Battle of Los Angeles (2011 Video) User Reviews

A movie crafted by a 5 year old

[joseph-ruffolo · 1/10 · 13 March 2011]

Take Independence Day and E.T, put then into a blender with two week old garbage and you get the SyFy production Battle of Los Angeles. The acting is over the top with the base commander character as a 1030's mafia thug as some of the worse character acting I've seen in years.

The special effects are marginal at best. The title of the movie and release is certainly to attract a viewer audience that might mistake this for the Battle:Los Angeles film release to theaters on 3/11/2011.

This movie ranks as a new low for the SyFy channel even considering some of the awful movies released bu SyFy the past six months. I recommend it for film students who want to see how not to make a movie. For anyone else give it wide berth or watch it with an air freshener.

I lasted 7 minutes and 32 seconds....

[vlaho-bazdan · 1/10 · 16 March 2011]

....and then it was just too much. I really have no point of reference, since i never saw anything remotely as bad as this, but definitely worst movie ever shot. Its worth seeing it only to understand how other movies are good in comparison. Even the bad ones. Is there any chance that i can sue asylum for a bag of popcorn and can of coke that i spent in those 7 minutes of my life that i wasted on this?? I understand problems with low budget movies, technical aspects of it all, but Flash Gordon was a low budget movie a century ago and compared to this is a master piece. Now i seriously suggest to avoid this insult to a movie industry world wide at all costs. And this is coming from a guy who endured an ex girlfriend sobbing after Leo di Caprio in a theater with wooden chairs for 2 and a half hours just to see Titanic sink. I can endure pain but i just found out my limits!

Tragic syfy movie that should never have been made

[neilthyer · 1/10 · 18 March 2011]

This would probably be in the worst 100 science fiction movies of all time. The script writers obviously passed it off to their kids. The director didn't come out of his trailer, the stars should have stayed in theirs. The special effects were the best part of the film, and these looked like a high school project. The sets are ridiculous, the military installations are positively laughable. The only people in this film that actually seemed to pay attention to their job was the wardrobe department, but then military uniforms do not require that much imagination. Why does syfy create this rubbish? I suspect it so that people will turn of the television and go outside in the sun for a few hours. At least that would be a reasonable justification for making this film. Considering watching this film - it is not even bad enough to be funny - just don't and say you did. No one will know the difference. I pretty sure the editor stopped watching it during the cutting.

...it could take the place of worst movie ever!

[skiporama-deducci · 13 March 2011]

Without a doubt, this is the single most horrific display of a low budget Syfy (dare I say) 'original' movie that I have ever laid eyes on. Considering the unbelievably cheesy acting and Jr. High computer class special effects, it's a complete mystery to me that this was actually written, approved and then funded albeit just barely. As if that wasn't enough, it was actually captured on video and edited, sent out for the final review and then advertised, scheduled and finally... tragically, broadcast on a major network. Yet, nowhere along the way did anybody stop and say... "holy mackerel, this is a complete piece of dung! We can't release this..." Nope! It was shamelessly put forth upon the world and I had the misfortune of seeing it with my own eyes and could not believe what I was witnessing. It's very possible that this production will live in infamy for EONS. And if more people than the 275 remaining Syfy channel fans actually get a chance to see this piece of ...., it could take the place of worst movie ever!

Tragedy....

[eirebet · 1/10 · 23 March 2011]

It is a tragedy that there is people filming these crap and worst of all, some people pay money to buy or rent bullshit like that... Horrible... parody... bad effects... something like actors but definitely NOT ACTORS tricky title to fool the fools... unbelievable bad scenario... there was not ONE minute of at least BAD filming... all of it was JUST GARBAGE... take this for granted. it may be the worst film you ve ever watched, and that only IF you manage to watch this all... i just FF it to see if the end could be such a crap as the whole film. And surprise!!! it was worst!!! for god's shake do not try to watch it, it is mind-mixer and make you feel sick

New Lows for SYFY Imagine Greater Budgets Please

[elliott78212 · 1/10 · 14 March 2011]

OK let me admit I am often mildly entertained in that this movie is so bad kinda way when I watch the Syfy Satruday Movie Spectacular. Because they are such spectacularly badly made films and on the off occasion there is a good sometimes even great film hiding there,well not this time. I want my 45 minutes back thats how far I got before I just couldn't take it anymore a first for me. Normally I sit through the terrible movies while playing on my laptop. I couldn't do it and in fact had to go see the real Battle Los Angeles today due to feeling so grimy from the previous night. The story if you can call it that is a fusion of Skyline and Battle L.A. and several other films the acting is worse the horrible with a script so poorly written I can't believe anyone green lighted it. CGI is so bad yet had scope it just didn't have detail or quality had this movie been released ten years ago u might have thought how cool was that but now its like wth I seen better CGI in commercials, even some films from ten years ago look better than this omg its just that bad avoid at all costs.

