Red Dawn - Now with added DPRK

[Oberon]

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-china-red-dawn-20110316,0,995726.story

[Takeda Shingen]

Ugh. I am probably the only person on the boards that didn't like the original. I have no interest in the remake. Still, to the point of the thread, China would be the more logical antagonist, as North Korea has positively zero ability to project power.

[Raptor1]

Eh, I enjoyed the original, it wasn't terribly good, but it wasn't all that bad either.

Replacing the Soviets with the Chinese was, in my opinion, a bad idea to start with, but North Koreans? That's just ridiculous.

BTW, this seems to be the exact same thing that happened to Homefront, as it was originally supposed to have Chinese bad guys too.

EDIT: Ah, just noticed that's stated in the article. Should really read the whole thing first. :damn:

[Growler]

Realities like force projection never did matter much in Hollywood.

It's all about maintaining access to the Asian superpower's lucrative box office.

^^There's your bottom-line reality.

[Kaye T. Bai]

Red Dawn 3: Liberia invades Cambodia! :yeah:

[TLAM Strike]

I'm surprised that Hollywood to get a bigger audience didn't make it a movie about evil American troops invading some tiny crappy communist dictatorship and the brave partisans who rise up to fight them. :roll:

[gimpy117]

great, now republicans can watch a movie that reinforces their paranoia that socialists are everywhere.

[Gargamel]

Funny story, back in grade school, my buddy had a sleep over for his 10th birthday party, and he had invited about 12 of us. We had gone to the video store to pick up some movies, and apparently one of us tossed Red Dawn into the pile without his mom noticing.

Later that night, we popped that one in. Got about half way through before she walked in.

I remember the lot of us being regarded as the coolest kids in school cause we got to see most of the flick. "DID YOU SEE THAT GUY SHOOT THE TEACHER!?!? OMG LOLOLOLZ!"

Had to wait a few years before I got a chance to finish the movie.. :nope:

[Ducimus]

Ok, this thought ive had for some time that i'm just now voicing is probably going to get me flamed 9 ways to sunday but.....

Has anyone else found the whole "Red dawn" cliche a bit on the .. uhh. i don't know. i can't find the word for it. Hypocrisy maybe?

The thing is, we as a culture, fancy ourselves as the oppressed freedom fighters. We like to root for the underdog going against the giant juggernaught. David and Gloiath, insert whatever metaphore you want here. I think it goes back to our colonial roots against the British. Fighting a gurella war against a large occuping power. And boy oh boy, do we like to portray ourselve as all these things in the movies or watch them in some form or another don't we?

"Wolverines!!!!"

I can't be the only one who's paused for a moment, and thought that gurella freedom fighters of the oppressed, is what some of the ahh.. groups of ragheads in the middle east think of themselves as? I guess the problem i have with portrayals like red dawn, is we are NOT the little guy. We haven't been for some time, and the irony is, in portrays like that, we cast ourselves in the same role as the groups in the middle east that we're currently fighting, at least by their view. I enjoy the movie and the storyline of an occupied US (i will be buying homefront eventually. :P ), but the ignorance and stupidty of them is not lost on me.

[Oberon]

Don't be silly, they're the bad guys, we're the good guys. :03:

[Sailor Steve]

Ugh. I am probably the only person on the boards that didn't like the original.
You assume too much. I thought the original was one of the stupidest movies I had ever seen. It did lead to one great story, though. I was at a wargaming convention when the subject came up. One of the people there, a former Soviet officer who had defected to the US, said that one of their greatest fears during the Cold War was to be ordered to invade America.

"We knew for a fact that every American owned a gun, and knew how to use it."

[SgtPotato]

Are you serious? We both made US and China to be friendly from the outside. But in the inside, we're still spying each other with cloak and dagger.

[August]

great, now republicans can watch a movie that reinforces their paranoia that socialists are everywhere.

Nah, to be that dumb they'd have to be Democrats...

[vienna]

It's always perspective: If you are the one fighting against the "powers that be", you are a "freedom fighter". If you are the "powers that be", the "freedom fighters" are "terrorists" and "rabble-rousers". Back in catholic school in about the 3rd grade, a Jesuit priest was teaching about the U.S. Revolutionary War and asked us "When is a revolution legal?" None of us had a good answer so he told us "A revoultion is legal if you win". If England had crushed the colonials, history today would label the colonists as unsucessful rebels and we would be taught that our good and noble British army had bravely defended us against the traitorous, vile rebels. It is the victor who writes history.

