Battle Los Angeles (2011) User Reviews

Judge fair, keep it real.

[drozzee · 7/10 · 29 May 2011]

First i would like to comment on all the people who gives grades like 1 or 10, try and be a little realistic please. Its freaking annoying that people really cant see how this scale is working. Look at the top 250 and at the bottom 100 .. Now that is amazing movies or just plain horrible movies. If you don't feel you got what you wanted out of this movie then maybe your expectation's was to high. Godfather, Fight Club etc, those are movies that deserve a solid 9 or 10. Diary of a cannibal, Dream Well thats movies that deserve a solid 1 or 2. So stop your pessimistic crap about how bad this movie is and rate 1. No one can ever say that this movie is worse then any on the bottom 100. Ihave personally watched 1000+ movies so i find my self quite knowledge about a good movie or not, and this is not a great movie, but you get solid mindless action movie with decent graphic and a good acting crew. It gets a little long but again, no one cheats you in this movie. No one said to you before you watched it that it was movie of the year. You have a trailer and you build your own expectations. Give it a honest chance and stop judging it like it was a episode "bad" episode of jersey shore or its a 8th wonder of the world. Just judge fair for gods sake.

I would have given it 6.5/10 but i cant half here.

Solid action, decent actors and a decent night entertainment, if you stop believing its the movie of all time, and just go for it.

Judge fair, keep it real.

Nice and simple fantasy thriller with action all the way!

[paulclaassen · 6/10 · 9 August 2021]

Staff Sergeant Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) was preparing for retirement. But when an apparent cluster of meteors turns out to be an alien invasion, Nantz embarks on one final mission. He is part of a platoon sent to Los Angeles to rescue a handful of civilians - and they only have 3 hours before the military nukes Los Angeles.

With time running out and obstacles around every corner, 'Battle Los Angeles' is a thrilling action adventure fantasy. The action sequences are fast and amazingly well done. The visual effects are stunning. The freeway scene in particular was awesome!

Does 'Battle Los Angeles' offer anything we haven't seen before in an alien invasion movie? Maybe not, but it surely was a hell of a joy ride! It has a simple premise without surprising twists or a complicated storyline. There's action all the way, and a very nice finale. This was pure entertainment!

Black Hawk Down... with Aliens

[Jharrison-22 · 7/10 · 13 March 2011]

I saw this film the other day, and I actually really liked it. It was exactly what I expected (maybe a little better). If you want to watch a really well thought out film with lots of character development and interesting subplots this is not the film for you. If you want to watch a bunch of U.S. Marines beat the tar out of invading spacefreaks, then this is the film for you. From when we first encounter the aliens to sometime in the middle, the movie is a nonstop thrill ride. Stuff explodes, aliens get splattered, humans get burned by lasers. In case you didn't already suspect, this film is very violent. Although there isn't a lot of blood, there are certainly a lot of deaths. The action is unpredictable and zany. One minute everyone will be walking somewhere between point A and B, the next, they're crouching behind burned out cars and houses as aliens pour ungodly hellfire onto them from above. The special effects were also quite good, with the exception of a couple bad animations here and there. That being said, the movie suffers when it slows down. The dialogue is poorly written, and delivered decently, but not well. Aaron Eckhart however did a wonderful job as a stony faced marine staff sergeant who keeps a cool head when under fire. Most of the storyline is pretty standard war movie/alien invasion stuff. You know, when after a bunch of fighting everyone gets discouraged and then the leader gives a big motivational speech and the inspirational music plays and everyone feels heroic.

So don't expect a masterpiece of modern cinema, expect alien guts and lots of shooting and I guarantee you will not be disappointed.

Finally ... What I wanted to see after I watched the trailer for Skyline !!!!

[sstallion · 7/10 · 14 March 2011]

I went into this movie with low expectations after the relative disappointment which was skyline, a film that promised so much from the trailer and delivered far less.

However, im glad to say any misgivings I had were quickly expelled. Now don't get me wrong, this isn't the greatest film ever made, and in many ways it fails to hold a candle to the likes of independence day, which in my opinion is one of the greatest films of its type ever made. It does however, bring a much more up close and personal aspect to an alien invasion. Its more like watching a war filmed in Iraq or something, but that in itself is what separates it from a muddle of recent alien invasion movies that fails to ignite any kind of fire in the mind.

The film moves at an unrelenting pace, with good action sequences and cgi to boot, its predictable at times and the ending fails to come up with something clever or original, but hey ... you cant have everything !!!

Marines Take On The Aliens

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 3 April 2011]

Battle: Los Angeles finds Marine Staff Sergeant Aaron Eckhardt ready to call it a career in the USMC. But an alien invasion that is disguised somewhat as a meteor shower upsets those plans. The aliens that are invading are not warrior Klingons or logical Vulcans, in fact they're really ugly and use our own sea water as fuel for their weapons.

I'm not sure of the science with that one, but we've certainly got a ton of sea water on this old Earth. Why the aliens just didn't land somewhere in the Pacific Ocean between South America and New Zealand and take all they need is something I'm still trying to figure out. Instead they land in all kinds of coastal and the world forgets it's feuds and tries to battle back.

The film is very similar to War Of The Worlds as Eckhardt's isolated squad, sent on a rescue mission for some civilians who were left behind in an abandoned police station in Santa Monica get first hand experience up close and personal with the aliens. It's very much like scientists Gene Barry and Ann Robinson in the 1952 classic being left behind and learning about what makes the Martians tick. But these are not scientists, they're making it up as they go along.

Eckhardt is second in command to young second lieutenant Ramon Rodriguez and there's tension there as well.

The acting takes a distant second place to the computer generated special effects. Although the stress of these Marines in combat with a very unknown enemy is telling and portrayed well on the screen.

