User Score
4.5 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 103 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 43 out of 103
  2. Negative: 46 out of 103

Review this movie

  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. May 3, 2013
    1
    When I saw the trailer, my first thought was "oh God, not this, anything but this!" I decided to go and see it anyway, and I was right. A good 80's film was born again as a cheap, and just plain boring film riddled with corny and overused plot elements. Please, just watch the original film and let the new one stay in the Best Buy value bin. That's where it should remain.
  2. Apr 23, 2013
    3
    Remakes are all the style now as if Hollywood has run out of things to say so here is Red Dawn, a modern day remake of a 70s cold war paranoia picture. Back then the idea Russia could descend the world into darkness was very real and now its the same with North Korea, oh wait, no it isn't. The film follows a group of survivors of a full scale invasion of suburban America by the North Koreans (I am honestly not joking). This group must band together and start a campaign of guerrilla warfare to take back their neighborhood and their country. (yet again, I am not joking) I really should have hated Red Dawn more than I eventually did. Don't get me wrong, I still pretty much loathed it. The cast is filled with miscast actors or just plain dreadful ones but it also has a few pretty great ones. For instance Chris Hemsworth is the right kind of charming/brooding to play former soldier Jed although Josh Peck is just horrendous as his hot headed (which he plays as constipated) brother Matt. Adrianne Palicki seems to be making a thing of the whole action woman thing but has had to wait a good 2 years for her two action films to be released after being held back for years. However she entertains as tomboy Toni although Isabel Lucas irritates and infuriates as her sister Erica. A pre Hunger Games Josh Hutcherson is in the film but I honestly cannot say anything about him because his presence isn't memorable. The main problem is that there is a borderline decent film hidden beneath the bad acting and illogical story that was changed as not to irritate the Chinese (the Chinese that were never going to see the film in the first place) as if they hadn't heard of a story before. The main draw of Red Dawn is the fact it is directed by Dan Bradley, a stunt coordinator who understands what makes good action as he has proven in the Bourne films he has worked on. The action is never short of fantastic from the opening invasion to the final showdown in a taken over police station. Its visceral and honestly some of my favorite action in a while, its that good. It's shocking that a film with this caliber of effects and stunts is let down by an idiotic plot change late into production and some woefully bad acting. Expand
  3. Apr 14, 2013
    8
    Like "War of the Worlds", with aliens replaced by North Korea. This is a truly awesome movie with an original story, great action, and lots of twists and turns that make this movie impossible to turn off. Awesome, truly awesome.
  4. Apr 6, 2013
    3
    O.k. so in this version of Red Dawn in lieu of an actual powerful, adversarial nation like during the Cold War the United States is instead invaded by a country with less then half the GDP of the poorest US State and roughly the population of Texas. This vast gulf in military power and funding is offset slightly by having China and Russia help out North Korea; which doesn't make much of a difference since the US Military has more equipment then the next 13 largest militaries...combined, and most of them are our allies. Of course they could get few actual Koreans to act in this movie, so the "North Korean" army looks more like the "Peoples Republic of Greater Asia", which in retrospect would have made a much more realistic storyline. Beyond the horrible plot that serves as a perfect example of the kind of paranoia that's driving our nation to bankruptcy spending untold billions on a gigantic military, the movie does do two things rather well. First, the comparison between the Wolverines and the insurgents fighting the US and the North Korean invasion force proclaiming that it wants to "save" America make the movie an excellent walk in "the other sides" shoes, essentially saying: "this is what it feels like to Iraq, Afghanistan, etc." The second thing which it does well are explosions. They are done very well. Expand
  5. Apr 6, 2013
    7
    I was surprised by this movie. I thought it was pretty entertaining. It isn't amazing, but it certainly isn't as bad as the critics make it out to be. I felt that this movie had lots of exciting action sequences that were both crazy with effects and very suspenseful. This is a touchy subject, but I felt that this movie was an exciting, inspiring movie.
  6. Apr 5, 2013
    9
    ReviewZone212 put it best, most people says this movie sucks. Well those people can suck it, this movie was AWESOME. Great action, great cast and for the most part of it funny and intriguing dialogue, my only gripe was that there wasn't really a great portrayal of a plot.
  7. Mar 29, 2013
    6
    I was actually surprised with this movie. It has a lot of negative reviews so I expected it to really suck. I was actually really surprised that I enjoyed this movie so much. No it's not anywhere close to movie of the year but it wasn't that bad. Granted,I didn't see the original and that may change my opinion.
