tend to sound like they wandered in from a bad SNL skit. That said, it's hard really to blame the actors with such a awful script to work with. The only bright spot in the film is Milius's direction of the action sequences which is occasionally striking though not nearly enough to save this film. If you like Milius's style, watch Conan the Barbarian instead. At least that film knows that it's fantasy and makes its campiness work for it rather than against it.

I'm sorry I don't share the love for this film that some do. I think it's because I'm not completely and utterly crazy. Perhaps if I was, I'd enjoy this paranoid conservative wet-dream. As it stands, the film is only worth watching just so you can tell your friends about it and say, "I swear, it's a real movie."

Wayne missed the point.

[mjwalser · 29 September 2004]

Previous commenter Wayne missed the point... "Red Dawn" does not glorify violence and war. Far from it... the movie tries to show just how gruesome and de-humanizing an extended conflict like this can be. The occupying Soviet and Cuban/Nicaraguan soldiers are not portrayed as monsters. In fact, there are many moments when they are shown for exactly what they are... often young and frequently scared soldiers, doing the job they have been told to do. There are certain individual characters that are shown as ruthless killers, but they are generally the exception. The movie is less an action film, and more a cautionary tale of taking things too far and going over a precipice from which it is not easy to return. Neitzsche said "Those that do battle with monsters should take care, lest monsters they become." The Wolverines start out as a band of scared kids running for their lives, and grow into guerilla fighters forced to fight for their freedom. Eventually, they take it too far, and start to lose their emotional connection to what they are doing. It's hard to say more without giving away some key points of the ending sequences, but suffice to say that the kids come perilously close to fulfilling Neitzsche's warning. Those that take this movie simply at face value will lose a lot of the potential impact, and will likely miss the messages contained therein.

A cut above the rest - which ain't saying much

[withhold_name · 6/10 · 9 August 2009]

*********************Spoiler Alert************************

Much of the technical criticism mentioned by others of "Red Dawn" is justified. The notion that a group of untrained teenagers could take on even a poorly motivated army like Cuba's or the now-extinct Soviet Union's is not credible. The best part of the movie is watching the teenagers struggle with the morality of guerrilla warfare. I give it a 6 out of 10.

But "Red Dawn" is well worth watching for one reason. It represents one of the last movies Hollywood put out that did not look like a joint venture between the Democrat National Committee and Code Pink.

Even in 1984 the "blockbuster" mentality was already changing the face of Hollywood. Every year lefty movie studio moguls churn out brain-destroying fare such as "Syriana", "Brokeback Mountain", "W", "Rendition", "Stop Loss", "Che", "Good Night and Good Luck", and "Redacted" by the truckload. All of these movies were wildly popular with critics, and not a few won major awards. All of them (not coincidentally) flopped at the box office. If it were not for blockbuster movies like "Spiderman", the "Star Wars" series, "Transformers", and the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy riding to the rescue like the cavalry, Hollywood would require a Federal bailout of epic proportions (pun semi-intended).

But in 1984 there was still some independent thinking to be had in Hollywood. If nothing else, "Red Dawn" is interesting to contrast with "The Day After", another move that came out at roughly the same time. The latter is memorable for the anti-American paranoia that was rising in power and influence and would soon swamp Hollywood.

Not great, but there's a lot of appeal nonetheless and it's memorable

[squirrel_burst · 6/10 · 22 April 2015]

"Red Dawn" does a good job setting up its somewhat fantastical scenario but it's very much a product of its time and might not ring the same way it did when it was first released. I still feel like has a certain amount of appeal, but if you love this movie it's mostly the nostalgia talking. When the United States is invaded by the Soviet Union and its Cuban and Nicaraguan allies, the Americans are overwhelmed. While this Third World War rages, our story begins to take place. A small group of high school students arm themselves, hide in the woods and resist the invaders with guerrilla warfare, assembling underneath the name of their high school mascot, the Wolverines.