Score another one for the Asylum

[MetalGeek · 3/10 · 13 March 2011]

The Mockbuster Factory returns with what may be their most audaciously titled/timed ripoff yet. The big budget sci-fi flick "Battle: Los Angeles" has just hit theaters and a day later "Battle Of Los Angeles" (note the "Of" in the title, people - totally different film!) airs as the SyFy Channel's Saturday Night Original Movie. I wonder how many people were dumb enough to tune in thinking that they were going to be getting the "real" blockbuster for free. If so - joke's on you!! Anyway, I haven't seen the "real" "Battle: Los Angeles," but what I've seen in the trailers, it appears to owe a lot to "Independence Day," and therefore so does "Battle OF Los Angeles." In both versions, a giant spaceship drops out of the skies over the City of Angels, apparently impervious to all Earth weaponry. In the "real" movie, the only ones who can do anything about the alien invasion are a platoon of tough-as-nails U.S. Marines. In the Asylum version, it's a small band of Air National Guardsmen stationed in the hills.

It must be said that the special effects in the first ten or fifteen minutes of "Battle of Los Angeles" actually look somewhat promising. While still characteristically Asylum/SyFy Channel cheap, the invasion/battle scene that opens the film looks like they at least put some kind of effort into it. I would imagine that the majority of the film's (small) budget went into that sequence, as the rest of the film doesn't come close to measuring up to it.

From here, all resemblance to the real "Battle: Los Angeles" ceases. Instead of Aaron Eckhardt and Michelle Rodriguez, we get Kel Mitchell (yes, the former "Welcome to Good Burger, can I take your order?" guy from Nickelodeon) and Nia Peeples. Nia is a sword-swingin' Area 51 ass kicker (aging gracefully in a "Resident Evil" style cat suit) who leads the band of military survivors through the desert (random observation: have you ever noticed how many Asylum films deal with "a small band of survivors traveling through the desert?" I'd say it accounts for a good half of their filmography!)to a final showdown on board the alien ship. I realize this plot description is rather vague, but then that's because as far as I could tell, the film had no real plot to speak of. It's basically a series of random fight scenes, stuff lifted from other (better) movies, lots of people running, guns being fired and stuff blowin' up (in the Asylum's trademark, laughably cheap CGI) and a whole lot of ridiculous dialogue. Shoehorned in for no apparent reason is a fighter pilot from 1942 (?) who is not what he appears to be, a grizzled old airman who tries to shoot down alien ships with a Colt revolver, and "advanced alien weaponry" that looks like it came off the shelves of Toys-R-Us. In short, if you tuned into this movie thinking you were getting the real "Battle: Los Angeles," then you deserve what you got. Bad movie fans who are in on the Asylum's joke will have a hoot and a holler picking apart the usual round of inconsistencies (such as Peeples' suddenly-appearing eye patch) and technical errors. Sit back with a six pack and enjoy. Judging from the reviews I've read of the "real" "Battle Los Angeles" movie, this Asylum-ized version is probably more entertaining anyway.

Not a Movie

[ninochandra · 1/10 · 21 March 2011]

Making a good quality sci-fi movie is not an easy work. There are some movie that we can call a not so good movie or even a bad and awful movie. But talking about Battle of Los Angeles, believe me, this is not a movie, this is totally torture. If you want to know how to waste your time in the worst way, then it's for you.

It is obvious that the movie want to ride the hype of Battle: Los Angeles. Even so, please make something that at least worth to watch. Do not expect anything from the story, The title should be "Independence day vs Alien vs Ninja". The technology used in this movie reminds me of Japanese TV series Ultraman circa 60s Sigh..I wonder what were they thinking making this movie. I don't really care about the character in this so-called movie except the ninja/samurai girl (and it's because of the outfit? maybe..)

