Skip to content

Reconsidering Red Dawn After 40 Years

16
Share

Reconsidering <em>Red Dawn</em> After 40 Years

Home / Reconsidering Red Dawn After 40 Years
Featured Essays Red Dawn

Reconsidering Red Dawn After 40 Years

By

Published on October 16, 2024

Credit: MGM/UA Entertainment Company

16
Share
Aardvark (Doug Toby) declaims his loyalty to the "Wolverines" in John Milius' Red Dawn.

Credit: MGM/UA Entertainment Company

American pop culture can be inspiring. Hopefully, it inspires the right people.

Popeye the Sailor Man served as the mascot of an Anarchist group during the Spanish Civil War. Pro-democracy demonstrators in Thailand in 2014 and Myanmar in 2021 employed the three-fingered salute from The Hunger Games. And in April 2022, a photograph from Ukraine circulated on social media: a downed Russian tank spray-painted with a single word in English, “Wolverines.” It was a reference to John Milius’ Red Dawn, a classic of the late Cold War.

Red Dawn, which enjoyed massive box office success upon its release 40 years ago in August 1984, tells the story of an insurgent group of teenagers who resist the Soviet invasion of a fictional small town in Colorado. The Wolverines’ guerilla tactics are more Việt Cộng than U.S. Army, but with a name taken from the high school football team, they’re true children of the Mountain West. It was one of many youth-oriented films of the 1980s and it featured several soon-to-be stars, among them Patrick Swayze—the Wolverines’ leader Jed—Charlie Sheen, Jennifer Grey, and Lea Thompson. But it was no romp. If anything, the film was anchored by the melancholic veteran character actors in supporting roles, among them Harry Dean Stanton, Ben Johnson, and Powers Boothe.

The Ukrainian fighters’ identification with the Wolverines is poignant not only for what it says about the Ukrainians but also for what it suggests about the film’s American audience. “Red Dawn” is a verb in our lexicon, as in “I’m going to Red Dawn your ass,” and the film’s admirers include libertarian and pro-gun intellectuals. If you look closely, however, you will see that the film’s narrative does not differ all that much from the mainstream media coverage of the war in Ukraine. It is an encapsulation of how Americans talk about war in general, both the wars we fight ourselves, as well as the causes we support with either our soft power or our treasure.

* * *

Milius was a friend and collaborator of New Hollywood’s auteurs. He had written a draft of Apocalypse Now—his favorite pastime is said to have influenced the surfing sequence—and offered informal advice during the shooting of Jaws that led to Quint’s iconic speech about the U.S.S. Indianapolis. Like Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Coppola, and George Lucas, he was a child of the 1960s—but not their ’60s. He called himself a “frustrated fighter pilot,” whose attempt to enlist during the Vietnam War was thwarted by his asthma. And his aesthetic was hyper-masculine and ultra-violent; Conan the Barbarian, his previous film, was almost rated X. He was an avid collector of firearms; Darren Dalton, who played one of the Wolverines, described him to me as “a teddy bear with a machine gun.” According to a not quite substantiated rumor, the Coen brothers used Milius as the inspiration for John Goodman’s Walter Sobchak in The Big Lebowski.

The audiences may have loved Red Dawn, but the critics were hostile. One predicted the movie would be remembered solely as the first to obtain a PG-13 rating—inappropriate for pre-teens, even as it catered to an adolescent appetite for blood and guns. Another wrote, “If only Milius’ narrative were as clear as his right-wing sentiments.” The New York Times’ Janet Maslin called it “rabidly inflammatory.”

Tom Eckert (Harry Dean Stanton) gazes solemnly through the fence of a prison camp in John Milius' Red Dawn.
Credit: MGM/UA Entertainment Company

Milius met the criticism with good humor, and he charmed one journalist with a joking self-caricature: “the Hermann Göring of the cinema.” He defended Red Dawn as anti-war in spirit, a study of how armed conflict dehumanizes both the occupier and the occupied. In the film, the Soviets establish Stalinist camps, but their Central American allies, former insurgents themselves, face a crisis of conscience and are genuinely sympathetic to the small-town Americans. The souls of Milius’ baby-faced heroes, meanwhile, are diminished with every life they take.

C. Thomas Howell, who had starred as Ponyboy Curtis in The Outsiders, plays Robert, one of the most memorable of the Wolverines. He first appears wearing a Star Wars baseball cap, but after the Soviets leave him an orphan, he gives up on fantasy and transforms into a cold-blooded killer, eager to wear camouflage, indifferent to his enemies’ pain. He is an embodiment of the fears of Eugene, an I.T. worker from Kharkiv, whom The Daily interviewed for an episode which aired on March 1, 2022.