Battle: Los Angeles is a good, not great science fiction film and it will no doubt attract a cult following of sorts, the same way Starship Troopers has.

Poor Effort

[johnhehir72 · 4/10 · 11 March 2011]

Poor character development and a worn out storyline make this a very forgettable film. I really didn't care who or when the next death would be. I probably wouldn't mind as much if at least one of the characters had been an annoying ass but it seems everyone was a hero, which ends up making nobody the hero.

I had no sense of dread from the alien invaders. In fact, if they had changed the aliens to an invading human army I think the film would have worked better. For all the special effects, the aliens might have well been cardboard cut-outs. It wouldn't have made them less interesting.

I came away from the cinema feeling like i had just watched a rather long advert for the marine enlistment division.

A familiar tale with a bit of a stylistic twist

[rparham · 6/10 · 12 March 2011]

The alien invasion film is certainly nothing original. Recently, and upcoming, I can think of no less than 4 film and TV versions of this basic tale. Battle: Los Angeles doesn't bring anything new, plot wise, to this scenario. In fact, it operates on the thinnest of plot and some very underdeveloped characters. The only somewhat unique aspect, at least for an alien invasion story, is its gritty "you are there" aspect, filmed in a hand-held, jerky, thick of the action style. This isn't revolutionary either, but Battle: Los Angeles does manage to squeeze some momentum out of its running length.

As mentioned above, Battle: Los Angeles' plot can be summed up rather succinctly: Aliens land on Earth throughout the globe, including near Los Angeles. This alien force, operating with ground forces, begins to overrun the various cities they arrive at, and LA is no different. A squad of marines, led by Staff Sergeant Nantz (Aaron Eckhardt) is dispatched to attempt to retrieve possible civilian presence from a Santa Monica police station behind the front lines of the fighting. They encounter heavy resistance, and must find a way back to their forward operating base while keeping the civilians under their protection, and themselves, alive.

Battle: Los Angeles is obviously influenced, visually, by movies such as Black Hawk Down and Saving Private Ryan in the staging of its action. Much of the film is photographed with hand-held camera moves, the focus constantly whipping around, disorienting both the characters and the audience. While the technique is hardly unique, it does work to a degree in Battle: Los Angeles, bringing a different approach to a familiar plot. This isn't about scientists trying to figure out what the aliens want, or politicians wringing their hands about the "big decisions" in the midst of an alien onslaught. Battle: Los Angeles keeps its focus exclusively on the soldiers in the thick of battle, presenting the action in a no-holds barred manner. It is refreshing, at least from that perspective, to see a harder-edged, more realistic take on this material.

On the other hand, Battle: Los Angeles is a bit weak on the character front. The most development is given to Sergeant Nantz, who had just recently returned from a tour in Iraq where lives were lost and many assume he was to blame. This plays into several moments in the film, influencing other characters regarding the decisions he makes during the events of the story. Beyond that, aside from a few obligatory references to someone's relative or background, none of the other characters see much development. Physically, they are different enough to stand out from one another, but they are all mostly blank slates. There isn't complete detachment from the audience, several moments have some resonance emotionally, but not as much as if the filmmakers had taken some time to flesh the people out a bit more.

Battle: Los Angeles also suffers from being a bit overlong, and it's relentless, action oriented approach means that a lot of similar scenes play out over and over again: Marines trapped in combat, things don't look good, a character makes a choice or sacrifice, they manage to subdue their attackers, and then the film moves to the next scene in this same format. There is also little or no development of the alien menace. Snippets of television coverage featuring scientific experts fills in a little of the backstory to them, but it is mostly incidental. However, Battle: Los Angeles is not created in that style, it is about the action going on with the marines in the thick of it, and stays in that mode.

Aaron Eckhardt proves again his ability to sell a character, and he imbues Sergeant Nantz with a vigor and a degree of weariness that you buy into. Most of the other actors do a decent job of making us believe in these people as Marines in the thick of combat. A few recognizable names take roles, including Michele Rodriguez as an Air Force tech who joins up with the Marines and Bridget Moynihan as a civilian they are trying to protect, but neither has much to work with in regards to their characters other than to look tough or scared, respectively.

Battle: Los Angeles is certainly no masterpiece. It doesn't deviate much from the alien invasion template in regards to the broad strokes of its plot, and the style it was filmed in has been pioneered by other films. That being said, the film is engaging enough, and applies its style to a source material in a way that at least gives a different perspective on a familiar narrative framework. That doesn't make for a tremendous film, but not one that is completely in need of avoidance by the filmgoing public.

Hoorah, I guess..

[Cunnilingilator · 1/10 · 23 September 2010]

Just Saw this Film at an advanced screening in Long Beach.

Battle: Los Angeles is the tale of Staff Sargeant Nantz' last day as a marine. Without spelling it out or drawing a diagram, the audience and the marine platoon we are following, are immediately deployed into Los Angeles for reasons they do not know. Soon we learn that indeed Aliens are landing off the shore of LA and killing everyone on the beach. The platoon we are following is sent on a mission to get some survivors from a gas station several miles from the coast. Generic movie ensues.

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. The intensity of the effect wears off right after the first alien is killed. After that the movie spiralled downhill deep, deep into the realm of the cliché. I'm going to name a few character's roles that are in this film, see if you can recognize them from other films you've seen. Experienced, hardened leader who gets a new platoon. Young officer straight out of officer's school who can't handle the action. Bad ass chick who can shoot. Soft and sweet nurse who gets picked up along the way. An Asian guy, a black guy, a white dude from the south, and a rookie make up the main part of the platoon. There is a scene where tension is high and its just a damn dog making noise. Start to see where this is going? This movie had some good things going for it. Its use of silence was well done. The blasting boom of the gunshots were startlingly realistic. The alien spacecrafts are awesome. The aliens themselves are pretty cool. Its just that the screenplay is terrible. SOOOOOO cliché in every way. This is your standard war movie just with Aliens. The ending is just as cliché as the rest of the film. Don't fool yourself into thinking it will actually be difficult to beat the aliens. 0 thought involved.