The special effects are good and to someone that would be genuinely fearful of an invasion by the soviets this could be a dream come true or a really frightening scenario. I enjoyed the fact that the film gets into its premise right away, telling anyone that doesn't buy the premise to promptly leave the theatre or stop complaining about the events that are taking place. The film also does a good job portraying the long passage of time and the changes that happen to the characters as they become more accustomed to guerilla warfare. Where the film doesn't work is in the emotional growth and towards the end where our heroes make decisions that feel out of character and downright stupid. While I was able to buy the premise fully, I did find that this story doesn't feel as fleshed out as it should be. I'm leaning more towards "video game-like" than "epic" when choosing what word to define the storyline, despite the fact that there is a full-blown war going on.

If you can suspend your disbelief (and the film does take the time to set itself up as a possible scenario so it shouldn't be too hard) and put yourself in the mentality of the red scare you will get a kick out of this, though you might leave wanting more when it comes to the story and characters. (On VHS, November 21, 2012)

"It's kinda strange isn't it?

[mbramsaur · 6/10 · 5 March 2022]

How the mountains pay us no attention at all. You laugh or you cry, the wind just keeps on blowing."

Red Dawn💥 A compelling plot. Russian troops fall from the sky and on to a high school football field, where they cause a great panic, and eventually, the small Russian army, takes over the small town in Colorado. Meanwhile, a group of teens find a way to escape to the forest, where they try to wait out, until it's all over. But nothing has changed for a couple of months, and they find themselves faced with the decision to take the fight to them, though they are few in number.

The film is fairly realistic, it shows what it would be like if it happened to America one day.

Good acting, okay camera work, lots of fire power, good number of explosions and a cool film experience👍. I'd definitely recommend.

Jingoistic, pro war, horrible piece of CRAP

[sushicourier · 1/10 · 3 June 2002]

This film tries at every turn to get the audience in a hateful spirit. It demonizes Russia and it's people. It is filled with God-aweful over acting, bad directing and bad editing. One of the worst pieces of dreck I have ever seen. Do not watch or rent this insulting piece of garbage.

A dire warning of a potential future

[sjwestbrooks · 8/10 · 5 March 2022]

When this movie came out, critics slammed it for the "silliness of its alarmist concept." But now...people see that it is not. As of the date I write this, Russia is invading Ukraine, and many are calling the invasion "a real life Red Dawn."

This movie is a lot better, and a bit more haunting and inspiring, than the critics say. The cast, the effects, the script, the camera work, the sets, the props...everything about this film is professional, to the point, and well made. This movie makes us ask the bitter question, "What if this happened in my town? What would I do?" In all honesty, I'm afraid that most people's answers would be, "I'd give in. I'd surrender. I'd obey my new rulers."

Next time you see or hear something about Red Dawn's "alarmist concept," think of Ukraine. Think of all its civilians are going through. And then you'll realize that this movie is, in reality, a warning of how our futures - talking to everyone here - could go if we're not careful and prepared.

Call Out The Wolverines

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 9 July 2007]

The scenario depicted in Red Dawn didn't happen as we all know. The Cold War ended with a fadeout instead of a bang, the USA did not get invaded. At first glance Red Dawn seems like a quaint and ancient propaganda piece, but it still raises some interesting issues.

Note how the invasion of America happened. Lots and lots of illegal aliens crossed our borders and infiltrated from within. Back in the day Red Dawn was National Rifle Association recruiting material, today however it's the film that the strict immigration people must love the most.

Several members of the Eighties Brat Pack gave stand out performances in Red Dawn like Patrick Swayze, C. Thomas Howell, Jennifer Grey, Lea Thompson and Charlie Sheen. Considering what he's peddling now, I wonder if Charlie Sheen likes to be reminded of his participation in Red Dawn. Swayze and Howell are brothers who when the paratroop invasion happens at their high school, they zoom on out of there, take supplies, weapons and ammunition and lead a guerrilla movement in their little corner of Colorado.

