BATTLE: LOS ANGELES (Trailer) (1 Viewer)

[RobertR]

Originally Posted by Ron-P



One thing I have never understood is why people base whether or not they'll go out and see a film, buy a film or simply rent based one someone else's opinion. Especially one's liked unto guys like Ebert or any "so-called" professional review.


If the trailer looks good, in this case it looks kick-ass, I'm going, no matter what RT.com says or anyone other review.

After all, a review is nothing more then someones opinion, nothing more.

I disagree to a certain extent. It's impossible to watch every film, and it's also a certainty that I won't like many (actually, most) films. So the question becomes how do I choose what I want to see? Trailers can give me some idea, but they can be very misleading (the old TPM trailer made the movie look like a good, serious Star Wars film). Therefore, it makes sense to read what others have to say. What's good about Rotten Tomatoes is that it doesn't rely on one review, but shows what the consensus is. A rating of 32% would mean that 68% would have to go against what I would think of the film. Those aren't good odds. In the case of BLA, I already know I don't like shaky cam. That, plus the low RT rating means that the reviews serve a useful purpose for me.

 

[TonyD]

 

One thing I have never understood is why people base whether or not they'll go out and see a film, buy a film or simply rent based one someone else's opinion. Especially one's liked unto guys like Ebert or any "so-called" professional review.

 

If the trailer looks good, in this case it looks kick-ass, I'm going, no matter what RT.com says or anyone other review. 

 

After all, a review is nothing more then someones opinion, nothing more.

Then there's no reason to have reviews topics here either. I read reviews because I want someone else's opinion. I don't decide not to see a movie based on someone else's opinion. Reviews to me are the same as if I said to someone, "Hey did you see that movie, what did you think?" I always read Ebert whether i agree with him or not. I respect his thoughts on movies don't need to agree with him.

 

[Tim Glover]

Thought it was ok...like some here. Not a keeper but a decent way to spend an afternoon. Went to the matinee today. The audio was really good and so was the image so I'm sure it will be a demo worthy Blu-ray. But just felt disconnected. I'm feeling that alot lately with movies and starting to think that maybe it's me. I like Aaron Eckhart but IDK, think he was miscast in this. The dialogue as Patrick points out was at times clunky and a bit forced. Wanted more backstory to Aaron's character.

I give it a generous 6.5/10.

 

[Llappin]

I saw this movie yesterday. I found the first 40 minutes pretty boring and annoying. But after the movie became more like a conventional action movie with visual effects it became possible to enjoy it.

The exposition of the characters couldn’t be more formulaic. The camera work was incredibly annoying. Most of the time not only it was shaky but we saw nothing but close ups of the faces and backs of the running marines in dark and fuzzy shots. I started feeling claustrophobic and wished I was watching “War of the Worlds” instead.

The second half of the movie, the camera angle widened and it became easier to focus on the visual effects and enjoy the movie. For me the movie started awful and finished satisfying.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

The real battle with this film takes place in the audience.


Almost impossible to sit through. I can't believe I wasted

my time on this dreck.


Can't Hollywood make a decent alien invasion movie anymore?

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein

The real battle with this film takes place in the audience.


Almost impossible to sit through. I can't believe I wasted

my time on this dreck.


Can't Hollywood make a decent alien invasion movie anymore?

Besides the original War of the Worlds which decent alien invasion movies are you talking about? By the way, I disagree with you calling this film dreck, but to each his own.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

The original War of The Worlds was 58 years ago.


I am talking about movies over the past decade or so.


They include Independence Day, Skyline, District 9

(to name a few)

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein

The original War of The Worlds was 58 years ago.


I am talking about movies over the past decade or so.


They include Independence Day, Skyline, District 9

(to name a few)

In that case, I thought this film was much better than Independence Day or Skyline. District 9 is another story.








Crawdaddy

 

[SWFF]

DISTRICT 9 is the exception to the rule. That movie was excellent!

 

[Llappin]

I was talking about Steven Spielburg's 2005 "War of the Worlds".

 

[cineMANIAC]

B:LA is not so much a bad movie as it is a tired one - watching it, it felt like I had already seen it all before: Saving Private Ryan, The Terminator, War of the Worlds, even the recent Skyline. It's the "been there, done that" problem that infects most of these modern Alien-Invasion movies. My energy is better spent hounding movie studios into releasing the ones that were made 25, 30 years ago to DVD or Blu-ray. There are still lots of good B-movies still unreleased to this day. There's a rumor going around that Midnight Legacy might release Without Warning. I hope it's true.