Hopefully Mr. Liebesman has better luck with the final product of Clash 2 than he did with this. Everyone I saw the movie with thought it was pretty bad. Movies like this that I totally enjoyed: District 9, Cloverfield, Avatar (somewhat), City of God (cinematography) and Blackhawk Down. All much, much better than this.

District 9 and the Bourne Identity had a really stupid baby.

Nothing new but a solid adventure.

[garethvk · 7/10 · 11 March 2011]

War movies depicting a group of soldiers against overwhelming odds are nothing new. For generations, moviegoers have been treated to cinematic recreations as well as new scenarios of fighting units in combat. Usually these films follow a typical formula that includes the tough and gritty commanding officer, the naive new soldier, the one with a woman and children waiting at home, and one who has difficulties with combat. In the new movie Battle: Los Angeles a new twist is given to the formulaic troops-in-combat picture which produces a mixed bag of results.

Aaron Eckhart stars as Staff Sgt. Michael Nantz; a 20 year Marine who, after losing men on a recent mission, has decided that it is time for him to leave and has filed his retirement paperwork from the corps. While completing a training exercise, Nantz and a squadron of Marines at Camp Pendleton are activated for what they are told is an evacuation mission in order to clear Santa Monica and other area residents from a swarm of meteors which are scheduled to hit just off the coast.

Nantz is assigned to a new commanding officer who, like the men in his unit, is wary of Nantz as many believe that he got his men killed in his last assignment. Despite the misgivings of the new lieutenant, he agrees that Nantz offers a wealth of experience and should be just fine for a simple evacuation assignment.

However during the mission briefing, the Marines are informed that the meteors that are hitting off the coast of major cities around the world contain metallic centers and that this is very likely an invasion from an unknown force. While the Marines are deploying an otherworldly fighting unit emerges destroying everything in their path as they moved inland from the coast line. Unsure what they are dealing with, the military decides to carpet bomb the city in order to contain the alien threat and give Nantz and his unit three hours to enter the combat zone and evacuate civilians from a police station.

While the movie is for the most part the standard soldiers-at-war film which substitute's aliens for the usual enemy forces, the strength of the cast and the solid action and special effects help the movie overcome many of its shortcomings. There is little character development in the film and scenarios that were introduced in some of the characters' back stories early in the film were given little to no chance to develop once the shooting started.

I also had an issue with some of the tactics in the film. While it may seem nitpicking there were a few scenes where the soldiers didn't follow logical courses of engagement until later in the film. I have had only the most basic of combat instruction from my brief time in the Air Force, yet I can think of at least four scenarios in the film where the unit failed to use the most logical options available in their combat situation. Of course any film dealing with an alien invasion is sure to have plot holes and yes I can quibble about the Air Force waiting three hours to bomb a heavily overrun area when containment would have been priority one in not allowing a hostile force that much time to entrench itself.

That being said it was an interesting and entertaining film. The enemy was sufficiently mysterious and dangerous enough to hold my interest and had me rooting desperately for the troops to rise up and strike back at the enemy. Michelle Rodriguez does fine supporting work in the role of an Air Force Tech Sgt. who may have the key to turning the tide of the battle. Eckhart is solid as the gruff but caring staff sergeant is equally strong and his unit of young corporals, including R&B singer Ne-Yo, are believable.

Director Jonathan Liebesman knows the core intention of this film is and in doing so provides enough action to keep the audience entertained throughout. despite some issues with pacing and plot. While it doesn't have the epic feel of Independence Day, Battle: Los Angeles is a film that provides enough entertainment to make it one of the better alien invasion films ever made and one that I certainly would not mind seeing revisited in a future sequel.

3.5 stars out of 5

Spend a 100 million and you get this???

[chas819 · 1/10 · 15 March 2011]

This movie made Skyline look good! Maybe I missed a key part while I was completely baffled that this is the movie they decided to make when they had millions of dollars to spend. Why? Completely predictable, a cast of characters nobody cares about, and we're required to suspend belief time after time just to move the story along.

Aliens arrive and invade, but it's OK, they don't have air support. How did they get here then? They have very advanced weapons, but apparently have spent no time learning to aim. It takes lots and lots of bullets to kill the aliens at first, but after a while just one will make them explode. And any time our marines make a significant kill, all action stops so they can Hoo Raa each other and dance a bit. Nevermind the firefight, the aliens will wait.

Add in shaky camera work and this mess was virtually unwatchable. Maybe I still have a well developed attention span, so I need more than 10 minutes of action, some filler, 15 minutes of action, more filler, action, filler, lather rinse repeat end.

It's movies like this where I think we should be able to ask for refunds! Maybe punitive damages!

Battle: LA, a close to reality war experience with aliens.

[jurasic5000 · 8/10 · 26 March 2011]

Forget what critic (others) says. This movie is enjoyable. Battle LA is one of the finest alien invasion movie. This movie is a third person view of a group of US marines getting their way out of the city invaded by Aliens. Battle LA is a modern combat war experience, no drama no bullshit. It sticks to the reality. Thats where audience lost the point, they expected another pop corn movie like Independence day/2012. But I do agree the movie lacks in some parts which prevents it becoming a great movie.

Visual and sound effects was awesome but camera work would have been better. Sometimes the camera annoys you, sometimes it gives you a first person experience.