As far as "Red Dawn" is concerned, I saw and rather liked the original movie but at no time time did I take it seriously as a political statement. I suppose it resonated with the Reagan-sotted rightwingers seeking to demonize the "Evil Empire"; for the rest of us it was just a movie and a way to pass a couple of hours. I do find it irritating the way Hollywood now panders in such an open way to influences having nothing to do with the art of film making. I live in Hollywood and when the remake was first announced, quite a few comments were made regarding the wisdom of casting China as the heavy. The studio(s) had to know going in about the doubts and criticism. That they chose to go ahead and make the film anyway speaks volumes about how disconnected the management of the studios is regarding real world situations. Hollywood no longer has studio heads who make films as art (hence, endless remakes), rather the studios are run by corporate bean counters who just hang on until their "golden parachutes" take effect and they can bail and go on to the next corporation that will hire and overpay them and grant them a sinecure when they leave. When the Oscars were presented recently, there was a lot of huffing and puffing about how the big, popular (in terms of ticket sales) box office films were snubbed by the Academy and low grossing (by bean counter standards) films were reaping all the Awards. The irony is that the rate of return for the awarded films (cost to make the film versus revenue) is probably greater than the multi-multi-millon dollar major studio projects and the awarded films will probably be remebered longer because they are art, not product. The Times article noted the "Red Dawn" remake may go directly to DVD and bypass the theaters entirely. I wonder how much the studio is going to pay out as severance to the studio exec in charge of production when they fire him? Knowing Hollywood, they maight even promote him.

[Freiwillige]

Ok, this thought ive had for some time that i'm just now voicing is probably going to get me flamed 9 ways to sunday but.....

Has anyone else found the whole "Red dawn" cliche a bit on the .. uhh. i don't know. i can't find the word for it. Hypocrisy maybe?

The thing is, we as a culture, fancy ourselves as the oppressed freedom fighters. We like to root for the underdog going against the giant juggernaught. David and Gloiath, insert whatever metaphore you want here. I think it goes back to our colonial roots against the British. Fighting a gurella war against a large occuping power. And boy oh boy, do we like to portray ourselve as all these things in the movies or watch them in some form or another don't we?

"Wolverines!!!!"

I can't be the only one who's paused for a moment, and thought that gurella freedom fighters of the oppressed, is what some of the ahh.. groups of ragheads in the middle east think of themselves as? I guess the problem i have with portrayals like red dawn, is we are NOT the little guy. We haven't been for some time, and the irony is, in portrays like that, we cast ourselves in the same role as the groups in the middle east that we're currently fighting, at least by their view. I enjoy the movie and the storyline of an occupied US (i will be buying homefront eventually. :P ), but the ignorance and stupidty of them is not lost on me.

While I half agree I can also see the distinction. We are the good guys (Most of the time) We have no dictatorships, Emperors, Totalitarian or fascist regime were defending. We usually dont put our boots on the ground and bombs in a chimney unless they deserve it. (Again I said usually)

Also what I take from the original is the whole defending freedom and apple pie and the great American way of life thing, Something it would be hard for an evil\ un American regime to copy.

Granted if it was some country culturally similar (England) than the resulting feelings would be similar.

[RickC Sniper]

The USSR was such a cool enemy. Sigh.

:cool:

[razark]

While I half agree I can also see the distinction. We are the good guys (Most of the time) We have no dictatorships, Emperors, Totalitarian or fascist regime were defending. We usually dont put our boots on the ground and bombs in a chimney unless they deserve it. (Again I said usually)
But you only see it that way because you see it from your point of view.

[krashkart]

The USSR was such a cool enemy. Sigh.

:cool:

+1. And awesome accents, too. Not to mention the Hind. :yep:

[Penguin]

Hollywood: critical and unconform: as long as the financial interests are met...:nope: It's a (stupid) movie, nothing more. People are way too appeasing against China. Smells like self-censorship.

In the next US Civil War movie they substitute the fractions through North and South Korea, so the Americans are not po'd.

And in the next WW2 movie they change the Germans to Iraqis - hey Germany's a big film market, too...

