Red Dawn

User Score
4.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 169 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 50 out of 169
  2. Negative: 76 out of 169
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 28, 2012
    4
    This remake of the 1984 film has shifted the villains from Russia to North Korea. (It was shot several years ago with Chinese villains, but times have changed and so did the flags and uniforms in post production.). Pre-Thor Chris Hensworth and pre-Hunger Games Josh Hutcherson lead the cast of young people who take on the hostile foreign invaders. Their pluck and guerilla tactics areThis remake of the 1984 film has shifted the villains from Russia to North Korea. (It was shot several years ago with Chinese villains, but times have changed and so did the flags and uniforms in post production.). Pre-Thor Chris Hensworth and pre-Hunger Games Josh Hutcherson lead the cast of young people who take on the hostile foreign invaders. Their pluck and guerilla tactics are amazingly slick and successful for such an untrained group, but there's not much about this film that's realistic. Some of the action is good, but much of it is blurred and choppy Expand
  2. 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, ButLet 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
  3. Sep 27, 2013
    6
    It's mildly entertaining and highly unrealistic. I've never seen the original so I can't compare it to this remake. I can say that it can be entertaining at times but overall the odd casting choices and emotional moments that fall short bring the experience down. Still it can be worth a watch just for the decent yet unrealistic action sequences that are packed with explosions. The castIt's mildly entertaining and highly unrealistic. I've never seen the original so I can't compare it to this remake. I can say that it can be entertaining at times but overall the odd casting choices and emotional moments that fall short bring the experience down. Still it can be worth a watch just for the decent yet unrealistic action sequences that are packed with explosions. The cast does a good job but the only character that feels like they belong in a movie like this is Chris Hemsworth. Seeing Josh Peck and Hutcherson take down numerous Korean soldiers better than a squad of fully trained marines is more than a little unbelievable. Still the movie is watchable, so if you have nothing better to do then there are worse things to watch in your free time. Expand
  4. 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.
  5. Nov 22, 2012
    6
    It's certainly not as bad as the pro critics would suggest. As a tribute to the first film, it's decent, but it lacks the charm of the original. Hemsworth is not nearly as magnetic as Swayze. But it's a dumb fun action flick that keeps the blood pumping, so I'd give is a modest recommendation to those who are into this sort of thing.
  6. 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 itsSorry 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
  7. Nov 23, 2014
    8
    I never saw the original film, but I know that the enemies have changed from the Russians to the Koreans in the remake which shows the progression of America over the years. This is a movie for teenagers considering the are so many young people involved. Chris Hemsworth was badass in this remake, I really enjoyed watching him. It also has an unexpected ending that you will never seeI never saw the original film, but I know that the enemies have changed from the Russians to the Koreans in the remake which shows the progression of America over the years. This is a movie for teenagers considering the are so many young people involved. Chris Hemsworth was badass in this remake, I really enjoyed watching him. It also has an unexpected ending that you will never see coming. Red Dawn is definitely underrated. Expand
  8. 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 NorthRemakes 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
  9. Nov 13, 2014
    4
    "Red Dawn" 10 Scale Rating: 4.5 (Mediocre) ...

    The Good: Despite the silliness, I was entertained through portions of it. It isn't a realistic movie at all, but the actors did a decent enough job with what they were given ... The Bad: ... but they weren't given much. I can only suspend belief so far before a film becomes inadvertently humorous. While the original became a cult
    "Red Dawn" 10 Scale Rating: 4.5 (Mediocre) ...

    The Good: Despite the silliness, I was entertained through portions of it. It isn't a realistic movie at all, but the actors did a decent enough job with what they were given ...