Eugene lived a normal life before the invasion. He shopped for PlayStation games, brought baked goods into his office. The media reports of Ukraine’s early victories did not bring him joy, as he saw in them records of the deaths of young men who just happened to be born in Vladimir Putin’s Russia. “Every time we’re winning, somebody losing a father, son, friend.” He had never killed anyone in his life, but he was now researching a specific kind of Molotov cocktail, one with an additional ingredient that caused severe burns if it contacted skin. He imagined the situation that would lead him to use that weapon. “I will have psychological circumstances after that,” he said. “But what other choice do I have?”

While Eugene was trying to adjust to a new conception of himself as an annihilator of human lives, the American public became jingoistic cheerleaders. A full year into the conflict, in February 2023, Malcolm Nance, a counterterrorist expert who had fought for the Ukrainian Foreign Legion, appeared on Real Time with Bill Maher, where he bragged about kicking Russia’s ass to the cheers of the studio audience. I hope even now, two-and-a-half years in, as the war settles into attrition, and as Volodymyr Zelensky reveals himself to be an at-best imperfect protector of democratic norms, that North America and Europe continue to aid the Ukrainian people.

I also know that war isn’t football.

We are confused, as were Milius and his critics. Is Red Dawn really anti-war? Is it a study of trauma? A celebration of everything that leads to trauma?

War is not a game, we say, even as we practice war games. There’s nothing heroic about war; every soldier is a hero. There are rules in warfare; war is crime.

* * *

You can debate the politics of Red Dawn, but if it has one, unambiguous policy message, it is a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment. In an early scene, the Soviets obtain a registration list from the local library in order to confiscate the Americans’ firearms, a dramatization of a dystopian scenario often described by gun rights activists.

For Milius, though, guns were as recreational as they were necessary. According to Dalton, Milius would fire a machine gun instead of yelling “Action!” and “Cut!” If he was frustrated on set—Doug Toby, another cast member, told me—he would pull out a pistol, shoot a few blanks, then settle down and drink a Pepto Bismol. (Toby appears in the film’s most famous scene, holding a rifle aloft and shouting “Wolverines!”) One night, he offered to drive Howell back to the hotel. “Here we were speeding down the road and he screeches to a halt, leaps out and fires six rounds into a Stop sign out in the middle of nowhere. And he hopped back and he looks at me and says, ‘That felt so good.’”

“I don’t think we would have flinched if John came to set decked out in bandoliers with an RPG over his shoulder,” Dalton wrote me. “He was enjoying his opportunity to lead like General Patton as much as we loved going to battle for him.” 

At the beginning of the shoot, he gathered his main cast into a room. “He lined us all up and in sort of a drill sergeant manner,” Howell says. “John sort of exuded a militaristic aura. He looked us all in the eye and said, ‘Men,’—of course there were two women there—‘when I hired you I didn’t hire any pussies. I want to take the next half hour answering questions about your characters and after that I don’t want to hear another word about it.’”

Milius took his core cast to a gun range, where they learned the basics of shooting. The actors needed to know the feel of a gun in their hands, the feel of a kickback. Apparently, this was his version of playing an acting coach. “Which weapon is right for your character?” he asked them at the end.

Not everyone enjoyed the atmosphere. In her memoir, Jennifer Grey called the film “right-wing propaganda” but also her opportunity to play a “badass guerilla fighter.” It was a boys’ club, and she did not much appreciate the pranks. Her castmates, among them Howell and Sheen, had set off firecrackers outside her hotel room in Las Vegas, New Mexico, where the movie was filmed, and she mistook the sounds for gunshots. 

Toni Mason (Jennifer Grey) uses a machine gun against the invaders in John Milius' Red Dawn.
Screenshot: MGM/UA Entertainment Company

The young actors trained under the guidance of former mercenaries, Green Berets, and Navy Seals. “There was a learned skill of being in those situations where you have to maintain your senses,” says Toby. “People are coming at you, around you. It’s a freak-out moment. And you have to move calmly, in a thoughtful manner.” The Wolverines, of course, are not highly trained Green Berets, but young boys striving and working towards that mindset. The evolution of Howell’s Robert into a killing machine is a tragedy.

