expected with low expectations World Invasion: Battle Los Angeles (which will henceforth abbreviate to "Battle of Los Angeles" ), because although generally enjoy the sub-genre "alien invasion", the previous race director Jonathan Liebesman does not inspire much confidence. In fact, I think your tapes Darkness Falls and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning are among the worst I've seen in this (put it on the poster!). Fortunately the transition to "blockbuster movie" was not as bad as expected and, although far from perfect, Battle Los Angeles seemed like a solid action film war devoid of original ideas but with enough suspense, combat, and effects special to entertain for two hours harmless. The argument, if the title was not clear enough, revolves around the sudden alien attack on several coastal cities in the world. At first it seems a natural phenomenon ... an unexpected meteor shower that sets in motion the army to evacuate the affected sites. But when he reveals the mechanical origin of the cars, and begin to assault troops out bio-mechanoids, it is clear that the Earth is at war. Then, the film focuses its attention on the Sergeant Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) and his squad of hardened Marines, whose mission is to rescue a group of survivors in the heart of Los Angeles before the start of the aerial bombardment, hopefully , stop the invaders. Needless to say that the bailout will not be easy, and that during their perilous journey by the steaming streets of the city, the soldiers will find challenges and threats they ever imagined.
understand what Liebesman and writer Christopher Bertolini tried to do, a science fiction film that did not wander into the classic stereotypes of alien invasion, but is based on the drama of the soldiers and their fighting spirit. To achieve this, the film must be moved from the epic spectacle of mass destruction (as we saw in Independence Day, War of the Worlds and the recent Skyline ), and limit their attention to the experiences of characters who are just a small, almost insignificant part of the battlefield. Strictly speaking, Battle Los Angeles does not use the trick of "home camera" style Cloverfield, but that's the impression given, putting us alongside the soldiers to experience up close the terror, confusion visceral intensity of urban combat, with poor visibility, poor guidance and constant uncertainty about the origin of the next attack. In other words (and many have made this comparison) is like Blackhawk Down, but with aliens instead of Somali rebels. Or, for younger readers, is how Modern Warfare 2, but with aliens instead of Russian mercenaries.
The idea is good and is reasonably well executed, but has the same problems we've seen in movies of this type (for example, in the upper Letters from Iwo Jima and Saving Private Ryan), with one or two exceptions, the soldiers are generic cannon fodder who will die according to whether they lack dramatic pauses to give "depth" the shootings and explosions. It is true that Battle Los Angeles cares to define the personalities of these disposable characters ... rookie, who is nervous about his upcoming marriage, the noble Nigerian doctor, etc. But it seems time lost, because in the heat of battle, all are perfectly interchangeable, anonymous, shouting the same tired dialogue ("Move, move, move!", "Cover me!" "I'm on it, Sarge!") . Even the few that we can identify (because they have the faces of famous actors) must also pay mandatory "personal dramas" to give additional meaning to their actions. Example of the ingenuity of the script: the heroic and taciturn Sergeant Nantz is tormented by an event in his past to be overcome to bring alive their "boys" of combat. Ah, yes! And it's also about to retire. Where is the Oscar to the writer?
As for the science fiction angle, I think Battle Los Angeles is also irregular. All elements of fantasy, from production design to the motivation of the aliens, look like a distillation of previous movies with similar theme. Even I found scenes and dialogue to identify Independence Day of (soldiers watching a military base destroyed), District 9 (some moments of urban guerrilla), y. .. um ... I think the rest would be spoilers. Either way more fun for the viewer irlas discovered. What I found less amusing was constantly bumping into logical chasms in the plot, which minimize the level of realism and credibility. I know that it is unwise to expect great zeal narrative film "vs soldiers. Aliens", but the holes in this story are so notorious that I often "pulled" from the movie and made me rolled his eyes in frustration. But ... honestly did not expect more, so I can recommend Battle Los Angeles what it is: a loud, frantic and childish mixture of war movies and science fiction (in the lightest sense of the word) that will undoubtedly be a useful recruiting tool for the U.S. military. The great actor Aaron Eckhart makes its best effort to create a believable character, which is not difficult when surrounded by props human, politically correct for its ethnic diversity, and useful for their specific purpose of dying when required the plot. By the way, Michelle Rodriguez needed agent who can find new roles other than "tough female soldier." Perhaps the director Jonathan Liebesman can recommend a good, after all, not many clunkers directors low-budget horror are suddenly in front of multi-million dollar Hollywood productions. I suspect that these negotiations were the real "Battle of Los Angeles."
Rating: 7
0 comments:
Post a Comment