"Red Dawn" Review
I take in a late night screening of that "Red Dawn" remake. Lets see how this one turns out.
DVD's
Blip TV
Original Series
Paranoia
Welcome
Previously featured on YouTube before ultimately being ousted by the powers that be (those powers being the people behind "Nail Gun Massacre") thecinemasnob.com will
feature all of the Snob's videos, old and new, and also brand new shows and full length original movies for those of us who already can't get enough of Z-Grade Cinema.
Links
Mike Bracken
The Spoony One
Tenebrous Kate
Eccentric Cinema
ThatGuyWithTheGlasses
Pushing Up Roses
Cinemassacre
The Geek Den
Revolving Video
Shaun Millington
Shriek Freak Arrow in the Head
Leslie Jones Blastoff Network
I Spit on Your Taste
Vault of Horror
Bloody Disgusting
Varied Celluloid
Patrick Rodriguez
Avante Garde Theatre
DjDaymage Halloween Mix
Cheap Arse Film Review
Forgotten Junk
Banned From the Video Store
The Experience Cinematic
Fistful of Cult
Video Hero's Hollywood Rant
The Horror Channel
Full Moon Reviews
SFHFF Review
The Spoony One
Tenebrous Kate
Eccentric Cinema
ThatGuyWithTheGlasses
Pushing Up Roses
Cinemassacre
The Geek Den
Revolving Video
Shaun Millington
Shriek Freak Arrow in the Head
Leslie Jones Blastoff Network
I Spit on Your Taste
Vault of Horror
Bloody Disgusting
Varied Celluloid
Patrick Rodriguez
Avante Garde Theatre
DjDaymage Halloween Mix
Cheap Arse Film Review
Forgotten Junk
Banned From the Video Store
The Experience Cinematic
Fistful of Cult
Video Hero's Hollywood Rant
The Horror Channel
Full Moon Reviews
SFHFF Review
The Cinema Snob: "Red Dawn" Review
Support
Help Support The Cinema Snob!
Unfortunately my page hates donate buttons and the link doesn't work, but if you would like to help out The Cinema Snob, my Paypal account is under thecinemasnob@yahoo.com
Unfortunately my page hates donate buttons and the link doesn't work, but if you would like to help out The Cinema Snob, my Paypal account is under thecinemasnob@yahoo.com
I like your solo reviews. There's really nothing to hold you back from spewing everything you feel about the movie, with no interruptions.
Pure. 100%. All American. Raw. Brad Jones.
Reply to this
You're making Brad sound like a kind of burger...
I could go for some burgers right now...
God damnit! >_<
Reply to this
Are you saying Brad ISN'T a delicious hunk of meat?
Reply to this
Well, The Great Gatsby is coming on Christmas
Reply to this
Sorry, but the studio rescheduled it to be released in May
Reply to this
I guess they thought there where way too many Leonardo Dicaprio movies at Christmas.
Reply to this
Happy Thanksgiving Dr. Jones.
Reply to this
the entire reason behind this movie was to be a promotional material for the game Homefront. or vice versa. crappy game crappy remake.
Reply to this
Good to know to wait for this to be a rental. I saw "Tomorrow, When the War Began" was about as good as a "remake" would be to "Red Dawn" and that film was based on a series of young adult novels. Australia has the "Tomorrow" series and we get stuck with Twilight.
Reply to this
Tomorrow, When the War Began (The original book not the movie, I hate doing this too) and its, I don't know, dozen sequels are the only Red Dawn remake I need.
Funny thing is when I saw Skyfall they played the Red Dawn and World War Z trailers back to back. After the movie my friends and I were trying to work out which scenes belonged to which trailer. Is it just us or does is Brad Pitt made up to look like Thor?
Reply to this
strangely enough, WWZ and Fake Red Dawn, look like the same movie.
Hollywood, You're really going to have a Zombie movie, be PG 13? what's even the point!?
I've seen the original red dawn. and it is a fun movie. this movie, looks like transformers, with out the transformers in it. thus i might as well just watch battleship. which was also transformers, with out the transformers in it.
As for Carrie, if Chloe Moretz, is in a R rated film, *assuming they do not puss out, and release it as a pg 13* and she is in a movie, where she's murdering people in it again. count me in! as She, along with Nick Cage, were by far the highlight of Kick Ass. And she was a fantastic vampire in Let Me In, as well.
