Red Dawn Remake--WTF?
 

Just a simple redo with us vs. North Korea (originally China, but apparently China said no.)

Even better is it's featuring Josh from Josh and Drake.

Due 11-21-2012, it has no real trailers yet, but it does have a website.

www.reddawnmovienews.com

I think I'm going to be sick.

Yeah, they can shove this turd. China would have made sense, but North Korea? Seriously? Maybe Red Dawn III will have us getting invaded by Somalia. LMAO

all I can say is...ugh, utter fail

I heard they were working on this quite a while ago. It must have got caught up on something. Kind of ridiculous they picked North Korea. Didn't the original have Russia, China, and all of the other communist countries together invading? N Korea couldn't invade an ant hill.

Chris Hemsworth is the new Swayze... Even Stark said it

I'd seen something about a communist coalition, but don't know much about that. The prevailing theory that I've heard was of China and of nuclear weapons, but they haven't released much about it. I believe the movie is done as the site has viewings listed, but need some extra time to not make it look so ****ing gay.

Yea, this was one of the films made by MGM a few years ago and hasnt been released due to their legal problems.

If i remember right, the Original bad guy was China, but then they deciced against it and just CGI'd over everything and made them North Korean. Its most likely crap since its been complete so long and languished, but I guess Cabin in the Woods turned out pretty good and that was another lost MGM flick.

Hmmm...sounds like the delay might have helped since these actors are alot bigger stars now than when they filmed it:



The film stars Chris Hemsworth (Pre-Thor), Josh Peck (Post-Drake and Josh) and Josh Hutchinson (Pre-Hunger Games)

China was an ally in the first one. Only remember that from the screaming chinaman comment.

Enemies were russia and cuba? Or some caribbean country.

Shit they should of done us vs. Most of the world scenario.

Even though most disagree, russia and china will be our biggestest allies as their economies keep developing.

Maybe if mexiccans got ahold of some alien weaponry we could have a more realistic movie then NK taking us over for a bit.

North Korea has a standing army of over 1 million, with a reserve army of 7.7 million. They may not have the technology, but they have a hell of a lot more troops than we do.

Take that back, you bastard

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__...rld_Police.jpg

With absolutely zero means to get them here. Our airforce would have 95% of that invasion force dead before lunch

We would annihilate them in the ocean.

Damn beat me to it

No Navy, barely any air power.


Besides, if we counted up our "reserve army" in the US it would probably be around 40 million heavily armed citizens.

IIRC in the original, they came up through Mexico and split the country in half

I doubt they could even get into Mexico unnoticed, but that's slightly more feasable

Maybe if North Korea managed to nuke every major city and government office simultaniously they could put up a fight.

This. Conservative estimates. (pun intended)

They plan on marching them here Mao Tse-tung style, recruiting along the way.

Clever. How's that going for you?


:D

The same would have been true of the Soviet Union in the original movie. If you bought into the original premise you should have no trouble with this one. Movies aren't real, but gullible people are. The original movie was entertaining, but fantasy. It was no more realistic than the new movie.

No, it isn't. But people wanted a "rah rah, America is the best!!!!" movie in the 80s so they bought into it.

I spend several months a year in South Korea (just returned Saturday). Take North Korea seriously, they are a threat. They may not be a threat to invade the US (the Soviet Union wasn't either), but trust me, they are a threat.

I agree 100%.


They just don't have the capacity to do it in a Red Dawn scenario.

Are the bad guys going to drop food on a highway to spring a trap, instead of just poisoning the food?

Well yeah, NO country is a real threat to invade the U.S., but among the list of candidates NK's pretty close to the bottom

They're a threat to South Korea. For about a week.

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...boo9fTls9Io1wA

Wolverines!

We can hope our technology can overcome their millions of troops. I hope to never see if you are right, especially since there is about a 30% chance I would be there when it happens (since I spend about 30% of my year there).

Unfortunately, they are also a threat to the US, both militarily and economically. Thankfully there are people who understand this and do their part to prevent it. You are welcome.