  8. Mar 19, 2013
    5
    Red Dawn is a passable action flick, the acting is alright but still mediocre, Red Dawn enjoyable at times but ultimately fails compared to it's past installment. Give it a rental if you're interested but if you're not there's nothing Red Dawn can do for you. Wolverines? More like Puppies...(Man I'm not proud of that)
  9. Mar 17, 2013
    4
    Let me get this straight, Red Dawn is somewhat a fun movie. Despite that its boring direction and screenplay, the old version was defiantly better but tired directors that just want business made this film. Red Dawn is one of those films that makes the audiences bored and nostalgic. Some scenes were worthy to be in a Hollywood movie but this is one of the stink piles Hollywood makes, But Overall it's a fun movie. Expand
  10. Mar 9, 2013
    3
    Another pointless remake that should have never been made. The 1984 version has a story that's compelling because you have kids that are put through the worst circumstances, that ends up bringing two brothers together. In this one all the kids look like they just got out of the shower while just being in a bloody battle and you just don't care about the brothers relationship at all.
  11. Mar 4, 2013
    8
    I'ts just a movie! I don't know why some people try to compare a movie like this with some chance of happening in the real world. As far as I know, movies are made do entertain people, to make people get out of their boring routine.
  12. Mar 3, 2013
    2
    Shallow plot, shallow characters, shallow action and a horrible ending. They just took a hugeass dump on the original while creating one of the worst action flicks Ive seen in a long time. Hell, even Bourne Legacy was better than this pile of excrement. I felt sorry for the cast who had to put up with the cheap SFX, generic script and boring, uninspiring sequences that shouts below mediocrity. This should've been a made for TV movie from the start. Hell, had they retained the China vs U.S premise instead of this ridiculous North Korea vs U.S one it might've been a bit better. Because totally...the North Korean Army uses Hummers as part of their arsenal and are perfectly groomed like Korean pop stars. Avoid at all costs. Expand
  13. Mar 2, 2013
    0
    what the hell i just watched this is terrible as Dark knight rises and Amazing spider man 3. For heaven shake people should not made this sort of war porn movies.
  14. Feb 23, 2013
    7
    This movie has a lot of action, and that's a good thing. So, they may have deviated from the original a bit, and that's fine. The acting is ok at best. Listen, I have watched BattleShip twice. I think the acting in that movie totally SUCKS. (Rihanna, acting, really?) The actors in this movie are far better. Go in thinking action movie, for about 2hrs, give or take, and you will be satisfied. Anything else, and you will probably be disappointed. i will recommend this movie on that condition. Expand
  15. Feb 20, 2013
    0
    North Korea attacks The U.S. A. This is the point where you should stop considering watching this teen fantasy movie! Some untrained kids from the local town later form a resistance group, and fight back the highly trained and fanaticized N.K. soldiers! Honestly I can not say how dumb that is...
  16. Feb 19, 2013
    6
    Enjoyable action film. Didn't have close to the storyline of the original, but enjoyable to watch. If you are looking for a remake of the original, this is not it. If you are looking for an action flick, have at it.
  17. Jan 28, 2013
    10
    People say that this movie sucks, I really don't know why they say that, you watch a movie to have fun, this movie, Red dawn, combines everything that teens like to become an amazing movie, great characters, story and sfx, ill be watching this movie as one of my favorites, always.
  18. Jan 24, 2013
    3
    Red Dawn is a remake of the 1984 film that starred Patrick Swayze, and sadly this remake is even more ridiculous than the original. I have seen the original film a few times, and although it has its problems, it was a fun movie because of how silly it was. This new version just isn't very fun and has nothing really special about it at all. The characters are really unlikeable, the action is nothing we haven't seen before, and I honestly didn't care what was happening in the story the whole time. When I walked in the theater I had an open mind, and I actually hoped that this would be a fun and silly action film. Well sadly this movie really doesn't do anything fun or original to keep it interesting, and I walked out of the theater feeling like I had my money stolen from me. What also disappointed me was that this movie actually has a good cast of actors too, and they just waste the talent they have. I realized this was supposed to be a dumb and mindless action flick, but I at least wished I had some characters that were fun enough to cheer for. I like brainless action films if they realize it Expand
  19. Jan 18, 2013
    7
    Sorry critics. I try to see what people are finding so bad about this film, but there is too many things I like here that should be highlighted. For one thing, this movie pays much more respect the the "man in uniform" than "Act of Valor" ever attempted to have. The action is awesome, and we have reasons to care for the characters here. Unlike "Battleship", this movie develops all of its characters. No, I have never seen the original "Red Dawn", and i'm not gonna let that affect my review. This movie stands alone as something entirely different. The point is, I recommend it. I feel that it is very underrated. Expand
  20. Jan 17, 2013
    4
    Horrible, just horrible. No word to describe how horrible this movie is.