But lately, she's been just in movies where she hasn't really done much. Like Darkshadows, where she's just there, to be there. Who makes a vampire movie, and makes it pg13, as well? what's the point?
The Avengers should be PG 13, not a movie about zombies eating people, or blood sucking vampires.
And as for the blood comment Brad made, well at least Lincoln, and Skyfall, had the balls to include blood in a pg 13 movie.
I did consider watching this film. But only because Chris was in it. but now that i find out that he's only in it a small bit. pass. I'll see Rise of the Gaurdians instead.
And I believe The Collection starts next week. Which I will probably see as well. unless they puss out on that too.
Reply to this
I'm a projectionist and the studio had us add the Mama trailer to Twilight for the second week, so if it wasn't there before, it's probably there now. Meh.
I try to mix up the trailer packages as much as I can when the studios allow it.
Reply to this
The first image I see is your face in your hand. This is gonna be a good one. XD
Post-watch: I was right!
Reply to this
Great job going it alone but you did say "We" when referring to yourself. I was half expecting someone to be edited in or something lol
Reply to this
I actually prefer Brad's solo reviews to his midnight reviews. He has a strong, well thought out opinion that he applies an absolute encyclopedic knowledge of film to. Please do more!
Reply to this
I also like your solo reviews but I have to admit that on Thanksgiving, seeing you sitting there all alone talking about yet another shitty remake of a beloved 80's movie was kinda sad.
Having the clamshell box right there was an unexpected touch, but the minute you mentioned that more faithful to the book doesn't always mean better I knew exactly where you were going to go. Yeah, the Shining mini-series really did suck, but let's face it, whenever you go from "Jack Nicholson at his scenery-chewing best" to "the guy from that crappy sitcom" your remake is doomed before it begins.
Reply to this
Thankfully, it's not playing in my theater, so I'll wait until they start showing Lincoln. If you see that movie playing Brad, I would love to hear your thoughts on it.
The only December release I'm interested in is obviously The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. At least seeing the return of Ian McKellen as Gandalf the Grey is something to look forward to more than the Red Dawn remake.
Reply to this
Oops! Forgot about Django Unchained. That movie looks so awesome, I don't know if I should watch it on Christmas or New Year's Day!
Reply to this
The Zack Snyder Dawn Of The Dead wouldn't irritate me so much, if it wasn't viewed as a remake. It's pretty good, but the original was a different and much more ingenious movie.
Reply to this
I know that Feeling Brad.
As of last year ...The orignal "The Thing"
I've had people think I was talking about "The Thing from another world". Admittedly Mostly people trying to act smart or much older people who actually think I'm talking about it.
Which is great in its own right - but spending 30 seconds identifying what the movie you're talking about is annoying.
I've taken to "John Carpenter's The Thing" to avoid that nonsense.
Reply to this
is there a way to watch this without automatic episode loading at the end? Its really annoying.
Reply to this
Yes, a highly effective and surprisingly simple solution to your issue is actually available!
CLOSE THE PAGE WHEN THE VIDEO IS OVER DUMBASS!
Reply to this
:/ This movie was perfectly fine and enjoyable. It certainly didn't "suck"...
Reply to this
This review is kind of pointless, isn't it? I mean, there's zero chance Brad 'stuck in the 80s' Jones would like a remake of a film he grew up watching.
Anyway, who really cares. Red Dawn is just a silly propaganda film.
Reply to this
Are you sure you're not getting "Brad Jones" mixed up with "80's Dan"? Because what you just said was kind of Bullshit. Brad gave a positive review to The Nightmare On Elm Street remake and that is definitely an 80's movie that he grew up watching and he also seems to be keeping an open mind on the potential of the Robocop remake.
I'd imagine the reason that he dislikes most of these remakes has little to do with blind nostalgia and more to do with the fact that they're most often than not blatant cash-ins with little to no thought or artistry put into them. Christ some of them have so little to do with the originals that they're remakes in name only, just lazy generic as all hell modern movies coasting on the popularity of their apparent source material.
Reply to this
Now now, don't get mad at him. He's just envious of my penis, I guess.
Reply to this
An apt metaphor for the envy that most remakes feel for the balls of their predecessors
Reply to this
Well not some, I know The Departed doesn't. Or hell even back in the 40s The Maltese Falcon with Bogart. Not John Carpenter's The Thing or Martin Scorsese's Cape Fear. Hell if you want to count A Fistful of dollars. But yeah most.
