A shot from John Milius' original Red Dawn (bottom) and a shot
from Dan Bradley's 2012 remake (top).
After viewing both John Milus' cult hit Red Dawn and Dan Bradley's remake that has just been released over Thanksgiving weekend, I learned two things; one, remaking a mediocre film and not altering much of its material gives the world another mediocre film and that I never want to see the U.S. get invaded unless the ones invading us have some clear agenda. I'll start off by saying that I didn't enjoy either film that much, but can't say I hated either of them. The casting for both films is solid, the effects are equally nice, and each film, I guess you can say, accomplishes what it wants to be.
But that's not enough. I gave both films a two out of four star rating and seemed to have the same complaints for both. People will inevitably ask me which one I find superior and I am prepared to give a fair analysis of both in a unique format, unparallel to how I've compared a number of movies in my day. In both Red Dawn films, we are given a group of high school teens who fight back against invading foreigners as a team called the "Wolverines," after their school football team. Let's think of each of these films as enemy football teams and this blog post as a football game. I will pick out six categories and explain how each film handled them. If they did it really well, 7 points (a touchdown plus the extra point). If they did it pretty well, 6 points (a simple touchdown with no extra point). And if they handled it in a sub-par manner but still wound up being somewhat successful, 3 points (a field goal).
Without any further adieu, let the games begin...
ROUND 1: CHARACTERS:
Red Dawn (1984): We are dropped into the setting of the film right after a short monologue and it takes only about a minute before the invasion begins. I can say the film wastes no time, but the remainder of the picture is either hokey dialog exchanged between great actors or repetitive warfare that begins to look the same after a while. Scarcely do we become attached to these characters, let alone do we get any development with them. Give 'em a 3.
Red Dawn (2012): The remake doesn't fare much better in terms of character development. There are a few sequences, however, where we could see the film try to tack on some emotional depth behind the characters and show smaller conflicts within the bigger one. For one, when Matt (Josh Peck) selfishly runs off to find his girlfriend, leaving his brother Jed (Chris Hemsworth) and their crew behind, we see an immediate spark of brotherly conflict as Matt brings up upon returning that Jed enlisted for six years in the war after the death of their mother, refusing to face their problems head-on. The conflict is a bit contrived, but I can't fault the film for trying. Aside from Jed and Matt, the other Wolverines seem to be along for the ride. Give 'em a 3, as well, bringing the game to a tie.
1984: 3, 2012: 3.
ROUND 2: ACTION:
Red Dawn (1984): It's no secret that my fondness for action sequences in films has worn thin. Fortunately, I can say with satisfaction that Red Dawn offers a thing I call "controlled chaos," where there is a heavy reliance on action, but it is mostly clear and easy to see. Is it enthralling and as immersing as it could be? No. But it delicately blends corniness with surprise and that works for the most part. Give 'em a 6.
Red Dawn (2012): Dan Bradley's Red Dawn, on the other hand, offers the kind of action I call "messy and incoherent," where the camera never stays still, bullets fly and things explode without ever resembling anything of a consistent pace, and everything is a murky mess. I return to my original analogy from my review of the film and that is, "Ever play a Call of Duty game? Join an online
match, turn the volume all the way up, begin playing, and have someone
shake the TV in the process and you got the action scenes in Red Dawn." Give 'em a 3.
1984: 9, 2012: 6.
ROUND 3: DEPICTION OF INVASION:
Red Dawn (1984): I was stunned how quickly Red Dawn began at establishing the Soviet invasion, but I felt underwhelmed as everyone scurried out of the school in the opening scene and carried on in their own car. There was little time for impending suspense and even less time to try and humanize the characters' backgrounds. Give 'em a 3.
Red Dawn (2012): The depiction of the remakes invasion is about the closest thing to riveting as we'll ever get. It's far from perfect, but entertained and somewhat frightened I was. Seeing the hundreds of paratroopers fall to our soil and to see the F-16 planes tear through the sky was a very incredibly entertaining sight. It also makes the main characters' journey to the mountainous cabin feel longer instead of blink-and-you-miss-it like in the original film. If only the camera would stay steady. Give 'em a 6; we have a tie.
1984: 12, 2012: 12.
ROUND 4: DEPICTION OF VILLAINS:
Red Dawn (1984): It's a requirement in action films that we have believable villains, and the original Red Dawn gives us probably the closest thing to that. The villains are undercooked and pretty stereotypical, but they are mostly believable as they drop in and heartlessly exterminate everyone around them. They don't have much of an agenda, but I wonder if they event thought they'd get that far. Maybe they were just surprised they landed in one piece. Give 'em a 3.
Red Dawn (2012): The villains in the remake are not much better, in fact, they are a bit worse. They are messy, disorganized, listless, confused, and rarely can I expect a plan from guys who shout about three words at a time. Give 'em a reluctant 3; we're tied again.
1984: 15, 2012: 15.
ROUND 5: ACTORS:
Red Dawn (1984): At the time, the cast in the original Red Dawn was considered an ensemble. There was the charming Patrick Swayze, the laidback C. Thomas Howell, who always seems to go securely under the radar, Charlie Sheen in a debut role, Powers Boothe in a fitting one, and Lea Thompson has the supporting female lead. Needless to say, this one had casting down to a tune (keep in mind, I'm neglecting the fact that they found not much interesting to do with any of them). Give 'em a 6.
Red Dawn (2012): My bias towards Josh Peck, who I grew up watching on The Amanda Show and Drake and Josh, must be put aside. The cast for this remake is a little strange and not as memorable. Chris Hemsworth and Peck bring in good chemistry together, but Isabel Lucas, Josh Hutcherson, Connor Cruise, and Adrianne Palicki do not bring too much to the table. Give 'em a 3.
1984: 21, 2012: 18.
ROUND 6: SPECIAL EFFECTS:
Red Dawn (1984): In the original Red Dawn, the special effects are vivid and largely imaginative, if too often, and to put it simply, can be viewed even pretty impressive by today's standards. Give 'em a 6.
Red Dawn (2012): The remake gives us plenty more explosion and a lot more of an emphasis on the use of weaponry by teenagers, and I can efficiently state that the effects seem to be consistent and believable, even if the scenario isn't. Give 'em a 6, as well, bringing this hard-fought game to a close.
FINAL SCORE: 1984: 27, 2012: 24.
POST-GAME SHOW
It's needless to say that the Red Dawn films are not my thing, but after seeing how similar my reviews are, I felt I had to crank out a blog-post saying which film I liked more. I feel that both films are mediocre entries in the ambiguous genre called "action," but if we're doing the political "lesser of two evils" method, I must say the original film feels more accomplished, despite its corniness and hokey quirks, while the remake doesn't justify its exsistence by repeating the problems of its original film. I hope you enjoyed today's game.
NOTE: Please, dear consumer; make a wise decision if you plan on visiting the multiplex anytime soon. I'll leave my review of the phenomenally captivating Life of Pi here, http://stevethemovieman.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=perfect&thread=3439&page=1
Comments
Post a Comment