On the whole its a close to reality and enjoyable ride. If you like war movies and serious visual & sound experience on big screen, this is the best thing right now.

A solid action adventure that delivered what I expected.

[blacklist-1 · 7/10 · 11 March 2011]

Battle: Los Angeles is a cross between Cloverfield (hand-held camera) and Independence Day (aliens landing on earth). It stars Aaron Eckhart as Staff Seargant Michael Nantz who having lost his platoon on a previous assignment files paperwork to leave active service for a while, but a call that meteors are landing all around the globe, which turns out to be aliens throws him back into the mix. The aliens want to eradicate the human colony for the resources of water, which helps in some way (it's never properly explained) to power their ships and mechanical bodies. Nantz becomes part of a new platoon who includes second lieutenant William Martinez (Ramon Rodrigeuz), Cpl. Jason Lockett (Cory Hardict), Cpl. Nick Stavrou (Gino Anthony Pesci), Cpl. Kevin Harris (Ne-yo surprisingly, whom I didn't even recognise until his name flashed up on the credits!) and TSgt Elena Santos (Michelle Rodriguez). They go to rescue any civilians in Santa Monica who are trapped in a police station and escort them out where also they find where the command module of the aliens ships that controls everything is and try to destroy it.

That's it really, and what is part of my criticism the story is very basic with no real twists, which also does contain some plot holes. Also there is no characterisation for any of the main characters who are as thin as cardboard, the film follows the usual formulaic structure with every stereotype you could imagine with the types of characters involved like "the new guy who wants to impress," and "the guy put in charge of a new platoon after losing his old one" etc. The script as well is truly dreadful, with all the clichés and cheesiness you could expect. But the thing is I was expecting this as this is your typical "America saves the world" trashy film.

I also expected other things that would be positive for this movie and it delivered. The action was exciting and well choreographed, (the best action sequence being on a freeway whilst the platoon try to save the civilians), there was enough suspense and tension throughout added by the great music and general pace of the film, the special effects of the aliens and their ships was impressive, the acting was surprisingly good even with the awful script. Aaron Erckart convinced as a marine leader with Michelle Rodriguez and Cory Hardict delivering solid supporting performances. The biggest strength I would say though is that it was excellently shot and edited. The hand-held camera added to the authenticity of the situation and never was too shaky, though there were a few scenes where it was hard to make sense of what was happening, but generally it was perfect.

Not everyone will like this film, those expecting anything then what I resembled of a decent script and story will be sorely disappointed and even the hand-held camera as pointed out by certain reviewers on here will irritate some people who may complain it's hard to see anything and that would be right in some respects. Battle: Los Angeles wasn't perfect with a story we've all seen so many times before, but if your looking for good action, special effects and reasonable acting, it does deliver. For me I would normally have given this film a five or six out of ten, but the acting and camera-work was a bonus and enough to tip it into a seven. Also there were more positives for this movie than negatives, which worked in the film's favour. Enjoyable action adventure that delivers solidly. A great effort.

Not worth the cinema price

[evenscoobyhadaclue · 3/10 · 14 March 2011]

From watching the TV trailers for this film, I was expecting a pretty fast paced, alien invasion, action flick. If I judged films on this alone, it would get full marks. However, I was left feeling quite left down by this film.

The over-abundance in cheesy lines, frankly annoying camera work, and massively predictable scenes could have been forgiven if this film had been a "b" movie, as that's what we have grown to expect from that genre. Also, despite the film being quite action packed from the get-go, I found that it dragged on and on, and definitely could have been better if it was at least a half-hour shorter.

To expand a little on the camera work, it is very jumpy with jerky motion and features repetitive amounts of "fast-zoom-in-really-close" style "effect", which is OK in some situations, but it does get massively overused in this flick. Another overused "effect" is the "looking-down-the-scope-trying-to-find- an-enemy" effect. By mid-way in the film, I wish I had actually started counting how many times this view was used, as I'm positive it was in double-figures. I know these effects can add to the feeling you're there with the heroes, but when it's just the same effect of looking down the sight at some smoke and concrete rubble, looking for shadows, over and over again, you tend to get put off it quite quickly.

The SFX are "ok". There is a heck of a lot of it in the film (as you'd expect, given the plot), and whilst some of the models are quite well detailed and could pass as believable, some of them are frankly amateurish - especially when zoomed in on (for instance, you can clearly tell that some of the "3d" metal work is simply textures on a flat surface, which offer no depth or moving light), which ruins the scene for you, as you can't help but notice it's a model, rather than some alien hardware.

Talking about the script now, I cannot convey to you just how much cheese is spouted by the actors in the film. I swear you can even see the anguish on Aaron Eckhart's face as he reels out yet another corny, predictable, and frankly unrealistic one-liner. It honestly gets to the point, where you're laughing at just how bad it gets at some points. It is extremely "B" movieish, which would be fine IN a "B" movie. However, this film is touting itself as a mainstream, high budget, serious action flick, where this sort of poor script writing shouldn't be found. In films like Independence Day, where they inject humour, light- heartedness and a "don't take it seriously" ambiance throughout, this script may well have worked - even been quite funny. But sadly, this is putting itself in with films like District 9 (Alien angle)and Black Hawk Down (Close combat / Brotherhood of men angle) and it really isn't in the same league as either.

Which just leaves the plot, which sadly is overly predictable and doesn't offer much in respect to tension, suspense or twists, but instead gives predictability, repetitiveness and sadly nothing new. Whilst it is constantly moving forward, and rarely breaks from the action, you can't help but feel that the film starts to drag.

To summarize, if it was a "B" movie, it would have been a pretty darn good one. However, since it's touting itself as a Action Thriller, I'm afraid it doesn't rate highly once you compare it to other offerings in the same genre - even if you go back ten years!