Reply to this
Well I was being more than a little facetious with that remark. I certainly don't think that a remake is inherently inferior to it's source material, infact John Carpenter's The Thing and Cronenbergs The Fly are two of my favourite horror movies ever and I greatly prefer them to the originals. The 1988 version of The Blob is another one I enjoy more than it's 1958 counterpart.
Reply to this
I totally agree, Just because something is a remake, doesn't mean it will be automatically bad. Look at Dredd VS Judge Dredd for recent example. Sometimes a remake, can actually be better. It really just matters of how much Hollywood is actually willing to try.
Where movies like Red Dawn, Total Recall, and many more remakes fail, is the lack of balls on the hollywood producers, and the lack of understanding of the original material.
As you have directors who think they know the material, and those who actually do.
As I actually predict that the remake to Evil Dead, will actually be pretty good. And maybe even the Remake to Carrie. but it is hard to tell, seeming that they have only released a teaser so far, for both.
so it IS possible for a remake to be, maybe not AS good, but at least good. and in some cases, better, or more entertaining. Like John Carpenter's The Thing. Probably the best remake of all time.
Reply to this
Who isn't?
Reply to this
The only thing about this movie that really bugs me is the fact that it is set in Spokane, Washington, but filmed in Detroit. I live in Spokane and we have a steady film business here. It's kinda hurtful in a way that they set a movie here and filmed it somewhere else for no reason.
Reply to this
I think the reason is that it'd be a lot cheaper to film in Detroit than Washington.
Reply to this
Washington? You'd think they'd want to film it in Canada in that case, it being the cheaper alternative with the same basic geography.
Reply to this
I was holding out a little tiny bit of hope for this movie... I guess that paid off in the acting!
The simplest reason for changing the Chinese invaders to North Korean is because China is one of America's biggest buyers of movie tickets. A lot of movies that bomb here can easily make back its budget overseas and by making the villains Chinese that could very easily kill all marketability over there so why not make it a country that universally hates us and we couldn't care less if they don't like it or show i there... even though this movie actually makes them come off as a country powerful enough to pull this off.
I guess they could've gone the rout as this Australian movie and just make them an unnamed enemy that could be from anywhere!
The only problem with the Carrie remake I got is the whole we're making it more like the books excuse when I can tell from the casting alone they're not... In the original story the reason Carrie is unpopular and picked on is because she's not a pretty girl! She's described as being heavy set and having bad acne... yet this movie hires another girl who is at worst in this movie is going to look regular TV/movie nerdy ugly. It's more or less like what you said they did with the Total Recall movie!
Reply to this
I wish you were pro racist and a national socialist(neo nazi) brad because t you could influence alot of youth to be racist
Reply to this
...What.
Reply to this
what an odd thing to say
Reply to this
Look at his handle..."Skullhead88" means "I am a skinhead, heil Hitler" ("h" is the 8th letter in the alphabet.)
The Internet: we got crazies.
Reply to this
Eh. Kinda figured that out after the initial shock passed. So uh... I'm not a big fan of censorship but I still call banhammer on that one because you really have to make it understood that blatant hate speech is unacceptable in any context (by "you" I mean Brad or whoever moderates this place but I'm sure they're already on it and my input isn't really needed).
If that's trolling that's not even funny in an ironic way, it's just bland and unoriginal (if strangely worded) and I urge OP to reconsider his/her life's choices.
Reply to this
People like you aught to be rounded up and gassed.
Reply to this
Faggot Josh is the racist one, go talk to him.
Reply to this
So, the Lone Ranger movie looks like it's a Tonto movie with a supporting appearance by the Lone Ranger? Are you sure Michael Bay hasn't gotten his hands on yet another franchise?
Reply to this
No, it's because Johnny Depp is more marketable as an actor than Armie Hammer is apparently. And it's more like Walt Disney enterprises got a hold of another franchise. Gore Verbinski is directing so I expect a Pirates of the Caribbean level of a movie or Rango. That an Jerry Bruckheimer is involved so it will possibly be much like Pirates of the Caribbean. Here's hoping it won't have so many sequels.
Reply to this
Also, here's hoping it's not 3 hours.
Reply to this
I do have to agree with Brad, the intial invasion scenes from the trailer just look fake.
It looks like they just stole it from World in conflict, they even set it in the same part of the country.
