Via Ace. If you’re wondering why they chose North Korea instead of, say, China, revisit this old post and all shall be revealed. Here’s something I’m not sure I’ve ever said about a movie: I don’t think I can suspend my disbelief enough to enjoy this. Want me to watch a buddy movie starring Bigfoot and Chewbacca as undercover detectives who infiltrate a drug ring to steal the Lost Ark of the Covenant? No problem. Want me to watch a pseudo-realistic war film in which mainland America is invaded by a country that subsists mainly on grass? Nope. Not happening, or at least not without great difficulty. This flick reminds me of the “uncanny valley” in robotics: People can cope just fine with robots that are very lifelike or not lifelike at all, but they recoil at robots that are kind of lifelike. This film is kind of lifelike. You could buy it if the invading army hailed from a great power — the original “Red Dawn” worked fine with the Soviets, and this one probably would have flown with China in the villain role — but these people? As a rule of thumb, if we’re going to imagine an enemy abroad overwhelming U.S. air defenses and landing tens of thousands of paratroopers, that enemy should be capable of keeping a long-range missile in the air for more than, say, 45 seconds. Basic concessions to reality here, guys — that’s all I ask.

Exit question: Would a historical counterfactual work better as a film? E.g., would it be easier to suspend your disbelief for a movie about a hypothetical 1942 invasion of the U.S. by Germany or, more realistically, Japan? I feel like that would be okay, even though it’s now actually impossible rather than just really, really, really, really unlikely.