The Wolverines’ first battle is the most dramatically interesting. The inexperienced teenagers miss their targets, scurry along the mountain, barely know how to hold a gun or a bow-and-arrow. The scene is fun and genuinely scary, but also the first step the young boys take down a dark road from which they will not return. The Wolverines take no prisoners. The scene ends with Swayze’s Jed executing a Russian soldier, who turns away from his pistol. Milius may have loved guns, but he knew why they had been invented.

The invaders raise a barbed-wired fence in John Milius' Red Dawn.
Screenshot: MGM/UA Entertainment Company

Milius indulges world-building humor—the movie theater in the occupied town plays Alexander Nevsky and the Soviets set up their own canteen—but, at heart, the film is responsible enough to be depressing. In some ways, it’s more responsible than the anti-war Vietnam films of the 1970s and ’80s. Coppola may have intended the opening sequence in Apocalypse Now, in which the sound of helicopters and The Doors merge over napalm and Martin Sheen’s real-life breakdown, as an evocation of the psychosis of modern warfare, but viewers have long grooved to his tone poem. 

The Wolverines die brutally. Howell’s Robert commits suicide by willingly exposing himself to enemy fire. The boys execute Dalton’s Daryl when he is exposed as a traitor. My older brother was shaken when he saw the film on cable a few years after its release, when he was a pre-teen. I was shaken too when I saw it earlier this year for the first time. Unlike his previous collaborators, Milius was not an artful filmmaker; his action scenes are smart but they lack rhythm, and his indulgence of Greatest Generation-style iconography, including Basil Poledouris’ drumbeat heavy score, is unintentionally funny. But other than Spielberg, he is one of the few mainstream directors to communicate the atrocity inherent in the death of a child.

* * *

There are many factors—economic, social, and cultural—that lead teenagers to join the U.S. military. More than a few will cite movies, and Red Dawn is one of several Reagan-era entertainments that influenced a generation of young men to later serve in the Gulf War and the War on Terror. Others on the list include G.I. Joe and Top Gun. An ex-Marine once told me he had been attracted by the firm, proud posture of the soldiers in Full Metal Jacket.

Of them all, Red Dawn captures the contradiction between rhetoric and experience, and permits its viewers to hate combat while still indulging a love for adventure. Even in the era of modern warfare, whether they be members of the occupying force or the occupied, the argument—the argument each of us has with ourself, is the same. “But if it be a sin to covet honour, I am the most offending soul alive,” says Henry V, as he rouses his “band of brothers” to take France. His old companion is more cynical. “What is honour?” asks Falstaff. “A word. What is in that word honour? What is that honour? Air.” icon-paragraph-end

About the Author

Paul Morton

Author

Paul Morton is a writer living in Chicago. His work has appeared in Literary Hub, Los Angeles Review of Books, Full Stop, and The Millions. He received his PhD in Cinema Studies from the University of Washington, for which he wrote a dissertation on the animation industry in the former Yugoslavia. At the moment, he is writing a book about Jules Feiffer, to be published by Fantagraphics. You can contact him at paulwilliammorton@gmail.com.
Learn More About Paul

See All Posts About

Subscribe
Notify of
Avatar


16 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Avatar
cdr.bowman
6 months ago

The background scenario to the film is both nuts and cartoonish, but in terms of how a resistance movement begins, even accidently, is fought by the occupier, is used as a tool by the “conventional” warfighter, and – perhaps – ends, there are some things to think about in Red Dawn, if one can look past the silliness …

As examples, the histories of (for example) the Unionist resistance to the Confederacy in Appalachia in 1861-65, the French resistance at Vercors in 1944, the Warsaw uprising in 1943 and the Polish Home Army rising in 1944, the Filipino resistance in 1942-44, all come to mind.

If Milius had made essentially the same film but placed his characters (modified to fit, of course) in one of the above settings, the reception may well have been different.

dalilllama
6 months ago
Reply to  cdr.bowman

That movie was made, 14 years before Red Dawn, and is largely forgotten, so possibly not.

The Hornet’s Nest, 1970, starring Rock Hudson as a paratrooper who lands in Italy and is assisted by a group of local teens whose families were killed by the SS. Combat against Nazis ensues.

Avatar
cdr.bowman
6 months ago
Reply to  dalilllama

Thinking the 40 years (roughly) since VE/VJ Day in 1984, as opposed to the 1970 film being in the middle of Vietnam, might have made a difference, but hard to say.

