Battle Los Angeles

A guilty pleasure with shooting, concrete, smoke, shooting, metal, explosions, more shooting ... and all of that over and over again. A spectacular “war of machines” in the destroyed dusty streets of L.A. Though it’s not elegant and lofty in Michael Bay’s fashion, Battle: Los Angeles is realistically gritty. The demented dialogue and hardcore pathos do not degrade the film, but give it a detached, fun dimension reminiscent of Starship Troopers. The question is whether that is intentional. Anyway, Jonathan Liebesman turns out to be a decent action director. And this is a movie I dreamed about when I was fourteen and had just watched Terminator 2 :-) (10/03/2011)

Another shining proof that only perfect visual effects and bombastic action can't provide enough for a whole film. Battle Los Angeles is nothing more than a cold parade of loud explosions, falling buildings and moronic dialogue lacking a coherent script or even a hint of human emotion to give the action on screen some authenticity. Liebesman may handle the action with bravado, but an elite director should at least be able make a juicy and medium-rare steak out of the premise, and not just throw a slab of raw and cold meat at the viewer (anyone who's seen Black Hawk Down knows what I'm talking about)... 50% (29/06/2013)

It’s incredibly how Liebesman handled this project. With a relatively small budget, he created a monumental-looking (title, trailer, posters) and yet very modest sci-fi film, full of very impressive visual effects and absolutely thrilling action (shots and panoramic camera sweeps like Michael Bay). The protagonists may not be as cool as in other films, but that's not the main focus here. In essence, it's a mix of all possible films, and everyone takes exactly as much of their own portion as they want. It has pathos, emotions, action, excellent sound design, quotes, likeable actors, heroism – basically everything we expect from this kind of movie. It lacks a budget for an even bigger inferno, but the director knew exactly what he was doing. With a bigger budget, it wouldn't be this cute winking at the film world, but a proper mess. PS: The best aliens in terms of philosophy and execution still remain those from Independence Day. (20/06/2011)

Black Hawk Down meets District 9 and Independence Day. A great cliché lurks around every corner. A group of soldiers (the commander "with a past", his white, black and yellow men, who also of course include a female pilot who "happens" to know a lot, and of course a few adult and child civilians) are fighting with aliens who resemble mechanical Predators with the intelligence of inmates of an institute for space idiots. It is done very effectively, but unfortunately in a completely undramatic and empty way. Because of the stupid script, I didn't believe in the characters at all. A big mistake and a shame all in one. That said, certain scenes are really good, it just needed to be more original and steal less from other films. That gets it two and a half mediocre stars. (08/04/2011)

Wow! A film where hostile aliens invade earth is a fan of those who want to defend it (the American army)? Who would have said? I understand that not everybody will like Battle Los Angeles, it’s far from a great film, but that several reviews will say that it’s an almost unwatchable epic fail... Really? It might be so for those whose ideology makes them prefer a film that relativises the evils committed by Islamic terrorists over one that celebrates the efforts of the American army. Battle Los Angeles is a very well made, but fairly stupidly written action film, which is the best possible result if you’ve come to terms with the fact this won’t be any new smart science fiction classic. The film is unbearably “American” in only three scenes, but that’s more than compensated by all the cool moments. To relax at the cinema? Ideal! 8/10 PS: Everyone (including Sony) is comparing Battle Los Angeles to other films, so: Independence Day: BLA is more realistic, dirty and, fortunately, without humour, and a little less pathetic. Cloverfield: Even though BLA isn’t shot with hand-held cameras, the action scenes give the impression that the cameraman is right there, and the monsters are shown as if by the way. Black Hawk Down: I related to the soldiers in both films in a similar way: very little. The action is just as realistic, but in BLA, unlike BHD, it didn’t bore me in the end thanks to – I admit – the more interesting enemies. 2012: BLA is a thousand times more compelling that Emmerich’s latest attempt at catastrophe. Skyline: The low-budget flick by the Straus brothers is worse in every aspect (and in some, like the direction, much worse), with the exception of the monster design. District 9: Blomkamp’s début is much smarter, but the craftsmanship is at the same level. Besides, whereas BLA is silly from the get go, District 9 becomes silly in the second half, which makes it inconsistent. Starship Troopers: The propaganda in BLA is about 5% of the “theoretically serious” Starship Troopers. (10/03/2011)