Author Topic: Battle: Los Angeles  (Read 8940 times)

Seren

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 956
    • View Profile
Re: Battle: Los Angeles
« Reply #40 on: March 13, 2011, 12:58:02 PM »
One of the best films I ever saw - 'Bambi meets Godzilla'

I've stopped trying to make sense of why I like a film, let alone why others do or do not....

Numina

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 454
    • View Profile
Re: Battle: Los Angeles
« Reply #41 on: March 13, 2011, 04:28:06 PM »
I probably won't go see this film as I do the battle: LA every day, its called the 405 freeway.  ;D :P :D
;D

Bill Binkelman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
Re: Battle: Los Angeles
« Reply #42 on: March 13, 2011, 04:51:35 PM »
Didn't get to it this weekend as planned...came down with a wicked head cold. Hope to see it one night this week. will give my review when I finally get to see it.
May the odds be ever in your favor.

MarkM

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
    • View Profile
Re: Battle: Los Angeles
« Reply #43 on: March 15, 2011, 07:44:37 PM »
Well....I just braved this movie and yet again, I am disappointed in a movie called Sci-Fi....the whole feel of the movie felt like saving private ryan with nothing but action, action, guns, and a little bit of aliens thrown in the mix to call it a sci-fi movie...
yet again, just like skyline, they did not really explain why they were here, yes, maybe they did, but through newscasts, about using our water resources and to conquer us..blah blah blah.....
I can not believe the drivel that hollywood keeps pumping out of so called sci-fi movies...esp enough with the shake camera moves....gets old and drives me nuts....:)

okay...NEXT....hahahaha

So often action or horror movies are erroneously labeled Sci-Fi. I will go so far to say that Aliens, a movie I love, is really just an action/horror movie that is set in space. A setting does not necessarily define a film's genre.

mgriffin

  • Hypnos Founder
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6936
  • Life is a memory, and then it is nothing.
    • View Profile
    • www.hypnos.com
Re: Battle: Los Angeles
« Reply #44 on: March 16, 2011, 09:21:50 AM »
We've been through this before. You can't just say "Aliens is more action/adventure/horror than SF, therefore it's not SF at all." Aliens wouldn't be the same at all without creatures from another planet, space travel, future-tech space-faring marines including Mech Warrior style robotic combat gear. It's not just SF but it's not just horror or action/adventure either.
[ Mike Griffin, Hypnos Recordings ] email mg (at) hypnos.com | http://hypnos.com | http://twitter.com/mgsoundvisions

einstein36

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
Re: Battle: Los Angeles
« Reply #45 on: March 16, 2011, 11:19:04 AM »
hahahaha...man I was totally go to say something along those lines.....just because it has gore, blood, things going bump in the dark and suspense but yet has aliens, etc doesn't mean it's not sci-fi:)

Website: www.imagineerrecords.com
Twitter: ImagineerR
Facebook: www.facebook.com/einstein36

Bill Binkelman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
Re: Battle: Los Angeles
« Reply #46 on: March 19, 2011, 06:28:03 PM »
Saw the film today and while it wasn't perfect, obviously, it was very well done for what it is, i.e. a ground force invasion movie which only happens to be about aliens. Eckhart makes the movie - he is very VERY good in the role of the staff sergeant who does his best to keep the relatively new Marines (and their raw lieutenant) from feeling overwhelmed at their first taste of combat. The rest of the actors and characters are all cookie-cutter, as many reviews have stated...but honestly, except for Josh Hartnett, and to a lesser degree, Tom Sizemore, Eric Bana, and Sam Shepard, how many actors do you remember as characters from Blackhawk Down, which this film (Battle LA) is obviously mimicking.

The action scenes are very well done, capturing the intensity of firefights in an urban setting, where cover can be a car, a bus, or a partially blown-to-shit wall. The film wastes very little time on exposition so we know almost next to nothing about the aliens...except they obviously want to exterminate us and take over the planet.

Look...this is an action spectacle movie, nothing else (except, maybe, a nice recruitment film for the Marines, although enough of 'em die in the film that maybe not...). As such, it is LIGHT YEARS better than something like ID4 or many other big budget films. Because it is small in scope (only a handful of actors and only one locale), it feels more intimate. It doesn't matter if you "know" these Marines as individuals...after all, how many of the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan do you know personally, but their courage in fighting this enemy is admirable. And I know that sounds sappy, but the firefights are very intensely portrayed. Sure, there are some hokey speeches, but nothing as cringeworthy as, IMO, that horrendous "Tell me I'm a good man" ending to Saving Private Ryan.

It does suffer from a rather abrupt end and it certainly borrows plenty from ID4 in a way at the end (not as stupid as a computer virus, but almost as deux ex machina a device, in a way). It's nowhere near as flag-waving as ID4 though. And, IMO, it's a far superior film to Spielberg's War of the Worlds remake, which I enjoyed for the first 30-45 minutes or so and then it submarined into melodrama (I was hoping Cruise's character's whiny son would be killed).

Anyway, for me, I enjoyed it a lot. Saw in a very good theatre and as a digital presentation. Many critics point out how LOUD this film is and it really is all that! Is it SF? As much as W of the W or ID4 is...yes. In some ways, from a tactical standpoint, the aliens come off as plausible...their invasion strategy is spot-on.  I don't think you can simply say that this could be the same film if it was human vs. human because the technology doesn't exist for a human army to invade on that scale that rapidly and that effectively. Is that enough of a SF element to justify calling it SF? Not for Roger Ebert, but for me, yeah. One things is for sure...like other "close quarters" combat movies, such as Blackhawk Down and the underrated Tears of the Sun, this will be best appreciated, cinematically, either in a good theatre or with a good home set-up, and no way will you get the sonic impact of the movie without a VERY GOOD subwoofer!
May the odds be ever in your favor.