Reply to this
Oh, man. In the preview image, you look so dejected. This is gonna hurt, isn't it?
Reply to this
Are you posting the new Radiodrome episode this weekend? I really need my weekly Faggot Josh fix, I'm tweakin over here!
Reply to this
Funny how Korea is becoming the evil China-standin. It's almost like their army is not terribly outdated and is forced to cultivate their own fields to avoid starving XD
And this invasion scene is really one of the prime reasons why I hate CGI: It's just to tempting to make scenes so giant and bombastic that they can't possibly be real.
Reply to this
The reason they changed the invaders from Chinese to North Korean is because they didn't want to piss off Chinese moviegoers, who are a huge market... and because a lot of the investors in the movie were Chinese. Oops.
So instead we're given the message that all Asians are interchangeable.
Reply to this
I know, but if you're basically not allowed to make a movie about a contemporary communist superpower invading the USA, then don't make such a movie in the first place - especially if the only other contemporary communist nations left could be bombed into the stone age long before they could ever set foot on American soil.
It'd be like making a WWII and replace all Germans with Liechtensteiners - because Luxembourg has a far lower population (equaling a smaller drop in profit should they feel offended).
Reply to this
Err, please change "Luxembourg" to "Liechtenstein" <_<
Reply to this
I know, right? This movie has no reason to exist.
And hell, modern China is no more communist than we are. Capitalism is out of control over there, they just keep pictures of Mao everywhere the keep the citizens in line. The title, "Red Dawn", makes no sense in a modern context.
Reply to this
"red dawn" my ass, it should be called quick cut dawn! LOL!
Reply to this
"red dawn" my ass, it should be called quick cut dawn! LOL!
Reply to this
I heard it was because hollywood was afraid of upsetting the chicoms. Funny considering during the cold war when they actually had nukes pointing at them they had no problem making a propaganda film but now that the chicoms has hollyweird by the financial short hairs they are too scared. Its not fear of death they fear, its being poor.
Reply to this
The difference between then and now is that now Hollywood gets loads of money from Chinese moviegoers. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot.
Reply to this
Hitcher remake!!!? No, just no!
Reply to this
They already did a Hitcher remake didn't they or did you just realize that there was one. Talk about disappointing poor remakes, The Hitcher is right up there. Though the sequel was good either.
Reply to this
Did they change all the invaders' Chinese speech and writing to Korean, or did they just do the flags and mentions of the country and call it a day? I thought it would be pretty funny if anyone who understood Chinese or just knew the difference between the two written languages could easily see how lazy the change was.
Reply to this
Bonus points if the former Chinese were uttering Asian-sounding gibberish from the start.
Reply to this
Why I hated the movie.
Sure the 1980s version was a bit far-fetched but is was possible given the circumstances the movie sets up in the very beginning.
But North Korea because you're afraid to lose the Chinese Market? And even China's a bridge too far in terms of an invasion and conquest...
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/21/could_north_koreans_invade_america
There's fantasy...and then there's just plain stupidity.
Reply to this
I think the scariest thing is people actually falling for the premise as credible somehow...again, check out the foreign policy blogspot piece. It's fun. More of us read that and demands some credibility, perhaps we'll get better movies...
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/21/could_north_koreans_invade_america
Reply to this
you know, the concept of being invaded by a Michael Bay movie, is actually scarier then the concept of being invaded by North Korea...
Reply to this
Well, at least the invasion will have good explosions and make a lot of money.
Reply to this
they'd be less CG too.
Reply to this
guys your site is not viewable on an ipad. when will you make your videos ipad compatble?
Reply to this
You know, the reason why the original movie holds up and why it was entertaining is because surrounded by all the (awesome) 80s cheesiness, there was a real movie there.
When Powers Booth is sitting with the kids around the campfire telling them how the invasion went down, you can nod your head there and say "yeah ok, I buy all that." It's just plausible enough that you can roll with it.
The "avenge me" scene is fun to mock for the acting, but it's still about a father who knows he's going to be executed telling his sons not to grieve for him. At its core, that's some pretty heavy shit. The subplot about the kid who lead the Soviets to their position and them having to decide whether to execute him... the subplot about the Cuban general who's writing home to his wife about how he's tired of all the killing, and how he empathizes with the Wolverines just trying to protect their homeland. Again, it's not Citizen Kane... but it's still a real movie. Incredibly cheesy and over-the-top, but a real movie.
The remake... yeah not so much.
