BATTLE: LOS ANGELES (Trailer) (1 Viewer)

[spshultz]

OH MAN! Damn! Plllleeeaaasssseee let this be good!

 

[SWFF]

Finally, some pics of the aliens, albiet behind-the-scene pics, but at least it's better than nothing at all. Have a look and decide. Weird, man.


SHOCK TILL YOU DROP: The latest issue of "Famous Monsters" magazine (#254) provides their readers with a behind-the-scenes look at the upcoming Battle: Los Angeles, opening March 11. Within this issues pages: An early look at the invading aliens that take on stars Aaron Eckhart and Michelle Rodriguez. These guys are described as "alien foot soldiers" and brought to life by Spectral Motion. Very "bio-mechanical," from the looks of it.

 

[spshultz]

Usually I'll watch a trailer once or twice and that's it. But, for some reason I like watching this one. I think I've seen it at least 6 times so far and it doesn't get old. Either it's a very well put together trailer that's covering up the bad spots well or the source material may actually be "a very good movie".

 

[Ron-P]

This does look fantastic and it's one I will catch the first weekend it hits theaters.

 

[spshultz]

I'm starting to now see TV commercials for it and each time I get a little more excited and I just can't. I must keep my excitement in check because this could be a real let down. But damn, I sure hope it isn't. Like Ron-P said above, I really hope this isn't another Skyline.


An early, early review has some not so nice things to say about it. But I'm not sure if I can trust the review. I think I'll wait for a few more to come in. I suspect this will be a 50/50 movie where half will hate it and half will love it.

 

[SWFF]

Fangoria is billing this as the final poster. Looks SO cool. Please, if there is a God in Heaven, make this movie NOT suck.

 

[Tim Glover]

I loved Cloverfield. Well done.

And yeah, that first teaser trailer for Battle-LA does look WAY cool.

 

[dmiller68]

It looks very interesting it will be good to hear some reviews. I think it could be good or it could just be ID4 all over again.

 

[Steve Christou]

Fingers crossed. I hope this one turns out well. The trailer delivers hopefully the film will too.


I found this related bit of info interesting... it might explain how the disappointing Skyline produced some spectacular visuals -

Sony Pictures Entertainment is contemplating legal action against Greg and Colin Strause, the directors of Skyline and the owners of Hydraulx Filmz – a visual effects company that contributed to Battle: Los Angeles.

According to Deadline, Sony feels that the Strause brothers should have given them a heads up about their plans to make Skyline before accepting the FX gig on Battle: Los Angeles, which gave them access to the film’s script, storyboards, and animatics.

More to the point, Sony is wondering if Battle: Los Angeles served as inspiration for the brothers to make Skyline and if they used the studio’s resources to polish up the effects on their modestly-budgeted thriller.

In Skyline, ”strange lights descend on the city of Los Angeles, drawing people outside like moths to a flame, where an extraterrestrial force proceeds to swallow the entire human population off the face of the earth.” The story is told from the point of view of four friends who have just returned from a night of partying and the majority of it was shot in Greg Strause’s home.

At the Skyline Comic-Con panel, the brothers cited Paranormal Activity as the main inspiration for their approach to the film. The independent production gave them the freedom to cast lesser-known actors and kept them free from studio interference.
http://screenrant.com/battle-los-angeles-skyline-lawsuit-schrad-73991/

 

[Robert Crawford]

Opening this weekend as I plan on seeing it and Red Riding Hood.






Crawdaddy

 

[Sam Posten]

Our friends at Pixl Junkies have a great interview you will want to read!

http://pixljunkies.com/adetokumboh-mcormack-the-pixljunkies-interview/

 

[Steve Christou]

I'll be going to see it next week but this quote from a comment at the IMDB has cooled my enthusiasm -

The film is shot like Bourne with epilepsy. I'm 21 years old and not too old to follow the action on screen, its just really, really, annoying when 80% of the shots are extremely herky jerky close-ups. There is not a single steady shot in the entire film. Not one

...shite.

 

[Steve_Pannell]

Regarding the shaky-cam, the trailer didn't look too bad to me so I thought I might give it a chance. But Aaron Eckhart was on Leno last week and they showed a clip that was nearly nauseating.


I guess I'm too old to appreciate "edgy, innovative & exciting" (or whatever they want to call it) so I'll have to pass on this one. Too bad.

 

[SWFF]

Oh, shit, shaky camera stuff, hey? Not a big fan of that either, but I'm gonna bite the bullet and see it anyway. Friday or Saturday afternoon, I think.

 

[SWFF]

MANIA REVIEW: Somewhere between the brilliance of Black Hawk Down and the idiocy of Independence Day lies Battle: Los Angeles. It lacks the ambition of either film, content to deliver modest popcorn fun rather than Black Hawk’s gritty slice of life or ID4’s would-be cultural milestone. But in blending the two, it actually finds an identity of its very own. It does its job cleanly and efficiently, finding solid, down-to-earth entertainment almost without effort. Cheesy dialogue and stock characters mar the proceedings here and there, but Battle: Los Angeles never surrenders to cliché.