    The Bad: ... but they weren't given much. I can only suspend belief so far before a film becomes inadvertently humorous. While the original became a cult classic, this one is mostly forgettable.
    Expand
  10. Aug 31, 2013
    7
    I liked this movie, but it was a bit annoying how easy they take over everything. If you can get past all of that and not take the movie to serious it can be fun. I do think they should not have made it about some teens. It would be much better with Grown men. It`s not as bad as some people are saying it is, most people just seem to give a movie a 10 or 0 they know nothing in between.
  11. chw
    Aug 22, 2014
    3
    Red Dawn was a terrible remake. Hiring young actors who only whisper and mumble is a terrible choice, and re-hiring for other movies (Battle of the Year) is worse.
  12. Feb 15, 2014
    4
    I thought "Red Dawn" had enough Guns, violence, frustration and heroic attributes to be like the original--but that's the only reason. The acting was terrible. In fact the only acceptable acting done in this movie had to be by Hemsworth.
  13. Jun 4, 2013
    7
    "As a huge fan of the original, If you can put aside all the cheesy, corny acting of our leads, chances are your going to like this new take on the classic film. Its intense, exciting and builds up huge momentum on its original. I know i'm a wolverine." B+
  14. Nov 25, 2012
    3
    I love the original Patrick Swayze version of Red Dawn, it was one of the best 80's movies that we certainly don't have time for a reboot. The new version starring a Hunger Games star and an Avengers star is pretty much says it. After a long period of delays since MGM (the movie's former company) headed for turbulance. And even bankruptcy, they should've released it when Sony acquired theI love the original Patrick Swayze version of Red Dawn, it was one of the best 80's movies that we certainly don't have time for a reboot. The new version starring a Hunger Games star and an Avengers star is pretty much says it. After a long period of delays since MGM (the movie's former company) headed for turbulance. And even bankruptcy, they should've released it when Sony acquired the rights to the troubled studio. Red Dawn is nearly half as bad as the floppy reboot Total Recall, so I thought it was gonna be called "Crap Dawn" or "Turkey Dawn." Jennifer Grey (the original Dirty Dancer) could send a message to the late Patrick Swayze that the director who is responsible for the remake is making a fool out of himself making a stupid idea to remake Red Dawn. I already got the movie on VHS, sadly I retired the tape and wait for the Blu-Ray release. Reboots are nothing more than con artists and so does the Red Dawn reboot. A terrible, indulgent, and as Joe Biden said in the Democratic debate that I've never heard that "Malarkey" word, but it's incredible. Expand
  15. 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 throughCompletely 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
  16. 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...
  17. Jan 26, 2014
    8
    Why people are bashing this movie? I bought Red Dawn the night before, and I found it pretty decent, it falls apart throughout, but it is actually a decent watch, I enjoyed it, it was entertaining and exciting, not perfect in any sense. one dimensional characters, not really convincing but for what it is, it is a B popcorn movie to not be taken seriously but only for fun.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. Jun 8, 2013
    1
    This is just a really boring movie. I wasn't going in expecting anything other than a bad movie, but even with that mindset this movie disappoints. Not even worth a rental. Absolute waste of time and money.
  22. Jun 10, 2015
    5
    I don't think that this movie is as bad as some critics say but that doesn't mean that it's good either.It gets convoluted most of the time and some of the acting is pretty much terrible.The action if you can call it that way it's not good and in the end this remake is just another reason to hate what Hollywood are doing with the old films just for some money,they are destroying the movieI don't think that this movie is as bad as some critics say but that doesn't mean that it's good either.It gets convoluted most of the time and some of the acting is pretty much terrible.The action if you can call it that way it's not good and in the end this remake is just another reason to hate what Hollywood are doing with the old films just for some money,they are destroying the movie industry. Expand
  23. Jan 17, 2013
    4
    Horrible, just horrible. No word to describe how horrible this movie is.
  24. Nov 7, 2013
    2
    You can not believe what is thrown in your face, even if it is a film, where imagination has no limits, the idea sounds so shallow and misguided. You are not convinced at any time.
  25. Feb 20, 2015
    3
    Quite possibly the definition of an unnecessary remake. The original wasn't all that great either, but this movie is just terrible. The acting and dialog are both underwhelming, the characters are massively underdeveloped, and the effects still look like they're stuck in the 1980s. The only reason this gets a 3/10 is for the mildly entertaining action.
  26. 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.
  27. Nov 27, 2012
    3
    The worst remake movies i seen is The Stepfather (2009). and Psycho (1998). Planet of the Apes (2001). The Wicker Man (2006). Red Dawn (2012) , And wait for more bad remakes movies Carrie 2013 and . Robocop 2013.
  28. May 30, 2013
    6
    Okay, it's no secret that "Red Dawn" is not loyal to the original "Red Dawn," but that does not make the new one bad. Yes, a remake was unnecessary, but the movie was pretty legit as far a remakes go. It has the same premise and it did it well. What I took away from the movie is the execution, which was a mess. But I guess I still liked the movie a bit so I'll be nice and give it aOkay, it's no secret that "Red Dawn" is not loyal to the original "Red Dawn," but that does not make the new one bad. Yes, a remake was unnecessary, but the movie was pretty legit as far a remakes go. It has the same premise and it did it well. What I took away from the movie is the execution, which was a mess. But I guess I still liked the movie a bit so I'll be nice and give it a positive rating, because I'm just a sucker like that. Expand
  29. 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, theRed 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
Metascore
31

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.