For those of you that do want to see it, I strongly recommend waiting for the DVD release to come out, then be discounted, before buying.

Well, it kept my attention.

[arteemus · 7/10 · 12 March 2011]

Not the best sci-fi flick I've seen, not the worst. The movie starts with a rockin' song & moves quickly to the action; lots of smoke, gunfire, perturbed Marines, darting shapes & weird sounds (which strongly reminded me of the velociraptor sounds from Jurassic Park). It had me glued to the screen, jumping at every sound & invested in the happenings.

The middle section of the movie dealing with a character's lingering death & his plea to save his orphaned son has been done over and over and over again in other films & I'm tired of those schmaltzy attempts by the director to tug at our heart strings. I'm also familiar with the "I'll stay behind & set off the bombs so the rest can live" martyrdom shtick (Armageddon, anyone? Aliens, anyone?). Maybe I was getting battle-weary.

The final third of the film again had me pulling for the survivors to finally get the hell outta there. Jeff Goldblum figures out that if they can disable the mothership, this will ultimately aid in the defeat of the extraterrestrials, so he & Will Smith take off from Area 51 in an alien spacecraft...oh, wait, that was Independence Day. OK, so our Marines figure out something similar, and are then led by the tortured and misunderstood staff sergeant (who earlier had bared his soul to his platoon, and won their loyalty forever; I, myself, would probably have been worried about getting out alive & trying to rest after such a hellacious day, but that would be too realistic & boring) to carry out a similar strategy. All ends well for the few Marines & civilians not already picked off. We Americans have once again singlehandedly (!!) figured out the secret to alien destruction & proceed to tell the REST OF THE WORLD, who are unable to figure this out without us. Yay, us.

Did the movie keep my attention? Yes. Was I entertained? Yes. Was it realistic? Probably not.

I'll save you the suspense: It's a war movie

[CSHaviland · 7/10 · 11 March 2011]

As war movies go, ho-hum. Saving Private Ryan set a good example of how a war movie should look like, and still directors don't achieve that level, even if they are inspired by it. I can't quite figure out what's holding them back. It does work.

But as alien invasion movies go, it's the most "grounded." You won't find any brain-sucking aliens in this movie, or U.S. presidents in fighter jets, or Microsoft viruses infecting the alien mothership, or aliens suddenly catching the flu and dying off soon after the attack. Because what I mean by being very "grounded" is the opposite extreme. It's not a movie about aliens, it's a movie about Marines at war, and while they are fighting aliens, there is nothing particularly "alien" about them when it comes to battle -- they're just tougher to kill.

Therein lies the reality-flaw: aliens able to travel from another star (presumably) and swarm our planet shouldn't be using ballistic firearms, they'd be using something a lot more deadly and advanced. Gas? Lasers? Chemical / viral drops? And even if they went ballistic, the shells ought to at least be armor-piercing and heat-sinking. While the alien machinery was tough to beat, it wasn't impossible, and it didn't seem to possess technology that was in advance of ours. In fact, they didn't even seem to have gravity control, but rather their ships flew rocket- style. That's just so 50's, isn't it?

There are many complaints about the shaky hand-cam effect in Battle: Los Angeles. Really? NOW everyone's complaining, after a hundred jiggling action movies in the last 10 years that have driven me to CVS upon leaving the theater? Even as a shaky-cam movie, it wasn't nearly as hard to watch as just a few minutes a Michael Bay movie.

It's like all the cameramen these days have Parkinson's.

And yet despite that I gave it 7 stars out of 10 here, which is pretty high, and I suppose I did that for a couple of reasons.

One, it was the most superior alien invasion movie that's been done to date. It divorced itself from the ideas behind Independence Day, War of the Worlds (remake), The Day the Earth Stood Still (remake), and Skyline, and tried to deal out all-out destruction without any over- ambitious science fiction ideas or save-the-earth-from-humans propaganda. I appreciated that, although I wished there was more "Sci-Fi" and less "Marines." Aliens struck a much more satisfying balance between the two, and had better plotting, better pacing, and a cooler foe.

Two, while the movie didn't take a lot of time to develop characters, the actors were strong performers that felt tangible and empathetic. I felt I was there with them, and that's where a lot of genre movies fail. They felt more like real people than actors playing people from a memorized script.

But as a science fiction movie about alien visitation (not necessarily war), it's way, way down on the interest list. District 9 was much more compelling.

Absolutely God-Awful Garbage, Why Aaron Why?

[stephen-lieber-man · 1/10 · 12 March 2011]

If you are really looking to waste two hours of your precious life, then feel free to give this piece of crap a try. It's awful... just awful. The production company is called "Original Films", which is ironic because there is absolutely nothing original about this movie in any way. It is cliché after cliché. From a marine who wants to retire being called in to a "one last job" scenario, to a kid loosing his father and begging "please wake up" over heavy synthetic violins. It's awful... just awful.

There is no objective, no plot, no story, nothing but flying bullets and low-fi "dancing" CG aliens. With the high budget of this movie you'd think that they could at least afford good looking CG. The animation and special effects in Terminator 2 were far superior... and that was made in 1991... 20 years ago!!

There's a simple game you can play with this movie. Whoever falls asleep first, wins. Yes, it's that boring.

But what is really depressing about this is the fact that Aaron Eckhart is a fantastic actor. It is a real mystery why he chose to be a part of this misguided production. He wasn't bad in this movie, either, but given the fact that there was no story, no character development, and soul-killingly lackluster dialogue, even his finely tuned chops weren't enough to make this movie entertaining.

Battle L.A. Reviewed by a U.S. Marine (Yes a POG!)

