MovieChat Forums > Red Dawn (2012) Discussion > Things the remake did better than the or...

Things the remake did better than the original

posted 10 years ago by ImaWeabooApparantly
7 replies | jump to latest

While this isn't as great as the original, I felt it did do some things better.

-The ending was more open, but still optimistic. The ending to the original was shoehorned to make it more hopeful. Here, we don't know if the war ended or not, but it didn't end on a completely sour note.

-The remake established the characters better. The original went into the action too quickly.

[–] sugar22 10 years ago

I liked the way that the Wolverines rescued the shop owner woman that was about to be executed for aiding them, and then the crowd rallied to them when Robert used the SAW machine gun to take out the soldiers. I liked how they did that better than how they attacked the prison camp and airfield in the 1984 version. I am glad that the Darryl in the 2012 version stuck with him and was willing to draw the Spetsnaz away from the others when they found out he was tagged. I do like the backstory of the characters better in the 2012 version as it was hard to see who was who in the 1984 version.

[–] Hendry_William_French 10 years ago

I am glad that the Darryl in the 2012 version stuck with him and was willing to draw the Spetsnaz away from the others when they found out he was tagged

That scene was a perfect summation of how movies made in the past had so much more balls than films made now.

In the 84 Red Dawn the traitor is killed. No questions. He's a turn coat and he's executed by the Wolverines. In this one, they make the traitor an accidental one because the film makers are too chicken $hit to set up a scene where the film's heroes have to kill one of their own. That is so pussified and reeks of not taking any creative chances - something that ultimately summed up the lameness of this entire film.

John Milius's Red Dawn is vastly superior in every way to this film. There is absolutely nothing about this film that is better than the original.

Buckle up back there, we're going into... hyperactive

[–] saniainen-748-829141 10 years ago

John Milius's Red Dawn is vastly superior in every way to this film. There is absolutely nothing about this film that is better than the original.

Except better action, much smarter enemies, less plotholes, more beliveable plot, better acting and no killing for sake of antogonizing the enemy, . In other words 2012 was better in almost every way!

I agree, 2012 copped out from some of difficult subjects of original, but at least they fought with someone who showed some sign of intelligence.

[–] Fawkes_Rocks 9 years ago

lol The acting in this movie was terrible. And the writing was even worse. I wouldn't be surprised if this movie was written by someone in high school.

[–] Brooklynjoe76 (193) 6 years ago

This has to be the worst post I ever read.

[–] millsey72 (10947) 2 months ago

Most remakes are better than the original because they get to improve over the original version

[–] gss2 10 years ago

Not that the first Red Dawn wasn't flawed, but this one is just a dumb summer action flick. There isn't the same character development, which is what made the original movie great. The enemy soldiers are all obviously using American equipment where the original was careful to make it look Russian. The acting was passable, but I don't see the cast becoming future A list stars in the same way the original cast developed. The film doesn't have anywhere near the emotional impact of the first.

I could have done without the setting. Rural Colorado was a little more effective than Spokane, WA as an out of the way sight for an insurgency.