Woove staff writer Alex Tallant reviews new science fiction war film from Jonathan Liebesman, Battle: Los Angeles.

I'm impressed that this movie only made $38 million in its opening weekend; it seemed like everyone I knew was rushing out to see it. But since this style of invasion/attack/disaster movie is becoming more and more common I guess the marketing campaigns seem less and less dramatic to an increasingly jaded audience.

Battle: LA is an exciting guerilla/counter-guerrilla warfare movie that does not aspire beyond the skirmishes depicted, and I admire it for that. It seems to be a film translation from recent games in the same genre, like Gears of War, with simple objectives defining the character's actions. Rather than try to capture the broader scope of the human-alien conflict the movie focuses on a single platoon and their direct reactions to the changing environment.

This allows strong character development and personal attachment, seen in some of the best scifi and military movies, relying heavily on convincing performances. The actor’s performances in this particular film were not outstanding nor were they weak; they were simply where they needed to be. Aaron Eckhart definitely was central to the film's momentum, but for the most part the other actors also contributed. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Michelle Rodriguez's typecast role as the lone female soldier, which was unassuming but still an enjoyable one.

Visually the film was decent. Due to my desire to identify the features within a shot I am not much of a fan of blurry camera panning, a defining characteristic of this movie. Outside of that the film was shot in a very common but comprehensible way. In terms of special effects and art direction the spaceships and alien technology were reminiscent of the Transformers movies, with all the small gears and parts whirring wildly in response to a simple primary action. While this is a popular style among viewers (as indicated by the box office success of both Transformer movies) it seems garish and unnecessary. The aliens themselves had a short intimidation half-life, and as a result by the end of the movie the sight of them hardly inspired fear. This could be intentional, as throughout the story the aliens' foreboding exterior is dispelled, even to the point of literal dissection.

The decision not to make the aliens indestructible until some critical moment near the end of the film makes this movie more interesting and prevents a completely bleak and hopeless tone. The alien technology, while threatening at first, is revealed to be only a few steps beyond our own, and their tactics even more similar. As mentioned earlier, aspects of this movie are comparable to popular sci-fi shooters, where for the sake of gameplay humans and aliens are more or less equally matched. The specific situation in Battle: LA is a surprise large-scale alien invasion of urban populations; a situation where again, humans aren't completely down and out. Because the problem presented in the movie is not completely beyond repair it allows for the rousing “Hoo-rah!” and “Go military!” themes, in addition to the most common themes across alien movies of “Go America!” and “Go Humanity!” to inspire the audience.

The intimate and gritty depiction of the marines, facilitated by the attention to particular skirmishes, makes the film itself unassuming when compared to other popular alien invasion movies like Signs (2002), War of the Worlds (2005), and Independence Day (1996). Rather than resolve the entire conflict the story ends with a humble but significant victory. This prevents attention from shifting beyond the scope of what was depicted in the film, and deifying an unbelievably small number of characters, both traits that can push a story from fantastic to downright ridiculous (note: Independence Day (1996)). That is not to say that movies like Independence Day don't have a place in modern cinema, but instead to praise the relatively humble aspirations filmmakers set for themselves and achieved in Battle: Los Angeles.