[mrkingz · 6/10 · 5 March 2011]

Just Saw this films about 3 Hours ago at MCAS Miramar...

just imagine how great this sounds... Independence day + call of duty = Battle LA. There's no way the can mess this up right?... wrong. I was extremely excited about this film, I was following all the trailers, the viral marketing but the end result was rather disappointing.

Aaron Eckhart, Michelle Rodriguez did a great job, but the supporting cast was sub par, and the dialogue was crap. The camera work was as shacky as this directors career... seriously, who would hire the The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: Beginning, B rated director to direct a 100 million dollar project... who's running this studio? if this studio is this desperate for ideas/advice then they should hire me...

well lets get back on track...

Plot summarized: (1)Marines Deploy after the Aliens invade(2) Marines ordered to save cops/civilians at the police station (2) Marines save some civilians (3) The Marines decide to hot wire a bus(really?)during a alien assault (4) they all board a bus and head to base(5) They make it to base after a serious of events and find it in ruins (just like in ID4) (6) The team decides to head for the secondary extraction zone and Blah, Blah, Blah... - sorry, i got better things to do on Friday night...

Battle LA is not a bad movie, Its entertaining and fun to watch but it falls flat rather quickly.

Posted on my facebook - "felt like i was watching a recruiting commercial" *** /out of 5

I got to hand it to Aaron Eckhart... That rifle to pistol transition, during that Alien retreat was good! Ooh-Rah

Did The Aliens Exterminate The Editor ?

[Theo Robertson · 5/10 · 15 September 2013]

Everyone described this film as BLACK HAWK DOWN meets ALIENS and who am I to contradict public opinion . One thing I didn't notice in the reviews was similarity to the John Wyndham novel The Kraken Wakes . Meteors land in the ocean and very quickly alien incursions attack the coastline . One criticism of Wyndham's criminally underrated novel is that if an alien race was this advanced then there's no reason for them to be hostile down to evolutionary psychology . In simplistic terms a civilization alien or otherwise would have to evolve beyond petty tribalsitic squabbles and pool their resources in to conquering physics and mastering interstellar travel . In other words an advanced civilization should in theory be a non aggressive race not bent on conquest

This is speculation of course because there's no evidence that there's life on any other planet and the novels of John Wyndham are quickly forgotten as the laser bolts fly and the aliens emerge from the sea . This is a pity because I was expecting a bit more mystery and suspense allowing the story to breath before the aliens were revealed . It's still not really a great loss at this point because I was still very impressed by the epic scope and spectacle as the marines fly to Camp Pendleton via helicopter dodging airbursts caused by the aliens . As the action then takes place as a ground war in the ruins of LA I was reminded to a certain extent of BLACK HAWK DOWN . The problem after the initial fighting however is that the scale and scope stops and started reminding me of any Michael Bay film you care to mention

Goodbye epic scope and scale we had when the marines were airborne and hello to close up and elliptic editing done via shaky cam . One can understand director Jonathan Liebesman trying to do a sci-fi blockbuster in a realist style but we've seen too many films with " blink and you'll miss it " type editing and you'd think with the utter contempt that many movie fans hold Michael Bay in you'd think most directors would avoid this style rather than constantly embrace it , but no they still continue as if it's part of their job remit . Would I cynical in thinking in this case it's too disguise the fact that the aliens aren't all convincing if you look at them longer than a nanosecond ? Hmm CGI and blink and you'll miss it editing . You spend tens of millions of dollars on a movie and you don't bother hiring an editor or a screenwriter . Remind me why Hollywood producers live in big mansions with a swimming pool while there's so many people with potential living in poverty ?

This is a the type of film like WORLD WAR Z that constantly gets pumped out by Hollywood where there's a germ of a good idea in there somewhere that blossoms in to a big headache inducing mess that makes for a great trailer but doesn't have any substance to sustain it for two hours . Obviously any idiot can be a Hollywood producer but it takes someone of relative intelligence to analyse if they want to spend money watching films like this at the cinema just because the trailer looked good . I'm glad I didn't spend money on a cinema ticket to watch this

Under the Sci-fi packaging is a good old traditional war movie

[harry_tk_yung · 11 March 2011]

The time is today (well, a few months away, to be exact) and the macro background is rendered intentionally vague. What the alien invaders really are is absolutely inconsequential. They are enemies and must be defeated – their lives or ours, period. Yes, there is one scene in which US marines and a civilian vet plunge their hands into the open torso of a dying alien (it's hard to tell whether it's front or back), ransacking, pulling out an assortment of slimy objects, trying to find a vital organ. The outcome of this unintentionally (or maybe intentionally, I don't know) comical scene is a simple, sweet conclusion: their heart is on their right side – to kill, shoot right. You see my point.

The focus of the movie is micro – a group of marines fighting their way out of a battered area of L.A. to bring out some rescued civilians, and later to destroy a vital communication centre of the enemy's that they stumbled across. As I inferred in the summary line, the fighting is quite conventional, artillery-based, state-of-the-art hardware notwithstanding. As such, this movie is well crafted and filmed and would satisfy most hard-core traditional war movie fans. Part and parcel of the package is of course the emotion contents: personality conflict, heroism, cliff-hangers, casualties, sacrifices, poignancy – all very familiar and predictable. At the end of the day, observing the length Hollywood has gone to boost the morale of the US marine, you would almost believe that they got tipped off by the government that a major campaign is about to be launched.

The cast is strong for a movie of this genre. Aaron Eckhart, one of the most under-recognized actors in Hollywood, leads the cast as well as the US marines in the story. Bridget Moynahan, who once played Isaac Asimov's legendary Susan Calvin (in her young days) opposite Will Smith in "I, Robot" (2004), is underused here as the civilian vet referred to earlier. Also underused, in a different way, is Michelle Rodriguez, one of the best tough-chick actors around today, not getting as much action as you would like to see her get. Thrown into the movie for good measure is Michael Pena (remember his collaboration with Nicholas Cage in "World Trade Centre" (2006) as the two trapped firemen?) playing a small role as a civilian with a family and winding up as collateral damage.

