Battle: Los Angeles.

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Battle: Los Angeles

    Just finished reading one of the draft screenplays.

    http://www.mediafire.com/?kryjgxzcrtx#2

    This read like a short film, embedded inside of a violent video game.

    It really made no sense to me.

    Aliens land in the ocean off of Los Angeles, (absolutely nothing to do with the historical so-called "Battle of Los Angeles"), swarm out of the water, slaughter everyone by ripping them apart with their claws, and, later, bring in their flying and walking machines.

    Meanwhile, a group of generic marines are picked off, one by one, with such regularity that one has difficulty identifying with any one of them. The protagonist appears to be the last one left, (like Ripley, in ALIEN). Once down to a couple of characters, a marine and a child, "we" learn the marine's backstory and the child's hidden talent.

    I'll admit that it avoided the utter lack of logic in DISTRICT 9, (aliens that are too stupid to call home for help, when their spacecraft runs out of fuel); but, apart from LAX, this could as easily been BATTLE: SEATTLE or BATTLE: MYRTLE BEACH. Marines fight unending hordes of aliens bent on fighting heavily armed marines with their sharp claws, (rather than with sophisticated alien weaponry).

    What was the intent of the alien invaders? Kill humans, conquer the planet, stop Hollywood's fixation on remakes? Don't target military facilities, (at San Diego), political centers, (at Washington), commercial centers, (at New York City), etc. No; start your invasion by killing surfer dudes, (at Venice Beach).

    I can definitely wait until this comes out on a DVD, and when I'll be compelled to see it for some non-entertainment reason. There's no real story, just battle action sequences against mindless aliens.

    As the normal rules of war wouldn't apply in this film, I would express my surprise that the screenwriters failed to consider the use of white phosphorus against the alien invaders, (as was done at Fallujah, in 2004).

    And, I'll consider writing a sequel: BATTLE: CANADA, (in which hordes of furry animals, with sharp teeth and claws, invade American suburbs and come knocking at everyone's backdoors).
    JEKYLL & CANADA (free .mp4 download @ Vimeo.com)

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Battle: Los Angeles

      Originally posted by Fortean View Post
      There's no real story, just battle action sequences against mindless aliens.
      Yup. Supposedly the most recent draft has a bit more character depth with the characters though so that gives me a bit more hope for it being more enjoyable all around.

      via negativa, Michelle is billed second and being touted as the lead, but I've heard she actually comes in about mid way through and only has about as much screen time as she did in Avatar. So while they're marketing it with her as the female lead to Aaron Eckhart's male lead, as if the two are co-lead, the reality is he's the main star (of course, this is Hollywood, so 99% of the time the guy is gonna be the lead, lol). She was able to get a 2nd billing due to her status, and they're putting her front and center because they know she'll be a draw. She seems to have become quite popular thanks to the combo of Lost, Fast & Furious, and Avatar. And now Machete too, it seems.

      Ultimately they're just capitalizing on her being the most popular actor in the film, even though, like always, she's unfortunately being forced to ride side car to some other actor who is the actual lead. I find that disingenuous, kinda like false advertising. Everyone seems to keep doing this to her. I remember when Fast & Furious came out, Universal had her front and center in all promotions, 3rd billed, touring the planet doing a ton of press, etc even though her character got killed off 5 minutes in. Studios seem to know she's a draw, so they use her to sell tickets, yet she never gets to headline a film, nor even have her character make it through to the end nor play a large role. It's actually quite mind boggling to be honest.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Battle: Los Angeles

        Originally posted by scripto80 View Post
        Ultimately they're just capitalizing on her being the most popular actor in the film, even though, like always, she's unfortunately being forced to ride side car to some other actor who is the actual lead. I find that disingenuous, kinda like false advertising. Everyone seems to keep doing this to her. I remember when Fast & Furious came out, Universal had her front and center in all promotions, 3rd billed, touring the planet doing a ton of press, etc even though her character got killed off 5 minutes in. Studios seem to know she's a draw, so they use her to sell tickets, yet she never gets to headline a film, nor even have her character make it through to the end nor play a large role. It's actually quite mind boggling to be honest.
        Ah, the ol' bait and switch. Terrible! It seems like this film has potential to be a really big hit, so I got a little excited there for a second when I thought Michelle was the lead. I thought she might invigorate the notion of women in lead action roles again. Makes me kind of sad, really. I'm not familiar with all of her work, but it's obvious from what I've seen that she does have star power that would translate into being a "draw"...and, you're right, it's kind of mind-boggling that they would use her for marketing purposes, but never for the film itself. People rag on Michelle for whatever reason, but I think she has potential to be huge. Super-star huge. I'd love to see her show her chops in a dramatic role, personally.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Battle: Los Angeles.

          I first saw Rodriguez in her first film, Girlfight. Her raw talent, screen presence, and physical believability absolutely blew me away. Unfortunately many of her other films with the exception of Battle in Seattle (a FANTASTIC little political indie with Charlize Theron, Woody Harrelson, etc) and Avatar, have left something to be desired. I don't really blame her though, I mean really there's only so much an actress can do with a handful of lines and constant directions to snarl which is what most of the other roles she's done calls for. It's like people say "We need a hardcore chick to carry a gun, bark orders, and die. Let's get Michelle Rodriguez!" But she's definitely got more to offer than that. I 100% agree she should be "super star huge". Even when her lines (not her fault obviously, hello writers) are awful, or characters unlikable (again, hello writers lol), she always steals the scene.

          In terms of drama, she actually has some foreign language historical drama she did recently called Tropico de Sangre. She plays the real life Dominican martyr Minerva Mirabal who died in 1960. It's a small flick and is showing at some festivals but I dunno if it'll ever see the light of day. Here's the trailer:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcchtvahXhU

          In terms of her getting a bad rep, all I can say is I've heard she's a total sweetheart in real life. Very sweet, smart, fun, and always extra kind with fans.

          Anyway I think she and Eckhart would have played well off each other were they on screen in a longer, larger capacity. He's such a cool, down to earth, natural actor and so is she. Alas, he probably has more time with young male soldiers played by a bunch of no names and an r&b singer, as well as damsel-in-distress Bridget Monaghan, than with Rodriguez. Oh well.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Battle: Los Angeles.

            Originally posted by scripto80 View Post
            In terms of drama, she actually has some foreign language historical drama she did recently called Tropico de Sangre. She plays the real life Dominican martyr Minerva Mirabal who died in 1960. It's a small flick and is showing at some festivals but I dunno if it'll ever see the light of day. Here's the trailer:

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcchtvahXhU
            I'd watch this, just because it seems so different from what she's done before. Something about her acting style in that trailer piques my interest, as well. In a perfect world, Michelle would be given her due. Strong, female characters should be front and center, and she seems to specialize in that. LOVE her!!

            I haven't read the Battle: Los Angeles script, but I hope they gave her a decent part. You mentioned something about more screen time going to a damsel-in-distress and a random R&B singer...figures.

            Comment

            Working...
            X