another jiggle-fest

By examatrix
Written November 23, 2012
Oh fer Gawd sake. Somebody buy the director of photography a steady cam already. I don't understand why these guys think they are building excitement by rocking and rolling the camera all over. This is a movie. We are the viewers,happily outside looking in. We are not impressed by having the actors wear a camera on their heads like animal planet. Distracting to the point of being unable to avoid an epileptic seizure and worse,you can't see what's going on. Lazy filmaking. And yes, I saw the original and it had more heart. Several key elements of the story were removed in this remake, and it really dumbed the thing down in order to avoid stepping on anyones toes. Seriously, rent the Patrick Swayze version, it's easier to look at and the story is all there. And one more thing: apparently the go straight to the top and learn on the job thing is still in vogue.Since Obama ratified the concept, other amateurs have been hopping into the cat bird seat with impunity. Connor Cruise? Go home.
30 out of 50 found this helpful. Did you?

Red Dawn

By wjmcbeth61
Written October 23, 2014
It was so-so, the premise was kind of far fetched. Why would they attack Seattle? The acting was okay but the characters never seemed to fully embrace their roles Any age would be fine
29 out of 47 found this helpful. Did you?

Ignore the Leftwing Critics

By BrianBailey
Written November 27, 2012
Is this a great movie? No, not by a long shot but it's very enjoyable on its own terms. A good actionerr . The critics hate it based on their political agenda. There's even a scene where the occupiers are making a public appearance and saying the how the people should be grateful since they saved us from corrupt capitalists and Wall St. Exactly what we just finished hearing during the campaign just ended and OWS before that. Can't beat that class warfare and the politics of envy. Would I have preferred the producers hadn't wussed out and renamed the enemy from the Red Chinese to N Korea? Sure. It might have been even more interesting (and plausible) to make the invaders UN troops but that would have meant a longer exposition and setup. The flick may jolt some young products of our government schools but I though the movie was every bit as (im)plausible than movies like Lions for Lambs or Rendition. And a heck of a lot more action. It might even recruit future Marines. S/F
25 out of 36 found this helpful. Did you?

Not Worthy of The Original's Title...Basically One Step Up From a TV Movie.

By Alon Patterson
Written July 30, 2014
Lots of potential in this cast but it was thoroughly wasted on a BAD screenplay adaptation of one of the best action scenarios of the 1980s. The testament to this truth is about as far away as Netflix or your local video source. The value of the original is not threatened or diminished by this remake, neither is the remake itself anachronistic, since this flavor’s been finely sliced and diced, politically corrected and delivered like pabulum for the "Scott Pilgrim" generation's violence diet. They should be righteously insulted by such condescension and pandering. Not much else to say here except next time they bring all this fine young talent together, how about giving them respect by providing them decent material? They're up to it and so is their audience. If you like the faces see this for a discount if you can. It's a stretch at ten bucks a seat.
24 out of 37 found this helpful. Did you?

Action

By ODBPete
Written September 22, 2014
I am a huge fan of the original so I was very skeptical about this new version, in my mind I knew there were going to screw it up.. After seeing it last night I have to say honestly,, it was better than the original ! .. It's so full of sitting on the edge of your seat action , a few one liners, and a few wow moments If you liked the first one you will love this one.. don't miss it
22 out of 34 found this helpful. Did you?