Battle:Los Angeles

[Scarecrow-88 · 7/10 · 4 March 2012]

I had read considerable amounts of negative reviews for "Battle: Los Angeles" so my expectations were practically nonexistent. So consider me quite surprised at how much I actually enjoyed this sci-fi war epic. This is most definitely a patriotic pro-soldier kind of action picture shot in the style of "The Hurt Locker", hand held and constantly in motion, with lots of building/structure destruction and ammunition fire. Aaron Eckhart really is an actor who deserves more recognition; the guy is just a dependable actor (and he has those rugged "Marlboro Man" looks that also benefits him) who was born to play the part of a leading staff sergeant, a leader of men. He secures a resolve even when some of the Marines question his skills as a leader after a nasty incident which resulted in his entire platoon's demise (one in Eckhart's new troop had a brother who died in that incident), and eventually proves to them that he is worthy of their respect and admiration in the field. Essentially, "Battle: Los Angeles" has alien invaders (wanting to colonize Earth) as the terrorists, all the world's major cities specific targets. In this film, Los Angeles, particularly Santa Monica at the start, is the primary focus of the invasion. Eckhart's men (eventually including civilians found in a hospital, and Air Force soldier Michelle Rodriguez, who shows up in every high-scale action film imaginable it seems these days) make their way through the debris and rubble of what once was LA. We see neighborhoods decimated, bodies all over the place along with damaged cars, death and destruction proof positive that the invaders (who have "drone ships" in the air along with "troops" on the ground) have superior weaponry in comparison to the US military. It will take ingenuity and bravery to survive this onslaught. Eckhart learns from Rodriguez that there is a "command center" that perhaps operates the unmanned drones and would enable the Air Force to strike from the air, but this will not be an easy task. What this movie does so well is take us into the frontlines as the city is being engulfed in a constant barrage of alien attack, up, close, and personal with the Marines. We learn about the attackers as they do and follow the soldiers as they march through a once densely populated city now in ruins. Some die as on any true battlefield, while all types of heroism are provided by the soldiers in an attempt to get any civilians out of harm's way, engage the enemy, and help defeat the invaders. The camera-work is designed to have us as observers on the enemy lines with the Marines, right there among them, seeing the carnage along with them. I think the movie succeeds. The alien menace always remains just out of focus, but we know they are there and have quite an arsenal. That's where the fun lies, I think, watching the soldiers respond to such uneven odds, and doing so commendably, scoring minor victories until they get that chance to aim at the "big cahuna", the command center. Special mention to Ramon Rodriguez as 2nd Lt. William Martinez, the leader of the outfit who Eckhart's Sgt Nantz answers to (and must sometimes coach), given the "big heroic sequence" where he gives his life to the others to take out a walking drone blaster.

This is an unoriginal, primitive and mindless recruitment video for the Call of Duty and MTV Generation

[Likes_Ninjas90 · 1/10 · 14 March 2011]

Staff Sergeant Michael Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) is an ageing soldier who is set for retirement. In his previous tour of Iraq he was one of the only survivors in his unit and speculation surrounds what happened to his men. When an alien invasion strikes the Earth however, he is brought back into the action to help lead a group of young and inexperienced soldiers. One of them is set to be married and another is expecting the birth of his child. As the rest of the Earth seems to be defeated, Los Angeles remains as one of the last posts. With the help of some civilians including a father and son, a veterinarian (Bridget Moynahan) and also TSgt. Elena Santos (Michelle Rodriguez), the unit works to clear out the city, moving towards an extraction point, before the area can be bombed out.

Calling Battle: Los Angeles the equivalent of a video game would be giving it too much credit. Jonathan Liebesman's irredeemable sci-fi action film is the antithesis of 2010's Monsters. This is an unoriginal, primitive and mindless recruitment video for the Call of Duty and MTV Generation. The soldiers here, armed with high powered assault weapons, don't so much act as scream grunt speak and backslap each other in a bid to look and sound cool. Take note of pop singer Ne-Yo's casting and Michelle Rodriguez as a hardened fighter. Big stretch. But video game enthusiasts would be better served sticking to the virtual battlefield because the shabbiness of this picture is one of its few surprises. Shaky cam makes an unwelcome return here, with framing so ridiculously tight in the opening stages that the camera seems to be attached to the actors' heads. Later battles are dismally over edited with rapid fire cutting that the film is indecipherable about who is being blown up. Forget about characters or development because by the first gunfight the scriptwriter already has too. There is no urgency or tension as we have no one to barrack for. As a viewer you're expected to catch flies as you admire explosion, after explosion, after explosion.

The entirety of the film, save for some painfully rushed and clichéd exposition, is made up of overlong battle sequences and standoffs. Moments of sacrifice and 'you go on without me' pleas, are unmoving and do little to compensate for the lack of narrative. Restricting the perspective of the film to a single military unit also means that there is little conception about the rest of the invasion. Only brief news headlines on the televisions give minimal information, like how the aliens are scavenging our water. Point being, the film seems more interested in being loud, rather than in the science, the aliens or even the human reactions. The cynic in me suggests that you see very little of the aliens up close because of how unconvincing they are. From afar they look like they're made from scrap metal. Try not to laugh as Nantz carves one up like a Christmas ham, looking for a weakness. What makes this more poisonous than other incompetent action films is the increasing transparency of the film's pro-military agenda. Along with the compassionless violence, the message seems to be that you're never too young or too old for the military. Luckily, Eckhart has a face made out of granite because it must be the only way he can keep it straight when spouting embarrassing propaganda like 'marines don't quit' and telling a little boy, 'I need you to be my little marine'. I found that and Battle: Los Angeles success at the US box office (it debuted at number one) to be scarier than any alien threat. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

What the hell did everyone expect?