[August]

What the war movie industry needs is a generic bad guy nation. Sort of like they use the 555 exchange when the plot calls for a character to read a telephone number. :DL

[Jimbuna]

Nobody thought of Mexico?

*I'll get my coat*

[nikimcbee]

Nobody thought of Mexico?

*I'll get my coat*

Been there, done that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqomZQMZQCQ&feature=related

[nikimcbee]

What the war movie industry needs is a generic bad guy nation. Sort of like they use the 555 exchange when the plot calls for a character to read a telephone number. :DL

You mean like on Top Gun?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNrB6qpmNwg

nevermind:dead:

[Ducimus]

While I half agree I can also see the distinction. We are the good guys (Most of the time) We have no dictatorships, Emperors, Totalitarian or fascist regime were defending. We usually dont put our boots on the ground and bombs in a chimney unless they deserve it. (Again I said usually)


One thing i figured out when i was still wearing a uniform.....Nobody goes to war thinking their the bad guy.

For awhile, i found myself questioning what was good, and what was bad. It's a question of standards, who's do you use? Theirs? ours? What makes their's any more righteous then our own, and who makes that determination? In the end, i answered this delimna for myself. I figure, my country tis of thee, for better, for worse, it's still mine. Right or wrong, its home, and that's enough.

Still though, nobody goes to war thinking their the bad guy.

[nikimcbee]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd52/sirwinpb/north-korea-5.jpg

Watch out! I come and get you! Take your country for glorious leader.

[Gargamel]

One thing i figured out when i was still wearing a uniform.....Nobody goes to war thinking their the bad guy.

For awhile, i found myself questioning what was good, and what was bad. It's a question of standards, who's do you use? Theirs? ours? What makes their's any more righteous then our own, and who makes that determination? In the end, i answered this delimna for myself. I figure, my country tis of thee, for better, for worse, it's still mine. Right or wrong, its home, and that's enough.

Still though, nobody goes to war thinking their the bad guy.

+1

You'd like to think that if they thought they were the bad guy, they'd give up. The soldiers at least, probably not the leaders.

[Sailor Steve]

What the war movie industry needs is a generic bad guy nation. Sort of like they use the 555 exchange when the plot calls for a character to read a telephone number. :DL
We were at war with Eurasia. Now we're at war with Eastasia. :sunny:

[Torplexed]

We were at war with Eurasia. Now we're at war with Eastasia. :sunny:

http://anglonoelnatter.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/richard_burton_obrien_1984.jpg?w=300&h=161

Sailor Steve, you've just won a one week all-expenses paid vacation at the Ministry of Love. Report to Room 101.

Don't mind the rats. :D

[TarJak]

http://anglonoelnatter.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/richard_burton_obrien_1984.jpg?w=300&h=161

Sailor Steve, you've just won a one week all-expenses paid vacation at the Ministry of Love. Report to Room 101.

Don't mind the rats. :DLOL. Reality control will soon be restored.

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

1984 was one movie which lived up to the book that preceded it.

[Sailor Steve]

1984 was one movie which lived up to the book that preceded it.
I agree. I was also a fan of this one.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048918/

I also recall liking this version at the time, though it may not have aged well.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059510/

And I've never heard of this 1953 US version:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0712166/

Or this 1954 British version:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0174444/

[Penguin]

I agree. I was also a fan of this one.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048918/

I also recall liking this version at the time, though it may not have aged well.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059510/


I'll definetely check them out, the good thing about this novel is that the plot is more about immersion, it doesn't need fancy special FX.



And I've never heard of this 1953 US version:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0712166/

Or this 1954 British version:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0174444/

The problem with TV series from the early 50s is that everything was shown live at this time, since cheap recording devices didn't exist. Only some material was recorded on 35mm. So the chances are bad to see these versions again :cry:.

[Sailor Steve]

The problem with TV series from the early 50s is that everything was shown live at this time, since cheap recording devices didn't exist. Only some material was recorded on 35mm. So the chances are bad to see these versions again :cry:.
That's apparently true of the American one, but I just found out the British Peter Cushing version is actually available.

[Penguin]

That's apparently true of the American one, but I just found out the British Peter Cushing version is actually available.

yes, you're right about this. According to wiki a second performance of the play was conserved http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four_%28TV_programme%29

Oh yes, if you haven't seen it yet, I can only recommend Terry Gilliam's Brazil - a great movie, inspired by 1984. An awesome interpretation! :up: