Skip to main content

Battle: L.A.!!!!!!!! Ah, hell.

World Invasion: Battle L.A. Oh no. This was not a good movie.

There isn’t very much to the story. The movie takes place in August 2011, when one day aliens decide to invade our world. As it goes, the aliens have pretty much taken all over all of the major cities on the west coast… all save for Los Angeles. The movie follows Staff Sergeant Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) and his platoon of grunts as they look for a way to save the city and any civilians that they come across.

Battle L.A. is a lazy man’s Independence Day, without the fun or the tongue in cheek smarminess of Will Smith (awww hay-llll naw!). The story moves A to B without any feeling or emotion. What also hurts is the lack of a climax that is almost pivotal in big action blockbuster type movies. It lacks the sense of direness that one would associate with a world invasion. So the story doesn’t give you anything worth buying into and what’s worse is that they don’t give you any characters worth investing into either. Everyone is one dimensional. They’re quickly introduced at the beginning with a short blurb each, and we’re supposed to care? So with no good story and no good characters, what’s the point in watching the movie then? Loud noises and big explosions, if that is your thrill.

And I guess that is the one positive thing. I liked the way the action was filmed. I know a lot of people don’t like the shaky-cam style of filming, but I really like the grittiness that it adds to a movie. The action in this movie is frantic and the shaky-cam works well with it, making you feel like you’re right there in the battle with the platoon.

The movie pretty much hits all the Michael Bay-ian dramatic cues, complete with pep talk speeches meshed with a sentimental score, but clearly without the $200 million Michael Bay-ian budget. I was talking to my friend at work about this movie, shortly before it was released. It looked like a higher budget version of Skyline which was released (unfortunately) last year. But nothing, and I mean, NOTHING, should be compared to Skyline. What a wretched piece of shit!

And I will end as I began. World Invasion: Battle L.A. Oh no. This was not a good movie. Later geeks.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dreamers, Achievers, Believers

It was quite a week last week. It started off on a more heavy note last Sunday, but as the week wore on, things became better and more clear. So let's do a little recap. This is going to be kind of long, so if you find this kind of stuff boring I've inserted pictures of funny cats for your entertainment. So... 1.5 Weeks Ago About 1.5 weeks ago, my friend Jon from Living Room gave me the contact info for his uncle. His uncle is an engineer and apparently was looking for new grads and new hands to hire. That week, I gave him a few calls but he wasn't there when I called him and when he returned my calls, I wasn't here either. We were playing phone tag that week *insert schoolgirl giggle*. Sunday Morning So last Sunday morning, his uncle gave me a call at 9 am (The morning! My weakness! HISS!) and we talked about stuff. I was telling him a bit about school as well as elaborating my work/coop experience as he didn't have my resume yet. So he goes on to tell

The Science of God

Not too long ago, two of my friends had posted their thoughts on evolution and creationism. Both friends shared similar sentiments on the topic (you can view Skylar's here and Keith's here ). Coincidence or not, shortly before they made their postings, I purchased a book called The Science of God by Dr. Gerald Schroeder, which was based on the same topic. Unfortunately, at the time of my friend's postings, I had not finished the book, but now I have. In The Science of God , Schroeder attempts to debunk the dichotomy that exists between science/evolution and creationism. He tries to show that there can exist a duality between the two and that discoveries in science actually prove the story of creation in the bible. The book can be roughly divided into three categories that being the concepts of time, the second with the biology of evolution, and lastly the concept of free will. In describing time, he focuses on the 6 days that are explained in the beginning of Genes

MAX PAYNE was oh so PAYNEFUL!!!

What a failure this was. An EPIC FAILURE~! And I'll tell you why. This movie had everything going for it which was why it made the failure seem so huge. It had star power. It had a very competent director. The visual style was there. It had a simple storyline... a storyline that was basically fuck-proof because it's so basic. The effects (when there were any) were also pretty great. So where did they go wrong? Pacing. If the first two-thirds of the film was like the last third, I think it would have been a fine film. Not great by any means, but fine. I mean, there was hardly any action in the first hour. It was all talk and build up. Every 5 minutes I was saying to myself, "okay, something cool is gonna happen now". But it never came. I think had they added 2 or 3 big action sequences during that hour, that it would have helped the film breathe and flow better. I mean, didn't they realize that the source material was an action game? Max Payne is