I hope to never find out either, but they're not a significant threat to the US. Glad to hear you believe in your mission.

No doubt they would cause a ****ton of carnage early on, but yes the technology would overcome their millions


Even more quickly if we busted out the nukes

Even if your belief is true (it isn't) then they are at the very least an enormous economic threat to the US. What do you think an invasion of South Korea would do to our economy?

There are 48 million people in South Korea, 21 million in the area around Seoul. There are also many millions more nearby in Japan and China. Seoul, Tokyo, Shanghai and Beijing are among the largest cities in the world. Nukes would not be an option.

Judging by the few videos out there I think the premise is they nuke the poo out of us and it just leaves the middle, but I could be wrong.

That's what I never got about the original, what the hell happened to the retaliatory strike?


You can't tell me they got every single sub, silo and bomber in their first strike

Not to mention the tac nukes

Especially since most of the nukes are in silos in the middle of the country, the part not damaged by Soviet nukes in the movie.

It was an entertaining movie, but you really had to work to suspend disbelief. Everything in that movie was far-fetched. The invasion, a bunch of untrained kids outwitting the Soviet army, everything was far-fetched. I assume the new one will be the same.

They filmed this at least two years ago. It must be a real turd. The state of Michigan gave producers heavy incentives to film in Michigan. Gov. Snyder did away with the incentives shortly after he took office in 1/11. The libs went ape over Snyder's actions but two balanced budgets later and an improving economy in the state of Michigan have made them forget about the glam and glitz of Hollywood.

It never should have been made.

Properly done (CASTING! CASTING! CASTING!) it might have made it's money back...

I didn't realize there were nukes used in the first one. However, I will soon find out. I was talking to my kid about this and decided to buy the original on DVD. Getting it from Amazon.

They finally have a trailer out. Judge for yourself



<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/k6T2Q4bBcUU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Just...bad.:shake:

Abercrombie model-insurgents without a hair out of place fighting an invading force of...North Koreans?




North Koreans? Did they say...NORTH KOREANS? ... Invading the continental United States? Riiiiight...

This movie will make less money than ''Battleship'.

There weren't...

They pussed out and changed it from the Chinese. China makes sense.

NK is a ****ing joke.

Then again, when you think about it, so is Cuba or Mexico being part of an effective invasion force...

Yes, there were


<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5Qc8jJ0TjSY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Bad idea notwithstanding, but PG-13, too?

Blow me, Hollywood.

Funny u mention that. I'm pretty sure the original film was the very first PG-13 rated film.
Posted via Mobile Device

No shit? I would have sworn it was R. Didn't it hold the record for most on screen deaths for a movie at that point, or something?

Whatever. I won't be seeing this turd remake, regardless.

I believe this is correct. A bit too much violence for PG, but no sexual content.

I always thought it was Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom but I guess it was just one of the movies that pushed us into the PG13 rating.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_..._rating_system

Adoption of PG-13 rating
Through the 1970s to 1984, explicit violence and gore in the films Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Poltergeist and Gremlins caused an uproar among parents over their PG rating.[12][13] Their complaints led Hollywood figure Steven Spielberg, director of Temple of Doom and producer of Gremlins, to suggest a new rating to MPAA president Jack Valenti for movies that have too much adult content to be rated PG, but not quite enough to be rated R. Spielberg's suggestion was for an intermediate rating of PG-13 or PG-14.[14] On conferring with cinema owners, Valenti and the MPAA introduced the PG-13 rating on July 1, 1984, indicating that some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. The Spielberg films were never re-rated.
The first film distributed with a PG-13 rating was Red Dawn (1984). Dreamscape and The Woman in Red were released on the same day the following week. The Flamingo Kid (1984) was the first film to receive the rating, but was not released until December 1984.[15]

:facepalm:

How did I forget that ****ing scene?...

No, just no.

Yea, it was basically Gremlins and Temple of Doom that broke the PG ratings back.

