Pretty much Red Dawn 2.0

It does seem that this is a pretty common reaction from Americans, who can't seem to grasp the idea that while it may be a similar story on the surface, when you get into it it's quite different. For one thing, this isn't glorifying war, it isn't glorifying Australia, the main characters aren't draped in the Australian flag, and it's not full of patriotic cliches.

The inspiration for this movie is based on a 7 book series, for anyone who will claim that the movie script rips off Red Dawn, and many have said that. At no point did the author, John Marsden, borrow from American movies, but from historical records of resistance movements in occupied Europe during WW2.

It really does seem that the moment any movie comes out depicting an invasion scenario like this, that people start drawing comparisons to Red Dawn. Totally unfair.

This movie isn't pretty much Red Dawn 2.0

Girl#1: We're dead if we don't do something.
Girl#2: Something's already dead. Your ends.

Then you weren't paying attention, since you seem to have missed how TWTWB only gradually reveals to us and the characters just what's happened to the country, unlike Red Dawn opting for a shock action opening with paratroopers everywhere. Or how it takes the teens in TWTWB something like 90 minutes to make a decision about joining the fight.

The Angels Have the Phone Box

The ones I just said?

The Angels Have the Phone Box

The lack of any background as to who the enemy is in TWTWB is intentional. The author of those books wanted the focus on the protagonists in the story, and did not want his books to fuel any kind of sentiment against any real world country. There was some upset over the fact that there's a definite ethnically Asiatic look to the enemy in the movie, as that is a key difference between the movie and the books.
I still think there's enough difference between the two that when some ignorant yank cries "Red Dawn ripoff", that I have a right to be angry about it.
Also, yes, they are both invasion scenarios, but as I have said, the inspiration for the writer was different. John Marsden has said that he looked at the history of resistance groups in occupied Europe during WW2. In addition, he wanted the "teenagers" in the story to be something positive, given how popular the "kids these days" meme had gotten.

I actually watched this film because I loved the original Red Dawn. I would not say the film rips off Red Dawn but anyone who says they are not very similar has not seen them both. I did enjoy the higher level of character development here, in Red Dawn there really isn't any. Just because two things are very similar does not mean the more recent one is ripping off the other. Imagine trying to have a single zombie movie if American directors weren't inspired by the Italians. Imagine if George Romero wasn't one of those inspired directors. Imagine if all the zombie film creators since Night of the Living Dead had not been inspired. There is a gigantic difference between being inspired to make your own version of something you like versus ripping off something. If no one was allowed to be inspired by Star Wars would be have any science fiction films? If George Lucas had not been inspired by Dune by Frank Herbert, would Star Wars exist? Inspiration and making your own version of something you enjoy is what almost every film, book and movie in the last 2,000 years has come from. Even Shakespeare borrowed from ancient stories when he wrote several of his plays. Anyway, just getting sick of people throwing around "this ripped that off" all the time on these boards.