Reply to this
Yeah, you know that bad guy whose sinister and could have been an awesome bad guy? That's Will Yun Lee and he's an awesome action star who plays a great bad guy (even in bad movies). He's the reason (well, him and Hutchison) I even went to go see it. Considering how little impact they have on the movie I totally feel like I didn't get my money's worth.
You got it right when you said it's a product of its time. Even now you give it credit for being made in a time where invasion felt real. Nowadays, most people are more concerned about our own state and invasion is a far off 80's joke. More people are concerned with what's on television (or about rising costs and lack of jobs in my group).
Great review!
Reply to this
Yeah, I pretty much disagree with each and every single thing you knocked this movie for. It wasn't great, but it was perfectly fine and enjoyable, and pretty much every point you make is an exagerrated nitpick in order to bash a movie you already went into wanting to hate. Not your best stuff...
Reply to this
Nope. Horseshit. While I didn't like it, I stated it actually wasn't as bad to sit through as I thought because the acting was really damn good. And honestly, if the half hour that is clearly missing from the movie was put back in, it would have atleast had a flowing narrative.
And criticizing an action film because I can't tell what the hell is going on because of the shaky cam, or who the paper thin characters getting killed are...that is NOT a nitpick. That is a legitimate problem with your film.
Oh yeah, and since when is this a thing that I immediately hate every movie that I thought looked bad from the trailers? Movies this year I liked, or kinda liked, that I thought the trailers sucked: "Frankenweenie," "Ted," "Men in Black 3," "The Dictator," "21 Jump Street," "John Carter," "Chronicle," to name a few.
What's that? Did I disprove your bullshit little theory in a matter of seconds?
Reply to this
Oh yeah, and I went into the Elm Street remake wanting to hate it, but came out liking it. That's right, another remake. To an already fine 1984 film.
Not your best comment...
Reply to this
lol, I love you Brad. Maybe Anonymous will come back to the big boy table in a few years.
Reply to this
While yes I agree, you probably didn't go in hating it, the guy is entitled to his opinion, but whatever. No matter how wrong he might be on that factor, at least he provides a difference of opinion on this site. Not saying I enjoy stupid Red Dawn remake either. But I hated the Nightmare one about the same.
Reply to this
Sooooooo, Brad doesn't have the right to correct someone who provides misinformation?
Reply to this
Why not try to make it decent?
Because Hollywood doesn't care. They just want to put butts in the seats and sell DVDs, and if mediocre cuts it, then mediocre shall become the norm.
What is the only thing that draws attention to the Red Dawn remake? The fact that it's title is Red Dawn.
We're past the Cold War. The USSR is dead. Communism lost. The modern surrogate boogeyman in the PRC doesn't fit either; they're capitalist to the core in practice no matter how communist they may claim to be in public.
Hell, the remake doesn't even use that modern parallel: They were so nutless that they changed the antagonists from the PRC to North Korea just to appease the real world PRC; a move that only serves to make the premise of the laughably stupid.
North Korea is NOT a military powerhouse; it's a very backward, largely uneducated third world country, and one of the most horrifying places to live.
Even ignoring difficulties posed by proximity and geography, North Korea TODAY would have real difficulty invading IRAQ when Hussain was in power, and the US kicked the shit out of THEM nearly a decade ago.
So, what's the point of remaking Red Dawn?
Another paycheck for Hollywood, and that alone isn't much of a reason for regular guy like me to go see it.
Reply to this
Wow, you mean Hollywood is the bad guy here, I mean Hollywood's also where good things like The Avengers gets made. I mean if where going to totally discount the system here take a step back, Hollywood let's someone like David Fincher continue to make smart movies. Warner bros. funds Chris Nolan money to make his latest movies. Martin Scorsese gets around Hollywood all the time and makes decent movies. I don't always thing Hollywood is out to steal your bottom dollar and get you in a seat. They may try sometimes yes, but really in the long run things like this will blow over and Hollywood will just realize what a bad idea it was and go on with their lives thinking of something else. I mean what does Red dawn making at the box office, $13,439 dollars that isn't a lot and it's barely making it's budget back.
Reply to this
Just because Hollywood is capable of occasionally producing a few good films does not excuse them from criticism.
Or in this case, their disturbing reliance on remakes, reboots, and re-imaginings of old properties.
And really, that's my biggest problem with film today; an overwhelming majority of what gets screened, are remakes et all.
