This film is no masterpiece. But it is nowhere near as bad as often made out, perhaps by those who have never seen it.
The use of stock footage, and some cheap special effects, is not unusual for films of this vintage. For a low budget film, it actually made good use of the available resources.
I suspect most of the criticism is not based on the film itself, but its supposed political failings. However the politics of a film are not a reason to pan it. We recognise the Battleship Potemkin as a great film, despite it being communist propaganda. The same applies to Triumph of the Will as Nazi propaganda. Less successful but no less political films, such as Schindler's List, are rated on their merits, irrespective of their message.
Invasion U.S.A. adopts a narrative that is close to documentary. It does not include irrelevant romantic distractions, or complex sub-plots. It is rather more of a war film than an anti-communist work.
The enemy is not clearly identified. They look and sound rather more like Nazis than Reds. The identity of the enemy is not as important as the message that America needs to be ready to defend itself. I would have thought that the message that a country needs to be vigilant is as correct now as in 1952.
The course of the invasion, and its successful outcome, were refreshing after watching too many gung ho American films where the US heroes always prevail. This film shows the reality that the USA could have been invaded by the Soviet Union in 1952 - if they had been, the Soviets would almost certainly have won the war. Russia had a narrow window of opportunity, before the USA developed too many thermonuclear weapons, and invasion would be too costly. There were Soviet invasion plans prepared.
I wonder when we will see an American film about a successful Taliban or ISIS attack on the USA, with the message that the USA needs to be prepared.