It's fascinating that the northeast of the United States didn't get invaded and that was the Free Zone. You wonder if the young people in blue state America would fight as these kids do. Kids like Howell and Swayze today are what make up our Armed Forces, they are a precious commodity indeed, blood not to be spent extravagantly or unwisely.

Red Dawn is dated in some ways, relevant in others. It's super-patriotic, jingoistic, never explains really but for a brief voice over prologue why all these people don't like us. But at the same time it invokes a fighting spirit in America that I hope never dies, because we will die.

It's nice to discuss geopolitics, look for economic solutions to age old problems, try to make people respect each other's differences. When the bombs are dropped though, discussion and reason are over.

What incompetent nonsense

[lotsofwordz · 1/10 · 14 July 2007]

This film is a pile of incompetent nonsense from start to finish. So, then: the invading forces have enough men and equipment to launch half a battalion against every small American town? Really? Across the whole United States? They get this whole airborne invasion into place without the United States noticing that anything is happening? And while all this is going on, where exactly are the American armed forces? Just sitting back and letting the Cubans and the Russians take over the country? Maybe sending in a half-hearted (sorry, tenth-hearted) response in the form of one Bell helicopter with half a dozen rockets against said half battalion? On their own soil???!!! Oh, dear ... this film falls flat on its face on plot, dialogue, production, directing, acting, continuity ... apart from that, it's not too bad: there are a couple of nice landscape shots in it.

Love this flick ...

[Colonial-Oak · 9/10 · 9 October 2018]

Yeah, I know ... not "realistic: ...

But you can't be an American and not get proud and patriotic after watching this flick.

Besides the story-line (plot), the cast was filled with a lot of recognizable, or soon to be recognizable, actors/actresses.

Red Dawn (18983) will always be a cult-classic -don;t take my woird for it, watch it yourself, then agree ... lol.

BTW, the millennial re-make wasn't 1/2 as good.

God Bless all to all American Patriots !!! ~ Colonial Oak .

Historical coincidence?

[Lgllyn · 7/10 · 31 March 2008]

Has anyone posted yet that, coincidentally, Wolverines, was the name to be given to the Nazi resistance fighters who were going to combat allied occupation forces once formal hostilities ended in Germany in 1945. I just came across this as I was reading about the German resistance to the Soviets. I think some you got this right in pointing out this was a movie, meant as entertainment, and not a documentary. It is enjoyable as the story of resistance fighters taking on, and defeating superior forces. Not great acting and some preposterous concepts but I believe it was Hitchcock who said that, to enjoy a movie, one had to suspend disbelief.

Confessions of a Socialist

[peter-bruck · 1/10 · 12 April 2009]

First of all; this movie is a bore. Normally you're around 20 minutes into a movie before the main plot starts. screen writers use this time to establish the main characters, their way of life, what they are like etcetera... this movie starts right after the credits with the invasion and it doesn't stop till the end (the movies lasts for 2 hours!!!). Maybe this sounds awesome now, but unfortunately it's nothing else then one cliché action scene arbitrarily added on the next. The only remotely thrilling scene is the one where the kids hide from a soviet patrol behind some rocks and get caught.

And could somebody tell me how the kids were able to mutate into rebel soldiers?Just by playing in the woods?

There's one more thing that I can't ignore regarding the other reviews: the politics of the movie. So please allow me one question: RD is about a high school football team fighting off the soviet invasion, right? Am I a communist because I think that's stupid???? Some said Red Dawn wouldn't dehumanize the Russians. Doesn't the movie start with soviet soldiers shooting young high school students? (I have to add; these students were actually unarmed, unlike these days). Isn't that at least a little one-sided? Did somebody really need a propaganda flick like this to feel good about themselves again? But hey, that's just me and I'm a European wimp, a godless socialist, a Robert Redforf fan and whatever else comes to your mind.