[imdb96 · 8/10 · 12 March 2011]

I go to Transformers to see Megan Fox look good and giant robots fight. I went to Battle: LA to see the American military and aliens shoot and blow each other up.

A lot of people seem to think this was supposed to be some kind of District 9 movie. Sure, if you evaluate it on the same scale as District 9, it sucks. But if you just wanted to see an awesome action movie, this is the movie for you.

Yes, there was no character development. Yes, the plot is a zillion years old. So what? I wasn't looking for those things. Now and then, it's nice to go see a movie with mindless action. 100% of this movie was mindless action. Suspend your disbelief and enjoy it. Compare it to a movie like The Losers or A-Team where the movie tries to build up some characters and an original plot and fail miserably.

I would also like to add that there are some nice original points to this movie. For once, the aliens are not infallible. I get pretty tired of the oh-lawd-we-hit-them-with-nukes-and-didn't-kill-one type of alien movie popularized by Independence Day. There is no magic bullet in this movie, the aliens die from bullets, and you have to take out the command and control center to do serious damage (hey, just like in a conventional land war!). I also thought this movie was a decent depiction of a realistic military response to an alien attack. Everyone mobilizes, surrounds the landing zone, and combat ensues when they are attacked. Pretty simple.

I also see complaints about camera style. I honestly didn't even notice. It didn't seem any worse than, say, Black Hawk Down.

So I give this movie 8/10 on my action movie scale. If you were planning on evaluating it on the thoughtful-work-of-art scale, you must not have seen any of the trailers.

Ambitious But Heavily Derivative

[Hellrazr360 · 7/10 · 12 March 2011]

2011 hasn't left an enticing first impression for films, both released and upcoming. With a record broken for most sequels, combined with re-releases (Conan the Barbarian) and spin-offs (Puss in Boots), finding something original in cinemas seems to be one more challenge to face for the year. That said, even though Battle: Los Angeles might not have direct relations to previous films, it doesn't avoid being dissimilar. The good news, however, is that it at least functions enough to be enjoyable.

We get a fairly brisk introduction to some of the cast before being thrust into the fight at-hand within the film. Down time is in short supply as the conflict with an invading (or as is referred to within the film, "colonizing") extraterrestrial force reigns over the runtime. Battle: Los Angeles stays in relation to its name as it takes place entirely within the city, but these Californians aren't the only people facing a new threat. A number of other areas throughout the globe deal with the same issue, though we never see anything on their end beyond brief TV broadcasts. As a result, the film takes on a feeling of being a smaller part of a potentially bigger conflict.

Since the vast majority of Battle: Los Angeles is action, the standards it's held to aren't terribly demanding. And thankfully, we're treated to some good scenes, namely the final fight just before the end which, though not epic or revolutionary by any stretch, does feel nicely built up towards. Other stretches, primarily the first few, don't hold up quite so well; suffering from the all-too-familiar Michael Bay-esque directing style of quick cuts without showing much, if anything. Fortunately, by the time the antagonists have been revealed full-well, things are seen in a far more cohesive manner.

When looking at how the film stands up on a more fundamental and less action-oriented level, the cracks begin to quickly show. Probably the easiest issue to pinpoint is that everything here is incredibly derivative of other films (and even videogames). Independence Day, District 9, Terminator, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, Modern Warfare, Resistance, Battlefield; the list of friends goes on. Another shame to find is that little-to-nothing is revealed about the invaders themselves. Most of the supporting characters also come and go without much development to find. Needless to say, this isn't much of a thinker's film, especially since most of what occurs on-screen is predictable.

Battle: Los Angeles is an easy film to figure out. If you like what you saw in the trailer(s) and are fine with getting 2 hours of that, then you should be content with what's present. But a detailed story and question-answering with regards to who, what and why are MIA, unfortunately. This is a shame since the film does show potential and even gives hints at being something more elaborate, but they're never delved into. Everything here is fundamental or, if you prefer, shallow. As an action film primarily judged on the on-screen conflicts, it suffices and holds up better than most of its typically-average precursors. Thus, junkies of the said genre will likely get what they're looking for while everyone else is better off waiting until the (good) summer releases.

what the hell was that?

[ali-adel · 1/10 · 14 March 2011]

its not an alien movie, not independence day, neither district nine, its not worth to be seen at all, why?, the shaking camera ( all the time ), close up's all the time( to escape from wide views ) makes you feel like you are in prison, no one wants to see the details of actors face's all the time, then where is the story, what is the special about this story, effects, effects, and not that special effects? at least show us something different than we used to see in this kind of movies... i think its not worth for cinema, maybe DVD, so you can close it any time you feel bad about it, and maybe you can sit far enough from TV when the director zoom's in his actor's faces...

Marines In An Alien Invasion

[HylianKnightJa · 7/10 · 9 December 2021]

I've seen this a few times, first time in theater and every time I feel like they nail the dynamic of what it would be like to be a Marine in an impossible situation surrounded only by your fellow Marines. I think the movie is genius really, blending seamlessly with other war films while also making it entertaining with the whole alien invasion thing. I think its a solid movie with heartfelt moments and Aaron Eckhart is undoubtedly the star of the show and really carries the movie. I would be remiss if I did not mention that my longtime idol Ne-Yo is in the movie and he gives a perfectly acceptable performance and a bit impressive considering he comes from a music background.

All in all, I think its a solid war movie while also being one of the best alien invasion movies as well. I give it a 7/10.