Movie should be entertaining and giving you impression to remember. Whether it's fun, scared, blue or anything but angry to your self for wasting your time. This is what you will get by watching this.

Not worth the time.

[mikes123 · 2/10 · 12 March 2011]

Cheap CG and blue screen battles aliens.

Made for TV.

Derivative. It's got pods and the queen from Alien, worms from Dune (or maybe it's a sarlacc from Star Wars), and acting from the original Star Trek.

Obviously trying to ride on the back of a major motion picture with nearly identical title.

Not really anything positive about it, unless you're bored with no other sci-fi to watch.

Where are the MST2K bots when you need them?

Right up there with Plan 9 From Outer Space, but not as entertaining.

Turgid pacing defeats most of the action

[LARSONRD · 3/10 · 13 March 2011]

This is the Asylum's knock-off imitator of the big BATTLE: L.A., and it's pretty dull. The film is muddled by poor pacing, extreme predictability, characters we don't care about, and lack of scope. Budget reasons no doubt affected the latter, resulting in a film that never really visualized the full extent of its concept; all of the action stays concentrated within a small group. Amidst that microcosm, however, the film has action aplenty, although much of it is hampered by the director's turgid pacing – reaction shots hold forever and are repeated over and over at the expense of engaging editing and propulsive forward motion so that the film even at its most exciting seems to proceed at a snail's pace. Cast does okay, especially Nia Peeples as an Area-51 styled military agent whose skill with a katana sword, however incongruous in the modern military, is thrilling, and Robert Pike Daniel as a crusty old-school soldier who takes pot shots at the alien saucers with a revolver, and steals the whole show. A first-rate synth-and-samples score by Brian Ralston & Kays Al-Atrakchi gives the story what propulsion it manages to gather. As the equivalent of a "B" movie it's passable entertainment for the undemanding, but most of us are demanding coherency and creativity. BoLA's story sustains little of that.

Awful......

[c_wriley · 1/10 · 12 March 2011]

This is quite possibly the worst Asylum "movie" to date. And, that is saying a lot. It's as if they're trying to make a terrible movie every time. I enjoy the occasional B-grade SciFi movie as much as the next person, but this garbage was awful.

And why is it this movie takes place in an abandoned rock quarry? Are we supposed to believe downtown Los Angeles is filled with crushed rock stockpiles? And the digital version of LAX was just sad. I guess we can just add this "movie" to the list of Asylum failures. And, it's a long list indeed. What a joke....

The only upside to this trash heap was seeing Nia Peeples. She still looks pretty good. I would have never guessed that she will be turning 50 later this year. Although, I could have done without the eye patch.

Poor Movie Making At Its Very Best - A must see!!

[ukproject · 8/10 · 11 July 2011]

Nobody likes to admit it, but we all do it. Everyone reduces the speed of their cars to a near crawl to rubberneck across the road the twisted remains of a tragic car crash.

And if you're looking for the movie equivalent of a multiple car pile-up, look no further than 'Battle of Los Angeles' by Asylum Studios. In fact I've actually turned into a bit of a junkie for these spectacularly bad movies by Asylum Studios and am seriously considering buying DVDs of all the movies they've made. If there was an academy award for 'Ballsiest Choice of Movie Title', these guys would win it every year, hands down. 'The Terminators', 'Almighty Thor', 'Alien vs Hunter', '2012:Ice Age', 'The Day The Earth Stopped'. If there was a 'Duping the Public into buying the wrong DVD award', they'd win that too.

The barnyard production values are almost reminiscent of a school play. You could almost picture a school teacher desperately trying to get some enthusiasm from the actors who would rather be doing something else.

The story itself is from the same cookie cutter mold as are most alien invasion movies nowadays. Aliens either want our planet, it's resources, or maybe they've just started receiving the 1st broadcasts of Americas Got Talent and believe that the humane thing to do would be to put us out of our misery.

In any case, don't try to make sense of this one. Stop being a critic for a while and just enjoy this movie as it cranks up the hammy acting, senseless action and moronic story telling to the max.

This is poor movie making at it's very best.

Rip-roaring stupidity™

[mikemdp · 6/10 · 13 August 2012]

So I'm reading this book called "Something's Alive on the Titanic," by Robert Serling, the same author who wrote "The President's Plane is Missing," "Air Force One is Haunted," and "Someone's Something is Something," except I made that last one up.

