Talk:Red Dawn

Film Unassessed

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Thank you (someone) for making this a proper entry.

Wasn't this movie banned in West Germany for its glorification of violence? Andries 08:18, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Unofficially, there were other problems with the film in West Germany. The big one being that some groups would like the film because it parallels certain events in post 1945 germany. Nobody would want to create any wave of nostalgia for the postwar diehards who fought against the occupation. Its not that far (unforunately) word-wise from "Wolverine" to "Werewolf" either. The futile death of almost everyone at the end also sent the wrong message.

we are talking about pro west, west germany rigth? as i can see why in whould be Banned in east germanyJoeyjojo 03:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While west germany was pro-west, the country was very sensitive to doing things that would deliberaly upset their communist neighbors. There was also lots of sensitivity in West Germany over anything that looked too militaristic and too right-wing because of the kind of people that stuff appeals to in the country.

Edits

New to Wikipedia, so forgive me for stepping where I shouldn't.

Was watching this movie on SpikeTV this evening and figured I would fix a few errors in this write-up. (Just changed Kansas City to Omaha and The Missouri River to the Mississippi River)

Wiki is phenominal by the way.

Background

Greetings. I edited the Background info. Someone had stated that the paratroopers at the beginning of the movie were "Elite Soviet Spetsnaz" & "Cuban Special Forces", however this is never implicitly stated in the movie. They were Soviet VDV (Soviet Airborne). A very good job was done of replicating the uniforms, weapons and headgear! Also, you see the VDV marking on most of the replicate VDV (BMD's, etc) vehicles throughout the film. Also the VDV in the opening were speaking Russian, and were not Cubans.

Spetsnaz are what were used to track down the Wolverines after they were betrayed from within. Spetsnaz are very specialized units that would not participate in large scale airborne assaults as the one depicted. Also, the Cubans have never had a viable Airborne element, they lack the training, and most importantly, the means. Hence if there were Cuban paras involved in the backstory, they would have had to create this branch of the Cuban Army from scratch, train, and then equip them with transport.

Cuban and Nicaraguan ground units, yes, elite Airborne forces, definitely would be left to the Soviets.

Soviet propaganda film?

I remember reading somewhere that the plotline was inspired by a Soviet propaganda film depicting Soviet partisan resistance against the Nazis. Does anyone know more about this? GCarty 08:26, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I can't prove it, but it does seem to be very similar to a Soviet partisan film. However, Milius has publicly stated he was inspired by the Mujahideen and that one of his goals was to show an American audience what it was like to be an Afghan under the Soviet occupation. Palm_Dogg 05:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i can prove it im russian i actually remember that there was a film right after the Great Patriotic War where some teenagers in a Ukrainian town of Krasnodon fought the german army under largely the same circumstances and there are even plot similarities such as when one of the high school students in Red Dawn betrays all of them and is shot by one of the characters near the end, similar thing happens in the russian movie. the movie was called Molodaya gvardiya (young guards)(in russia elite armies are granted the title of guards)

Operation Red Dawn (film)

I was bold and merged the top couple of paragraphs of an article called Operation Red Dawn (film) with this one, then redirected. No sense in having two articles on the film, and the other one had the wrong name and doesn't add any detail. I added a couple of paragraphs at top, about gun control and about Operation Red Dawn, to this article; do with them what ye will. bikeable (talk) 05:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Expense

This movie sounds very expensive, with all the fake vehicles and paradrops. Captain Jackson 18:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Ego?

Now, I have never heard the song in question, nor seen the lyrics, but that line, especially coupled with the mention of this movie, makes me wonder if the words aren't actually Iron Eagle. - SAMAS 23 March, 2006

I have the album with the reference song, and the line is, indeed, "Iron Eagle." I changed them.

partisan vs. insurgent

I noticed in the history of edits that the references to the band of teenagers were changed to "insurgents." In a few cases, the former term was partisan. I'm not trying to dive in too deep here, but based on the definition of the two words, wouldn't partisan better describe the band?

For example:

Partisan - n. - A member of an organized body of fighters who attack or harass an enemy, especially within occupied territory; a guerrilla.

Insurgent - n. - A person who rises in revolt against an established authority, especially a government.

taken from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

I guess it all depends on if you could classify the communist government in the movie as an "established authority" or if you consider the band as "members of an organized body of fighters."

- grey ghost 02:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major Inaccuracies

This whole section is POV--somebody was offended by a besmirching of the Red Army, I guess--and is opinion. I deleted the most egregious comment but in my opinion the whole thing is offensively POV as it stands now. Rewrite or delete.--Buckboard 08:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

It also has a strong whiff of original research about it. I think entirely remove it. As an aside, I find it incredible that such a minor film (and that's putting it gently) has such a long article - suspiciously fancrufty. --Plumbago 08:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I don't know. This film was hardly minor. It was a popular box office hit, possibly influential, and a good example of a pop culture tie-in with politics in the mid-1980s. Now if we had separate articles on every character in the film no matter how minor, and maybe an article on homoerotic overtones in Red Dawn and one on Red Dawn Democrats, now that would be fancrufty. 70.108.86.207 20:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll stop reading Wikipedia for the rest of the day. Nothing else is going to top this great comment by 70.108.86.207 and I might as well end on a high note. Brilliant comment! Johntex\^talk 20:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entirely agree. You got me 70.108.86.207. Kudos dude. --Plumbago 21:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perceived Inaccuracies

This whole section should be taken out as it is POV Mirlin 04:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ludicrous in the extreme

If ever evidence was needed of the delusional paranoia of the Right-wing in the USA this film is surely it. The USA has not been invaded since 1812 and has the strongest armed forces in the world. The idea of the Soviet Union invading the USA was laughable when this film was made. Now of course the concept of anyone invading the USA has become an idea that even lunatics would scoff at. Those 12 million Cubans and 5 million Nicaraguans, yeah really frightening to a nation of some 280 million.SmokeyTheFatCat 22:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check your facts again - US territory was invaded during World War II. Johntex\^talk 08:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the 4.1 million Japanese troops that invaded China (population of approx 1 billion in 1935) and held its entire coast from 1937 to 1945 was frightening. If you think the overall point of this movie is "delusional paranoia of the right-wing in the USA" then you have missed the point. The point is war sucks. Avoid it. As for the idea of a Communist invasion, that happened to be the most likely scenario at the time, and the writer and director pulled the setting from real events that were happening in Afghanistan and past events in almost every war. To fully appreciate this movie, you have to put aside politics and try and see through the cheezy 1980's action film making. -grey ghost 00:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]