In terms of US-market-oriented “big” productions (used loosely), Patton and Tora, Tora, Tora both came out in 1970 (same year as Kelly’s Heroes and Catch 22) which is an interesting transition point; not quite to the deconstructionist phase for Hollywood, but getting there … A Bridge too Far, which was the last traditional big budget “serious” Hollywood/international treatment (for a while, at least) was 1977; by 1979, it was 1941.

The Big Red One came out in 1980, which was an interesting mix of elegy and deconstruction; In 1984, a “historical” Resistance-focused film (based on Vercors, for example, given the potential international cast of characters) might have been well-received.

Might not have been the film Milius wanted to make, of course. ;)

Last edited 6 months ago by cdr.bowman
Avatar
Greg
6 months ago

I saw this movie at the theater and it had an impact on me. Having grown-up during the Cold War, most of us did think that eventually USA and Russia would go to war. And it was always pointed out to us by teachers that if we even did have ground war – a lot of us believed we’d nuke each other to Kingdom Come- some paratroopers from Central America didn’t seem at all intimidating.

PS- It was First Blood that inspired me to enlist in the Army.

wiredog
6 months ago

It was all over cable when I was in the US Army in the mid-80’s.

We generally thought it was funny as all get out. We laughed at it a LOT.

Avatar
cdr.bowman
6 months ago
Reply to  wiredog

Did the same at Top Gun, but think the goal was a little different there.

Avatar
Paul Morton
6 months ago
Reply to  wiredog

Just curious: What were the funniest parts? Were there any parts that you quoted as inside jokes?

Avatar
Jean Lamb
6 months ago

Even as we watched it, we realized how dumb these kids were. Lighting up their camp to be seen for miles? Falling for the ‘help, I’m a wounded food truck’ trap? I must admit, I did like the scene with the Cuban officer lying about what was written on a scene marker.

Avatar
6 months ago

The popularity of the movie is a product of the assumptions behind the politics rather than the politics itself – Americans enjoy seeing themselves in the role of the occupied rather than the occupiers that our troops have actually been.

Avatar
6 months ago
Reply to  ValleyWill

I feel like the thing most people don’t understand about this film is that a huge chunk of the audience is 100% aware that the United States has been in the role of occupier and that John Milinus 100% was thinking of Vietnam in this respect. Like the movie’s sympathy to the occupier’s soldiers as victims of the occupation is because John knows that we’ve been on the other side of this.

Avatar
6 months ago

From the UK the teenage me saw a jingoistic American piece full of crazy kids and stupid decisions, fully in line with the Reagan politics of the time. The tragic deaths of a few brave teens only served to reinforce the overall horror:

“Some of you are going to die, martyrs of course to the freedom that I shall provide.”

Rewatching it years later I gave consolation points to Milius for being unflinching in some moments in order to get the message across – people with guns kill, whether the gun is pointed at you, or you are pointing the gun – which one do you choose?

Avatar
Liddle-Oldman
6 months ago

Read Twain’ s The War Prayer — it’s only a few pages — for an illumination of part of this.

Avatar
6 months ago

I think that there’s probably a paper to be written about the popularity of heroic depictions of guerilla resistance movements in American movies when this isn’t really a role that Americans themselves have occupied in any war since the 18th century; particularly given that, in most of the US’s wars for the last 80 years, the guerrilla fighters have been resisting their own troops.

Avatar
6 months ago
Reply to  jaimebabb

I think John Milinus is 100% thinking of Vietnam during this movie and how American soldiers are being sent to a place they don’t understand, don’t have anything against, and getting killed by people they don’t particularly want to fight. Which is why the movie is so sympathetic to the occupier.

John’s politics in RL are not really as easy to define as just saying “right wing” or “left wing” because he really is as contemptuous of the Reagan era politicians as the Left.

Avatar
cdr.bowman
6 months ago
Reply to  jaimebabb

Unionists in the rebel states in 1861-65 (Nineteenth Century) is an interesting exception to the above, though.

Of course, about the only major releases that tackled that setting were Tap Roots (1948) and Free State of Jones (2016), neither of which apparently made a profit … The Birth of a Nation (2016) did better (relatively) but had other issues.

Avatar
6 months ago

As someone in the Army at the time, I laughed at how bad it was.

It wasn’t even good propaganda. Just run of the mill Reagan era trash that encouraged the kind of “John Wayne” stupidity that gets young & inexperienced soldiers dead.

Especially some years later as an Infantry NCO I came to despise the movie even more.