Anyway, the book is about a team of adventurers who dive to the Titanic, only to discover a monster down there. And we know this is true because of all those 1912 newspaper stories that quoted survivors saying, "Thank God the Titanic sunk, because there was a monster on it." See what I did there? I made that up, too.

Anyway again, I bring this book up not just because its plot is perfect for an Asylum film (if you're reading this, Barry Van Dyke, you're welcome), but because it inspired me to coin the phrase "rip-roaring stupidity™."

And so here we have "Battle of Los Angeles," in which an alien ship literally the size of Los Angeles starts blowing up the city for no good reason, and the military responds by sending a few hot chicks in fighter jets to check it out.

Soon, the fate of the world is up to a half-dozen or so ragtag soldiers, because the rest of the U.S. military apparently has better things to do than save the world from an alien invasion.

Once the plot is established thus, the film requires only that you just sit back and enjoy the rip-roaring stupidity™. For instance:

-- The impossibly gravelly-voiced sergeant who barks out phrases like "These ain't the Rooskies!" and stoically fires his service revolver at a squadron of flying saucers blasting lasers at him.

-- The tank-like robot with a machine gun on its head that looks like an amalgam of a Dalek and a vacuum cleaner that the aliens sent to kill a neighborhood of people. For some reason.

-- The platoon leader who clings to life despite clearly being shot about 9,000 times by the Dalek vacuum.

-- The fighter pilot who can't seem to shake the flying saucer on her tail until she bravely ejects, taking out the alien ship when her plane's windshield flies into it.

-- The World War II pilot who shows up in a Corsair 68 years after being abducted by the aliens, who seems really, really cool until later in the movie, when we find out something very, very stupid about him.

-- The samurai babe. 'Nuff said.

We're soon introduced to one of the aliens and learn the real reason they're here, and to be honest, it's a rather nifty one (which I won't spoil for you here, but is easily learned on Wikipedia).

"Battle of Los Angeles" is a mockbuster of the mainstream film "Battle: Los Angeles," and if you dolled out good money at the theater for the latter when the former was a buck at Redbox, find someone to stooge-slap you. Thanks to The Asylum, rip-roaring stupidity™ doesn't have to cost a fortune.

Not SyFy's worst, but it is down there as one of their all-time lows

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 14 July 2011]

I dislike a lot of SyFy's output but I watch them to see if they are ever going to do something worthwhile. They've made a few tolerable if hugely flawed ones, but mostly the movies aired on the SyFy channel are trash.

Battle of Los Angeles is not SyFy's worst, however it is down there as one of their all-time lows. One thing that really spoils it is the pace, throughout it is very turgid and severely undermines the action. Speaking of the action, most of it felt clumsy and further disadvantaged by poor editing.

The film itself looks cheap. The effects have a half-hearted, crude and unfinished look to them, and the photography is all over the map. The story is predictable and unengaging, the dialogue is clichéd and cringe-worthy, I didn't care for any of the characters and there is some really dire acting going on, in fact Battle of Los Angeles is one of the worst-acted SyFy films I've seen recently. The leads show no charisma, and the support cast is also uneven, some overact and some are so dull it is hard to tell whether they're actually acting.

Overall, an all-time low. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Too hard to watch

[ryoendeprouw · 1/10 · 16 May 2011]

First of all, I love Science Fictions movies... So I was curious about this movie. After watching 5 minutes, I found it really hard to watch the rest of the movie. I've seen awful movies, but not like this... The script, dialog, acting is so terrible. Even the effects were awful to watch. I don't understand why they making this, this is not even a movie... The acting, seems the persons have read only once their script, if you want to act, you have to live in your role.... And how Nia use the katana, wow, every child of 6 can do that... And the old sergeant is shooting ships out the sky with his revolver, C'mon let me laugh... It's one of the worst movies i've seen... don't waste your time to see this... and if you do, you will regret it... It's so painful for your eyes...

How many times can Los Angeles be invaded by aliens?

[paul_haakonsen · 3/10 · 10 April 2011]

For a SyFy movie, then "Battle of Los Angeles" was actually somewhat surprising. Why you may ask? Well, first off all, the effects in the movie were actually decent enough, except for the explosions from the hand grenades. They were the weakest explosion ever. The alien spacecrafts and vehicles were actually nicely made, except for the weird robot-like vehicle that was fashioned from a modern day bomb-removal unit. That was just hilarious.

