Battle: Los Angeles

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by tiny_lewis, May 17, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. 1080p version of this now on usenet (wiki and CHD), if you have a popcornhour NMT or similar, and a decent dsl connection (12gb mkv file)

    relevance? Has guns, aliens, "US Marines" CGI and the sceptics get an arrse kicking. Oh, and a old and bold character, whom most of us might relate to ;-)

    Smaller 720p version as well (approx 5gb)
  2. Yeah, but, its utter, japs eye drizzle from the flag waving aint USA brilliant, saved the world again, school of hollywood cluster fucks.
  3. Just about sums it up - but it passes a couple of hours and the CGI is good. You could always try the more cerebral Skyline, of course.
  4. Now Skyline is a piece of shite.

    Battle:L.A. has its faults but then it is a film about an alien invasion so its pretty much a case of turning off your brain and enjoying the big bangs and effects. I personally enjoyed it for what it was, a bit of fluff.

    The fleet of Sea Knights flying over L.A. as the aliens landed in the sea was pretty impressive on the big screen I must say.
  5. It is one shite film, not worthy of wiping one arrse on.
  6. Oh I dunno... Hollywood fluff has it's place. After all, I thought U571 was a highly enjoyable film as I watched it as a story rather than a historically accurate portrayal of events.
  7. I'd love to know whether Skyline was intentionally 'intellectual' , or not. By intellectual, I mean not spoonfeeding an audience what the plot is, together with the why's and wherefores; it simply happens and there are no explanations.

    Unlike the huge, HUGE plot hole in BLA concerning water ;-)
  8. Anyway, back to the original point..

    It is, um, 'available' now.
  9. I liked 'Red Dawn.'
  10. Its still shite though