What kind of candy ass neighborhood was invaded? I promise you that if paratroopers land in our back yards we start shooting. This movie is bad. BAD bad bad. So bad I'm ending it. Burn it. Burn Netflix. Burn bad film makers. Burn bad homeowners who aren't armed. Retitle: Candy Asses DIE DIE DIE!
shareAssuming for a moment that, in fact, a batch of invading paratroopers were to drop down in your neighborhood, your response would be to attempt to repel the invasion with a shotgun or hunting rifle? Maybe a handgun that you've shot targets with?
How do you suppose that will turn out? I've been on the other side of that and generally speaking, when heavily armed professional soldiers are fired on by untrained civilians using non-military weapons, it goes very, very poorly for the untrained civilians.
Even so, the air filled with bullets flying would mean a large scale parachuting force would suffer massive casualties, if not by being hit, but by not landing safely as the soldiers mind being at least slightly panicked.
shareNo, the air filled with bullets flying would mean a lot of civilians getting hit by mistake.
I'd think civilian resistance would be something they'd expect and be prepared to encounter. Considering getting shot at is their job, why would they be panicked?
"I mean, really, how many times will you look under Jabba's manboobs?"
No, not at all. A few redneck Americans firing wildly at paratroopers would probably result in more Yankees killed than paratroopers - even without the paratroops firing!
Even trained American soldiers are extremely poor shots. Literally thousands of bullets are fired for every enemy killed - this has been consistent for all wars Americans have been in. For instance in Iraq and Afghanistan the United States has fired an estimated 250,000 rounds for every insurgent killed. Imagine how much less effective civilians would be!
Even trained American soldiers are extremely poor shots. Literally thousands of bullets are fired for every enemy killed - this has been consistent for all wars Americans have been in.
Dude would probably have ended up shooting some non soldiers
shareThis movie was supposed to take place in Spokane WA and trust me, they'd be armed and shooting there.
Maybe its a good idea maybe not, but people with weapons would be likely to fire out of self preservation.
So, taking a potshot at a professional soldier, in full gear, and backed up with heavy weapon - this is self-preservation?
If you ever find yourself under attack by a professional military, you, as a civilian, have two routes. Get away if you can, hunker down if you have to. The fastest way to become a dead civilian is to take on a military target with inferior weapons and no training.
Remember, regardless of country, paratroopers are the elite units. They're not barely-trained recruits, they're not rear echelon specialists.
In the 1984 Red Dawn, there was a scene in the invasion where there was a bumper sticker on a truck shown saying "The only way I'll give up my gun is if you pry it from my cold dead hand" then they showed a person dead on the ground next to it with a Colt .45 in his hand then one of the Cuban soldiers stepped on that hand and took the gun & put it in his belt.
Sure perhaps those with guns did shoot at the paratroopers immediately, and most likely got themselves killed or captured like Tom Eckart who was a cop. The smart ones, probably with military experience, would NOT fire right away unless absolutely necessary as they are outnumbered and outgunned. Firing at animals and targets in a range is different than shooting against a trained army with AKs, machine guns, and the like. If those armed citizens organized themselves into some sort of militia and had training in small unit tactics and before the invasion or if there was a military unit nearby, then perhaps it would be more feasible to attack the paratroopers head on, but the smart thing would do is what Jed did and head for the woods with their guns at least initially. It would also be more useful if those armed civilians did hide their weapons and focused on gathering intelligence and finding ways to communicate with others before attempting any counterattack and guerilla warfare.
And then there's the question of how did hundreds of enemy aircraft ever make it into the air space over the neighborhood in the first place? Where the hell was the U.S. military? Why weren't the planes dispatched before they even hit the coastline? It's one thing to ask viewers to suspend their disbelief for a couple of hours of film. It's another entirely to ask them to go brain dead for a couple of hours of film. (Not that I did. I couldn't watch more than 20 minutes.)
sharethey showed an F-16 shooting at some of the NK/Russian planes before it was destroyed.
if you watch the part where the marines talked to the Wolverines, you would see their explanation. The NK & Russians used an electric pulse to render the power and equipment dead. subs had drown, and tactical non nuclear weapons were used at strategic targets before the fighters and paratroopers and the like invaded.
You need to kill your brain before starting to watch this cheap bit of propaganda aimed at children.
shareWhat a very grown up post! It's very easy to say you would turn into Rambo if this did happen, but I doubt you would last very long!
shareLots of people think they can be a hero or (if their motives are less idealistic and more about being cool) a badass in the hypothetical scenario that an enemy force invaded. I think part of it comes from the fact the US has never suffered actual invasion from a foreign power, not for hundreds of years, anyway; thus the current generation has no idea what it's like to be invaded, and, more importantly, doesn't think they ever will. Not realistically, anyway. So the amount of serious thought they seem to have given to what they'd do in the unlikely event an invasion happened amounts to "I'd get my gun and shoot at them."