  21. Jan 15, 2013
    1
    How racist is this movie? Really! It is a 2012 re-make of a Reagan-era film however it seems that race relations and stereotypes are still quite Reagan-era. The two Hispanic kids don't even get lines and die off, the Black kids are portrayed as traitors and also die off, and well the only ones who live in this barrage of racial stereotypes are the white kids. Also how can we even think that North Korea one of the poorest nations in the world could ever invade the United States? One of the worst films of the year! Expand
  22. Jan 9, 2013
    2
    Red Dawn has some good action scenes and some pretty actors thats where the good stops. Story telling is horrible, felt forced and predicable, Dialogue horrible feels like a standard Hollywood student script nothing special, Character Development sad(not in a good way) and horrible, seriously what made the old Red Dawn so good was the character development. You had time to get to know the people and feel what they feel and when they die its horrible but that's the point to involve the audience. , Weapons and tactics horrible. I was looking so forward to this movie... Why did you have to mess up such a awesome genre. Could have made a classic, just another Hollywood B movie with lots of money pumped in it. Expand
  23. Jan 1, 2013
    10
    epic
  24. Jan 1, 2013
    10
    epic
  25. man
    Dec 22, 2012
    5
    Went and saw this two days ago and I have to say, it wasn't terrible like many critics and audiences alike have been suggesting. However, it had so much more potential. I now realize why this movie was shelved for three years, because it was probably not looked greatly upon. The only good thing this film had to offer was the action pretty much. Other than that, the acting was stale and the storyline felt rushed and was quite a mess. Instead of Russians invading, it was originally planned to be the Chinese, but we obviously couldn't do that. So it was changed to North Korea invading. Like I said, the action was cool and entertaining for the most part, but it's just typical guns and explosion action. Obviously, Chris Hemsworth did this film only because he wasn't quite as big a star at the time and probably had nothing else to work on. It's definitely not his fault the film turned out the way it did. And as for Josh Peck, it always seems like he's being miscast in so many movies such as this. He works as goofball like he did in "Drake and Josh" so many years ago, but this was not the right movie to put him in at all! I never thought Josh Hutcherson was a very good actor, but he was technically in this just to be in it. And last but not least, the ending: There wasn't really an ending at all as a matter of fact. It didn't really conclude at all and we were just left sitting there with nothing in the end. All-in-all, this film was sadly just wasted potential. Expand
  26. Dec 17, 2012
    6
    I am a fan of the original and this one was just fine...worth seeing (probably more of a Redbox than a $12 movie ticket), but good fun, different enough from the original but close enough to "honor" it.
  27. Dec 10, 2012
    7
    I still have a difficult time believing that people listen to critics. I have an even harder time believing they get paid for what they do. This was a good action movie. It's as if they were expecting a thriller. I was also looking through user reviews and had to laugh at the illiteracy of most of the negative scorers. Are children rating? I can't trust an individual's opinion if he/she seems incompetent. Anyways, dairy for the tangent. Good action movie. If you haven't seen it, just remember......ACTION MOVIE. NOT PHILOSOPHICAL. Expand
  28. Dec 10, 2012
    6
    Though it's not as bad as the critics make it out to be, there's no question Red Dawn is a silly, over-the-top, wannabe-bad ass sort of film. But despite all that, it's actually kind of fun.
  29. Dec 10, 2012
    3
    Completely preposterous. There is a scene in the middle of the film where they run into a friendly and they tell him who they are. His response "I was afraid of that", My response "I couldn't agree more". I just could not believe I was sitting through this weird mess of a film. The only reason it is still in theaters is because there is nothing else to take its place. Why sit through this when there is a perfectly decent version of this movie from the early 80's to watch sitting in the discount bin at your grocery store. That one starring that chain smoking sex symbol Swazee back before he died choking on his own regurgitated tobacco tar. Expand
  30. Dec 8, 2012
    1
    Worst movie I have seen. Bad acting, bad plot, bad directing, and so on. Please do not waste your hard earned money or your precious time on this garbage. It's BAD!
Metascore

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 33 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 33
  2. Negative: 18 out of 33
  1. Reviewed by: Peter Bradshaw
    Mar 15, 2013
    20
    This has to be the year's most pointless remake: a boring and badly acted reboot of John Milius's gung-ho red-scare actioner from 1984.
  2. Reviewed by: Neil Smith
    Mar 11, 2013
    40
    The doltish, messy and frequently incoherent result bears all the hallmarks of a botched and compromised endeavour.
  3. Reviewed by: Nick de Semlyen
    Mar 11, 2013
    20
    Long-delayed. Arguably not long enough.