And for an invading force of aliens with the ability to travel through space, wouldn't you think they had some firepower beyond projectile bullets? That was also hilarious.

Similar to the "World Invasion: Battle Los Angeles", this movie wasn't overly rich on a solid story. You were just thrown into the chaos and were left to sort out the ends yourself.

For some reason we never saw anything from the streets, you would assume that there would be chaos on the streets, with people panicking, police and military mobilizing, but no, that was not be. Instead we get less than 10 soldiers taking up arms, lead by some anti-social, overly angry and cursing officer. I have never heard of an officer addressing his subordinates in that manner. I wonder what they were thinking with that one. And to top it off, throw in someone who auditioned for "Kill Bill", but didn't make the cut. What was up with the outfit the character Karla wore, and wielding a katana? Wow!

And one thing that did amuse me was when they were inside the mothership, getting squished, then Karla knew exactly how to work the machinery of the alien technology and save the day. Marvelous entertainment value right there!

Lots of similarities between "Battle of Los Angeles" and "World Invasion: Battle Los Angeles". Coincidence? That is up for us to decide, now isn't it? The acting in "Battle of Los Angeles" was actually adequate. Of course, nothing to harvest in any awards, but it was bearable to behold. Again with the similarities between "World Invasion: Battle Los Angeles", you got a macho lady; Theresa June Tao and Michelle Rodriguez. Another coincidence in actress choices?

Truth be told, then "Battle of Los Angeles" is actually one of the more impressive SyFy movies, but it just suffered from having no real solid storyline, and that it had too much in common with the "World Invasion: Battle Los Angeles" movie. And that pulled the movie experience way, way down. But it was a refreshing step away from their usual big and mean monster movies.

Of course, you know what kind of movie this is, you have the ending figured out right from the very beginning of the movie. It is just that much of a stereotypical movie.

Battle of Los Angeles

[szedelanyi · 1/10 · 12 March 2011]

Edward D. Wood Jr. is alive and well and working for the SYFY channel. Not since "Plan 9 From Outer Space" has there been serious contention for the worst film ever made, until now. It is obvious that they pulled out all the stops and went WAY over their $3,000 production budget, possibly by as much as 20%. Now I like a schlocky sci-fi flick as much as the next guy, as long as the idea is either original or entertaining. This film is neither. The plot is a direct rip off of several recent big budget films,there is no character development, the actors seem to have had around 20 minutes to read through their scripts, the sets are cheesy, with the majority of exterior shots filmed in either the abandoned enlisted housing complex of a decommissioned air force base, or a sand and gravel pit. The special effects look as if they were done on some kid's laptop while doodling during 7th grade study hall. But worst of all, it takes itself WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. The only thing missing is "Elvira" poking fun at it.

What have they created????

[matt-sharrett · 2/10 · 21 March 2011]

Ahh, the Battle of Los Angeles...........

My work mate bought this movie for us to watch at work. He was under the impression it was the new Blockbuster Battle: LA but after the opening 2 minutes, it was painfully obvious that he was wrong...As wrong as this movie in fact.

Never have I seen such terrible acting and CGI. The sets are atrocious and the plot is non existent. My work mate walked out after about half an hour but I was so shocked at what I was seeing, I had to watch until the end.

I did have a good laugh at some parts of this film such as the eye patched ninja taking out alien drones with her Katana and the old grisly Sergeant shooting down an alien spacecraft with his revolver (and it wasn't even a 44 magnum) but apart from that, it left a lot to be desired, even for an Asylum film.

Im pretty sure the CGI for this was done on a commodore 64..

If your considering watching this...don't

Burn before watching...

[Erikwk04 · 1/10 · 28 September 2011]

I'm going to keep this short; DO NOT watch this movie! Yes the graphics are bad and the acting is worse but the reason you shouldn't waste a single second of your life on this movie is the truly laughable script. An American airforce pilot from 1942 lands in modern day L.A. and joins up with local National Guardsmen, no questions asked? Shortly after, our team of would be heroes joins forces with a samurai chick with a pirate eye- patch. Again, nobody seems to bother asking a simple but valid question: 'Hey, who are you?' Instead our band of merry morons are just fine with following would-be ninja MILF into her creepy underground bunker. Even the title is an obvious attempt at piggy-backing on the success of World Invasion: battle Los Angeles. Like I said, burn before watching...

