Battle: Los Angeles

vanilla.. yes it did.

As SF peep.. i am their

I own both because both are good.. but BLA is war movie and D-9 a true SF experience

different genres. tho intimately linked
to know this is called intelligence

 

Thought this movie was a piece of crap. But can understand that anyone 8 to 12 years old or someone older who thinks the world started the day they were born might like this.

Two main points. First, the scriptwriter apparently watched every war movie made in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. He then extracted every cliche possible. The more movies making up the cliche set, the more probable you will find it here, in Battle LA.
In the movie itself, he showed his creativity by using what were already cliches, several times. That it is he would repeat what was already a cliche multiple times during the film. And this includes all kinds of cliches: situational, confrontational, personal, dialogue and more. If you are a youngster or think anything that happened in the world before you were born is irrelevant, these would then not be cliches.

The other point is the jittery camera technique used throughout this movie. This is where the camera is never anchored but constantly shifts sideways, up and down and around in repeated measured shifts. When the camera is not constantly jittery, it's zooming in and out in quick short zooms. This is supposed to generate a feeling of edginess, tension and anxiety, I suppose, in the viewer. But there was actually a time when the writing, direction and production values alone were enough to hold the viewers interest. Any old Billy Wilder movie (Double Indemnity; 5 Graves to Cairo; Sunset Blvd.) would be a model of this type of movie making. What was in front of the camera was interesting enough, they didn't have to dumb it down by shaking the camera.