And most of those are bad, boring, bland or flat out insulting films.
Any film can possess those qualities, but when that same film is made redundant in addition to that, that's when you have to question "why does this exist"?
If they aren't going to try to present the original premise in a refined or improved manner (as John Carpenter did with The Thing), but rather half-ass everything and probably deliver it out of context, why bother doing a remake for any reason BUT exploitation?
Even the worst memorable film is still worth more than the best forgettable film.
Ironically or not, what movie is more likely to be remembered a year from now?
The Red Dawn remake, or something like The Room?
"They may try sometimes yes, but really in the long run things like this will blow over and Hollywood will just realize what a bad idea it was and go on with their lives thinking of something else"
Dunno about you, but I've put up with this nostalgic exploitation crap for about 8 years and counting.
Not saying remakes and reboots are new (they're old; oldest remake I can think of of the top of my head is from the 1950s) but we live in an era where Hollywood is overly reliant on them.
Obviously, it must be making them good money, or they'd have stopped this crap years ago.
Reply to this
Oh, come on here for a minute, there is remakes yes coming out sometimes, but not at the rate you describe it. I mean they have slowed down considerably from the the rate they did it eariler. And some of you people on this site have been more than welcome for a reboot, or a remake. Hell that's where freaking Nolan's Batman came from, that's where Marc Webb's really overrated but loved by Brad Jones was made. The Departed was a really good remake of Infernal Affairs. I guess your the kind of guy who only watches independent movies all the time or maybe freaking Terrence Malik. And then you just trash on Hollywood for no good reason but oh they think digging my childhood memories is so insulting. If you don't like fine, go watch the original Red Dawn, I'm sure you can find it on Netflix or redbox easily. Look, I'm not defending this movie, I know it will probably suck hard. But you need to realize that Hollywood doesn't always pump the shill with remakes and reboots. And even when they do they are not always boring, and insulting as you put it. Or people wouldn't be praising Nolan's Batman like it was the second coming of Christ. That and simply movies like The Departed got born in this so called era of over reliant remakes and reboots you call it. Fucking Dredd was a reboot or a remake, and don't pretend it isn't. The Karate Kid remake was a good enough remake. I think you discount everything good because of a lot crap which yes, the theaters get flooded with it. Oh and another one, the new James Bond, he need to be rebooted after the foul stench of Die Another Day. Don't tell me that was boring and flat and insulting. And if you think Hollywood is just the remake factory, check what's out right now, a lot of non-remake movies. Red Dawn was the only freaking remake released recently, and it failed like Total Recall did. I say things are not looking good for your supposed trend of remakes. By the way Carrie's pretty old material and has already been remade once for TV, and King is always know for getting his books remade a lot into movies.
Reply to this
Sorry too much in rant mode to put spaces in that.
Reply to this
I actually read your unwieldy block of text, and well, it's a rant.
Long story short: I'm sick of sequels, prequels, and reboots of older franchises.
I am sick of seeing garbage like The Phantom Menace 3D, Clash of the Titans, or Die Hard 6 (whatever they're up to now) in theaters.
By far and large, they do nothing but cheapen the culture they're attached to.
They're overwhelmingly exploitative and not in a terribly interesting way; like Bruno Mattai only instead of it being one director working with a bunch of D-grade actors and the occasional B-listed, it's the entire movie industry.
They get these A-list actors, pour millions into CGI, license record-label grade music...but then they just go and screw the pooch in direction, editing, and most of all, STORY.
Like I said, they get all the best things to make a great movie trailer, but then (with rare exception) cock up making the actual movie.
I wouldn't have ANY problem with it if they would put some actual effort into these.
My favorite movie of all time, IS A REMAKE (Ocean's 11). I'm not averse to it.
But after seeing all the crap remakes in previous years (including most of Rob Zombie's work), I'm just burnt out on it.
Reply to this
Surprised you like Josh Peck so much. I thought he was the definition of dull surprise. Everything else though, ye gods this was the stuff of awful.
Reply to this
The whole point of Swayze and his brother getting killed in the original was they were using a diversionary tactic. They stayed in the base to buy time for whatshisface and the girl to escape. Swayze was going to give away his position the moment he started shooting shit up anyway, and he had already accepted he wasn't going to survive the odds, so he might as well get some kind of gratification trolling the Russian general just before he buys it. I didn't really have a problem with his death.
Reply to this