Parody or Disaster - or Both

[HeadMMoid · 1/10 · 12 March 2011]

Asylum is perhaps the most consistent motion picture production company on the planet. They have shown an uncanny ability to produce one piece of utter trash after another. Battle for Los Angeles is, unfortunately, well rooted in this tradition.

Other than ripping off a number of science fiction movies BfLA started off as just another poor CGI, no plot, badly acted, and technically flawed Asylum production. Then, after the introduction of poor game quality alien killing machines and an unbelievable ninja-like female fighter, it seemed that there might actually be a theme developing -- parodies of a plethora of science fiction movies with a few shooter games thrown in for good measure. Sure enough, Independence Day, Close Encounters, Tomb Raider, MIB, and others all flashed by. Perhaps if there had been anyone in the production staff with even a slight amount of talent, original thought, or imagination, they might have pulled it off.

Unfortunately, like everything produced by Asylum, the movie fails to live up to expectations, unless those expectations are for a bad movie. Unexpected, unexplained, and just plain ridiculous plot twists coupled with improbable events and situations eliminate any ability to suspend disbelief and leave the viewer wondering if the writer's job was anything other than stringing together a preselected set of parodies.

Topping off the movie's problems are poor CGI (especially early in the movie), an obvious lack of military knowledge, and one predictable scene after another.

The movie seemed to be played as a serious parody. As such, it failed. If it had been played for humor, it might have had a chance -- at least to the extent that it already was able to produce howls of laughter at how silly some of the scenes were when played on the level.

Absolutely the WORST movie of ALL time.

[trevertowne7 · 1/10 · 18 May 2011]

I can't believe that i sat down and watched all of this movie. It completely blows my mind. Why would anyone want to even star in this movie? About ten minutes in i wanted to smash the computer monitor with my set of Drum sticks.. I really wish i wouldn't have wasted my time pirating and then watching that sucks ass film. Zach braff may have ruined his movie career.. also who the heck was that seventy year old lady that they kept zooming in on her ass? it was like looking at my grandma. yuck. I will be more careful the next time I'm trying to download a movie so i don't download something this horrible. The director and writer should reconsider their career path.. i hear that a McDonalds might be hiring. Again, the worst movie i have ever seen in my life.

I still can't believe that someone would sell this movie..

[Stigal · 23 October 2011]

I have seen this movie in all the DVD shops I have been going to at centre of their most popular shelf. The cover and all makes it look like a normal movie....so eventually when the price came down to 3£ I decided to buy it.

That is the most wasted 3£ of my life, and I will go back with it and try to get my money back. I have never before gone into a reputable DVD shop and bought a movie that was actually a disguised C-movie (disguised as an A-movie)

This movie is horrific, I don't think I have the vocabulary to describe it. I registered on this site only to write this review to prevent YOU from buying this. When it started out I first thought it was a joke or the wrong movie. IT just starts with these horribly bad CGI pics of the earth and a cartoon spaceship. How can it be made in 2011 ?? Independence day was made in 1994 and had a million times better graphics. then next we find ourselves at some very badly made military base. None of the characters are introduced,no personalities are introduced, there seems to be no ongoing plot, just a bunch of army guys with the most cliché lines I have ever seen.

I usually enjoy B-movies, but I couldn't watch this one more then half an hour...It was simply to bad...horribly bad.

what is a movie without a plot, without characters and without even attempting to make things look real ? It IS BAD BAD BAD Stay away ! It may look like a decent movie on the cover..it is not.

A True Saturday Night Treat

[MoronUnited · 10/10 · 13 March 2011]

Syfy and The Asylum's latest joint-production brings forth everything you could ever ask for in a great B-movie flick, from the hilarious effects to the wonderfully campy acting. The plethora of negative reviews on IMDb for this great flick truly shows what is wrong with the overly-serious movie-going public nowadays.

Battle of Los Angeles is pure enjoyment from start to finish, a thrill-ride like no-other. Combining effective aspects of past Asylum flicks, Battle of Los Angeles takes the Hollywood film it is based off of and runs wild, creating something that is incredibly imaginative and is not afraid to have fun. Similar to The Asylum's take on Sherlock Holmes, it doesn't rip-off the subject matter, rather taking the original film and infusing the serious script with over-the-top twists and turns.