"I mean, really, how many times will you look under Jabba's manboobs?"
If you shot on the invaders you're basically guaranteed to be getting yourself killed. Just for the fact that at that point in time your only goal should be getting out of dodge and finding a hiding space and attacking them is doing nothing but killing time. At best you'd hit 1 or 2 of the invaders but guess what theres like a good 1000 or more troops parachuting in that would get you.
This moronic belief that civilians can stop an army is why idiots in the NRA believe they really need automatic weapons in their home for protection.
"This moronic belief that civilians can stop an army is why idiots in the NRA believe they really need automatic weapons in their home for protection."
This "moronic belief" is the reason the Japanese didn't invade the west coast after Pearl Harbor. Their fear was that "there would be a gun behind every blade of grass" thanks to our Second Amendment.
This "moronic belief" is the reason the Japanese didn't invade the west coast after Pearl Harbor
I started this stupid thread back in January as an angry response to just how dreadful this film is. Reading it now, I'm laughing at myself and the posts that keep coming in. Believe it or not, I am not a right wing redneck, but rather a a liberal hippie who really despises bad films. I will admit I like guns and we do know how to shoot here in my part of the world. We shoot the *beep* out of stuff. This movie, it needs to be shot. In the face. And maybe stabbed. The internet never dies. Nor do bad films. Let us set our ideological differences aside and agree on one thing; this movie sucks.
shareThat is funny - and you are right, it was a dumb movie, and a remake of a dumb movie.
As for civilians with guns, they wouldn't stand a chance during the invasion. They actually did the right thing in the beginning by getting out of Dodge and regrouping to attack on their own terms.
Speaking as an ex-combat soldier I know how these guys would feel going in - make it hard and fast (Speed and Violence, Force and Brutality - sort of an unofficial motto we had)
Any sign of resistance is going to be put down hard. As soon as they hit the ground they are looking to secure the area, and anyone who looks like the slightest threat is going to die. Unorganized civilians going up against heavily armed, trained and motivated combat soldiers using squad tactics, fire and movement and a ton of fire power will last mere seconds. Picture a mixed martial arts champion fighting a six year old kid. Same kind of fight.
Just hearing high powered bullets go past your head for the first time (like BIG fire crackers) can be disorienting and cause hesitation, which makes untrained civilians with small arms very soft targets.
Having guns in your home is for protection from your fellow gun toting citizens, not fighting an invading army. Modern warfare just doesn't work that way.
I can usually tell when I'm here by other people's reactions.
but rather a a liberal hippie who really despises bad films
Dammit--You're right. I'm a 47 year old capitalist bastard with no hair still trying to find myself. I'm living a lie here--Look away--the shame, the shame. (That movie still sucks though).
shareMy husband said the exact same thing if we were invaded. But i still enjoyed the movie. Lots of action n explosions.
shareBest thing to do would be hide and fight as guerillas (as depicted) a single sniper (trained or not) can stop a convoy. If you were to stand in your front yard even with an M-4 there is a good chance you will be killed or captured. 22 years of military training speaking here.
shareThere is alot of brainwashed comments here, stating that sivilians are lousy shots and that military are full of deadly superhuman killers.
I was in the army, and trained for close combat encounters. My weapons were; MP5, Glock, G3, MG3. I was trained for city defence. I had a loaded MP5 behind the guy in front and shot targets left and right.
I consider myself no better shot than any other hunter or clay shooter. We trained only on still targets. So i would say that clayshooters may well be better shots than most army personell.
So. If there were an invation. And if i were invading. I would;
* Not know the land as well as the locals
* Be loaded up with gear, making it more difficult to fire, than a sivilian with just a gun and comfortable clothes.
* Be abit disorientated with gunshots from all angles.
When Norway was invaded by Germany in the second world war. It was the gurilla warfare that did the most damage to the Germans here in Norway.
How do you suppose that will turn out? I've been on the other side of that and generally speaking, when heavily armed professional soldiers are fired on by untrained civilians using non-military weapons, it goes very, very poorly for the untrained civilians.
So, you want to take on the Chinese army with a 92FS? I have one myself, and it's useful enough in an emergency. It's not something you're going to use to fight off a trained soldier in full gear, with an assault rifle, grenades and everything else.
Pistols are very short range weapons. What you see on TV and the movies is not remotely close to real life. Guys with pistols don't take on guys with rifles or shotguns. You would be very hard pressed to hit what you're aiming at beyond 50 yards, and that would have to be a stationary target at that distance.