It also owes a strange debt of gratitude toSkyline, which tried to steal its thunder last fall and now makes it look like Citizen Kane in comparison. Battle: Los Angeles takes the same premise – aliens invading the world, with LA as the eye of the storm – and applies a few common-sense details to actually make the experience worthwhile. Instead of showing us entitled pretty boys cowering in their condo, it puts us on the ground with Pendleton Marines, who actually have the wherewithal to shoot back. Instead of focusing on the money shots of alien ships, it uses old-fashioned inference to hint at the invaders’ appearance (thus making them infinitely more frightening). And instead of casting blandly handsome leading men, it gives us Aaron Eckhart, who can deliver more grit and gumption with his little finger than an entire marina full of Pretty Young Things.


Eckhart plays Staff Sergeant Nantz, a burnt-out lifer ready to retire from the Marines when the little green men launch an all-out invasion. He finds himself running a squad of terrified rookies as the aliens march through Santa Monica on their way inland. The armed forces have drawn a line in the sand about 10 miles from the shore. Nantz’s squad goes into no-man’s land to rescue a group of civilians from an abandoned police station. As they proceed, they unwittingly become the focal point for what may be humanity’s last stand.


Director Jonathan Liebesman makes it work because we never move beyond their perspective: the larger war arrives only in hasty snippets, delivering just enough to convey the stakes to us. The aliens skitter through rubble-filled streets at a distance, pausing only to unleash devastating attacks while the Marines do their best to take them down. The keys to victory come in small, logical steps, while central characters drop dead with almost casual indifference. Our limited perspective actually heightens the authenticity, making us feel as though this could actually happen instead of falling back on ID4’s imbecilic grandiosity. Liebesman keeps the pressure on his characters at all times, while devising new ways to shake up the same basic “grunts vs. space baddies” scenario. Along the way, he slowly builds to a climax that – while a tad convenient – still earns its payoff instead of taking our goodwill for granted.


Which isn’t to say it comes without a struggle. We learn about the Marines themselves through stock exposition and tired stereotypes, from the newbie lieutenant out of his depth to the tough guy from Jersey who knows how to hotwire cars. Battle: Los Angeles can’t resist pausing every now and then to deliver embarrassing speeches or pumping up the “go Marines” subtext to almost ludicrous proportions. Furthermore, Liebesman relies unduly on the now-standard shaky-cam perspective, which seriously needs to be retired. (You can do edgy and immediate without making the audience seasick, guys. Really.)


None of that proves fatal, however; just mildly annoying and detracting a bit from the film’s undeniable coolness. The producers scored a real coup with Eckhart, who sells the dodgy lines better than anyone could expect. His embattled everyman feels competent yet human, out of his depth and yet doing the best he can. And when the actor’s signature rage comes boiling to the surface, he revels in every inch of it: allowing his supporting cast to rally around him and give the audience a legitimate rooting interest. You can’t ask for more and Battle: Los Angeles doesn’t expect you to. It delivers on its promises without a lot of excess baggage, and makes for a nice diversion devoid of summer bombast. Indeed, once the dust settles, it may be more entertaining than a lot of its so-called betters. A little humility and a lot of hard work goes much farther than you’d think.

 

[Jose Martinez]

I am so there!!! Too bad there are no midnight screenings near me though. Oh well, tomorrow it is.

 

[Steve_Pannell]

[COLOR= rgb(255, 0, 0)]PLEASE DISREGARD THIS POST.[/COLOR]


[COLOR= rgb(255, 0, 0)]I fell for something a TROLL posted on IMDB and posted this here thinking I was giving everybody a heads-up on a spoiler. I've been told later in this thread that the information in my post is wrong.[/COLOR]


[COLOR= rgb(255, 0, 0)]I apologize for the misinformation in this post. Go and enjoy the movie and don't believe everything (maybe anything) that you read on the internet.[/COLOR]

[COLOR= rgb(255, 0, 0)]______________________________________________________[/COLOR]



I thought I would post this as a warning to all who want to see this movie:


Don't go to IMDB and read the message board. Some idiot keeps creating a thread with a MAJOR spoiler as the thread title. He started one earlier today and it was deleted but now he's started another one.


I promise I'm not telling this so your curiosity will make you go and look. I'm not planning to see the movie and this really, seriously irritated me.


If you want to know the spoiler, it's:









about Aaron Eckhart's character sacrificing himself to destroy the ship


I may be overreacting but this just rubbed me the wrong way.

 

[Brent M]

Disappointed by the current 34% rating at RT, but this is the kind of movie I will see regardless of what critics say. It's a big, summer popcorn film(even though it's being released in March) that needs to be seen on the big screen and that's exactly what I plan on doing.

 

[SWFF]

Heading off to the 3:30 showing tomorrow afternoon.

 

[Sam Posten]

Ebert's panning of this film may be his funniest review ever.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110309/REVIEWS/110309992