Kel Mitchell is perfect as the soldier who, well, runs around and kills aliens. No back-story is provided since no back-story is needed in a flick where all we want to see is mindless action. Nia Peeples is also amazing as the eye-patch rocking, katana wielding ninja-assassin who takes out flying cyborgs with her blade. Yes, she slashes flying cyborgs WITH A KATANA. What more could you ask for? Robert Pike Daniel also turns out a hilarious performance as the maniac commander who stands out in the wide-open, shooting at incoming alien aircraft with a pistol. Just awesome. And I don't know who the guy was who rode down the railings on a perfect split, but it's hardcore.

For a turn-your-brain-off, mindless action flick, The Asylum delivers the goods with Battle of Los Angeles. From slow-motion shots to CGI extraterrestrial air-battles to the excessive amounts of running from explosions shots, there's plenty to keep viewers laughing. It's sufficiently cheesy and goofy while being made by enough passionate creators to make it well-worth the Saturday evening. The Asylum truly understands what makes these Saturday-night flicks so enjoyable and attractive, embracing the very nature of what these movies are all about. The actors ham it up, the effects are wonderfully inept, and the story is non-existent, but it all adds up to a great time. Sit back, have a few laughs, and enjoy.

One of The Asylum's best movies

[misbegotten · 7/10 · 29 March 2011]

Although it's clearly The Asylum's take on the mega-budgeted studio movie BATTLE: LOS ANGELES (playing at my local multi-plex as I type these words), BATTLE OF LOS ANGELES' primary template is actually INDEPENDENCE DAY (1996): within the first four minutes of the film, a two mile-wide circular spacecraft has descended out of the heavens to hover menacingly above LA's skyscrapers, proceeded to devastate the city with an expanding burst of energy, then disgorged waves of saucer-shaped fighters that attack all of the military bases nearby. However, the movie that BATTLE OF LOS ANGELES most reminds me of is Neil Marshall's DOOMSDAY (2007). Just as that film was packed full of homages to the various genre movies that Marshall grew up watching during the Eighties, so director/scriptwriter Mark Atkins' BATTLE OF LOS ANGELES contains numerous references to sci-fi films produced up until the late Nineties. There are nods towards WAR OF THE WORLDS (1953), TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY, SCREAMERS, MEN IN BLACK and even STAR WARS EPISODE IV: A NEW HOPE.

In terms of narrative, Atkins piles incident upon incident, resulting in a mad meld of aerial dogfights, immense property damage, mind-controlling foo fighters, alien drones of all shapes & sizes, time-displaced WWII pilots, references to the actual 'Battle of Los Angeles' (a real-life UFO incident that occurred in February 1942), city-wide electrical/magnetic pulses, Majestic 12, shape-shifting robot assassins, vehicles retro-engineered using Roswell technology, journeys at light speed, and a climatic confrontation with a Lovecraftian alien king. It's like watching an entire cliffhanger serial in a single viewing. And just when you think things can't get any more bonkers, Nia Peeples drops in on the action (literally) as a MJ-12 agent clad in a skin-tight blue catsuit, dispatching alien drones with a katana.

The extensive CGI used throughout the film ranges in quality, from being as impressive as you'd expect to see in a bigger-budgeted movie, to decidedly dodgy. But on the whole, it passes muster.

I can't say, in all honesty, that BATTLE OF LOS ANGELES is actually a 'good' film, in the conventional sense. And I'd hesitate before recommending it to anyone else. But speaking for myself, I thought it was an absolute blast and I enjoyed it immensely. It stands alongside MERLIN AND THE WAR OF THE DRAGONS and SHERLOCK HOLMES as one of the best movies produced by The Asylum so far.

fun movie if you don't expect much

[random4ever · 5/10 · 8 June 2011]

best thing about the movie, special effects, worst thing is the script, they did spend some money on this film, wish they spent more, casting is not good. directing is not good, the story is good, script is iffy at best. its not the worst movie i seen in a while, its nothing great. not a bad flick when there is not much of a choice on what to see. on the plus side there is lots of fighting. it could of been a contender if it just had a bit more of everything. i have to admit i would like to see a squeal made with better directing,script and cast. so grab a cold one, kick back and enjoy a senseless human vs alien movie and don't expect to much besides the special effects.