Shit, I forgot he was in that movie.

wow this looks bad

thor should have dealt with this shit sooner

It's Thor, Comedian, and Wonder Woman against a Bond villain. How can this be bad?

Just on principal, I won't see this. The idea of us getting attached by North Korea is absolutely ****ing absurd - it would be like Rhode Island stomping New York. Had the producers not sold out to China and altered the script, I would have given it a look. That scenario is believable.

All involved can kiss my ass. I'll stick with the original.

But they have a secret weapon that cancels out all of our technology!

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nGoe7BdGdlg?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This movie isn't going to work in a theatre full of people attached to cell phones and iPods.

You can't explain the mentality of a lifetime of "duck and cover" to kids you don't ever want to know what that means.

I'm skeptical about:
- The "let's steal that super-weapon" plotline they're adding in;
- How it works without the mid-80's Cold War paranoia already in place;
- Josh Lucas;
- The fact that remakes of 80's movies are usually atrocious.
And I'm pretty sure it will get pretty bad reviews.

However:
- I'm still looking forward to what choices these filmmakers make in adapting it to today;
- It still looks like a good action flick;
- I think we as a country could use something to stand up and cheer about;
- It looks like they're doing well in adapting some of the iconic scenes to this remake;
- I like the casting in general, and;
- Adrienne Palicki specifically.

So I'll see it.

1) Movie is made with upcoming actors and original idea on old material.
2) Movie hits the skids. Movie sold from one company to another without any real advertisers willing to commit. Movie finds internets can stir interest and funding. Movie uses this to stir interest.
3) Plot of film changed due to pressure from (THE ****ING ENEMY IN THE MOVIE) advertisers and backers to change the the "script."
4) Original "ok for an action flick" degraded (numerous cuts) to dog$3it SciFi films original level due to the fact the ****ing invaders in the film employed some lawyers (read: CHINA) and they had to salvage something since there were some now-pop stars in the film...

Out Today

WE GOT A BUMP OVER HERE!

http://i.chzbgr.com/completestore/20...6107161040.jpg

heard a review today - the dude said it's better than the original....but he thought the original sucked so that's not saying much! LMAO

Make fun of Josh "Drake and Josh" Peck all you want...

He did do this:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1082886/

heh, this entire premise is just laughable in 2012. In 1984, it seemed semi-real because of the lingering threat of the USSR.

12% at Rotten Tomatoes. LMAO

Surprised it is that high. The commercials look dreadful.

The original was gritty; the remake looks like a Michael Bay flag-fest, with plucky 'Merican teens givin' it to tha man! Drink Mountian Dew Xtreme! You know it's "da bomb" cuz it starts with an "X"! F*#K YEAH!

It was actually better than I expected but still way prefer the original.

Shocked they were able to explain the invasion in a way that was at least in the galaxy of realism without the Cold War paranoia.

Had one good HOLY SHIT moment too.

[htismaqe;9139601]Make fun of Josh "Drake and Josh" Peck all you want...

He did do this:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1082886/[/QUOTE]

Decent movie, his acting was great.

There is a reason it sat in the can for three years.

Needs more Lea Thompson.....

Now down to 11% at RT. Top critics rate it at 3%.

Jesus. LMAO

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_pJlUbAGrD2...eaThompson.jpg

http://www.miserableretailslave.com/...-the-duck1.jpg

http://img001.lazygirls.info/people/...ty3u.sized.jpg

This turd is streaming on Netflix now. Started watching it last night. It's even worse than I thought it would be - the acting is Star Wars I-III bad and the story is awful. I may finish it at a later time just because I hope to see many of the characters die.

LMAO That's as good a reason as any to finish a movie.

The main thing I wanted to see in the new shitty Star Wars movies was Vader put his lightsaber through Jar Jar's ****ing head. That would have almost made them worthwhile.

Of course Darth Lucas denied me. Bastard. :grr:

just watched this on netflix, ya, that was pretty ****ing bad.