 

[SWFF]

I got Greydon Clark on my Facebook friend list. I sent him a PM asking if he knows anything about this Midnight Legacy thing. Now, I can only wait for his reply. Impatiently, too.

 

[Brian Dobbs]

I was entertained by the movie, but I was hoping to see more of it. Why so much shaky cam? Seriously, there's a scene where they're looking at a map and the camera was all over the place just like in the battle scenes. WTF?


Shaky Cam is so gimmicky. Good for bursts here and there, but the camera shouldn't take me out of the movie.

 

[Jim_C]

Originally Posted by Brian Dobbs

I was entertained by the movie, but I was hoping to see more of it. Why so much shaky cam? Seriously, there's a scene where they're looking at a map and the camera was all over the place just like in the battle scenes. WTF?


Shaky Cam is so gimmicky. Good for bursts here and there, but the camera shouldn't take me out of the movie.

That's my only real big complaint with shaky cam, when it's used in scenes that don't justify it. Is it necessary to use shaky cam when two men are sitting in an office talking or when people are calmly walking into a room? Use it sparingly and it makes its effect more significant when you use it in battle scenes.


I enjoyed the movie. In general I've decided that I must be easy to please, though. I know this movie is a Marine recruiting poster, is cliched and is no where near original but I don't care. I was entertained for a couple hours on a Sunday night when I wasn't looking to really engage my mind but just go along for the ride. It's not District 9 but it's a hundred times better than Independence Day.

 

[Todd H]

My brother and I saw it this weekend. We were in the mood for some action so we decided to check it out. Action was decent. Story had some potential but the wooden and hokey dialogue did it in. Entertaining but forgettable.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Originally Posted by Jim_C

My brother and I saw it this weekend. We were in the mood for some action so we decided to check it out. Action was decent. Story had some potential but the wooden and hokey dialogue did it in. Entertaining but forgettable.

My 20-year old son and I saw the movie this weekend. The quotes above pretty much reflect our experience. The nice thing about the Ebert review is that it took the edge off our expectations after seeing the kick-ass trailers. By going in with lowered expectations, we probably left the theater having felt better about the experience.

That's my only real big complaint with shaky cam, when it's used in scenes that don't justify it. Is it necessary to use shaky cam when two men are sitting in an office talking or when people are calmly walking into a room? Use it sparingly and it makes its effect more significant when you use it in battle scenes.

Honestly. Another example where it should not have been used is the scene at the front end of the movie where Eckhardt's character was meeting with the other officer about ending his military career. Why go hand-held for a rather perfunctory scene providing background on our main character? People DO notice this stuff and don't like it. I realize such artistic decisions are all subjective, but...

 

[Kevin M]

You know, I look at my DVD collection and I see that I am a really poor/conflicted film snob taste wise...I mean I have The Sword and the Sorcerer sitting right next to Gandhi, Dumb and Dumber next to Schindler's List, Robot Monster next to Wages of Fear.

So I don't feel like a total film snob when I say that I didn't like this film However as I have my fair share of beloved "bad" or less than A films in my collection it is odd that I didn't.....there are reasons.


Many who like the film say that it was an action flick so why expect more?
Because #1 the trailers didn't portray it as a simple fun popcorn flick, more like an serious and dramatic alien invasion version of Saving Private Ryan or The Hurt Locker.


#2 even the most retarded action flick has a little character development to make you give at least half a damn about it's characters...I mean ID4 had more character development....did you read what just stated? INDEPENDENCE DAY HAD BETTER CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT WITH ITS PATHETIC STEREOTYPES THAN THIS FLICK!!!

That's a sad statement to make.

#3 the shameless ripoffs from MANY other better films such as Saving Private Ryan , Black Hawk Down, Cloverfield...Etc. Etc.



I mean I'm surprised they didn't name the standoff location near the end "Dog One" let alone the line of dialog taken directly from ID4: (paraphrasing)"we know how to take em down, spread the word."


Defend it as a simple action film all you want but even the most boneheaded of those films at least attempt some characters and plot for you to give a damn about.
This was shallower than a Sci-fi channel no-budget giant spiders telefilm or your given Call Of Duty first person shooter.

 

[TonyD]

Incredible movie ever!! love to watch it again and again. Now I'm looking forward to....................... i hope that it would be awesome!! what about you guys?

Hmm, how did that get through?

 

[Mike Frezon]

While certain posts may sneak through, Tony...they never stick around too long.

 

[TonyD]

No kidding. Love the email notification, get to see them before they disappear sometimes.