Box art for Battle: Los Angeles

Battle: Los Angeles

action & adventure, drama, sci-fi & fantasy, thrillers

A Marine platoon faces off against an alien invasion in Los Angeles.

Rotten Tomatoes® scores

  • Critic Score
  • Audience Score

common sense

PAUSE for kids age 14
1 out of 5
Drinking, drugs, & smoking
0 out of 5
3 out of 5
Positive messages
1 out of 5
Positive role models
3 out of 5
0 out of 5
4 out of 5

Violent alien invasion movie is a waste of time.

what parents need to know

Parents need to know that this violent alien invasion film is more or less a war movie in disguise, with constant fighting and shooting, explosions, death, and blood. Between the violence and the strong language (including "f--k" and many uses of "s--t"), it pushes as far as it can get with its PG-13 rating. All of that said, although the movie isn't very good, some of the characters do behave admirably and could be considered positive role models who work well together.

what families can talk about

  • Families can talk about the movie's extreme violence, fighting, and death. Is it necessary to the story? Does it send any particular message?
  • Is the movie scary? Would it have been scarier or less scary if it had shown more of the aliens?
  • What's the appeal of alien invasion movies? Do they play on any real-life fears?

movie reviews from Rotten Tomatoes®

Top Critic Reviews

Rotten: As it lurches from Act II to Act III, "Battle: Loss Angeles" reveals itself to be a lousy movie.

- A.O. Scott, New York Times, Friday, March 11, 2011

Rotten: If the talk had been surgically removed, leaving only the sights and sounds of combat, this could have been a striking, semiabstract display of aggressive energy; as it is, any viewer over twelve will go for the laughs.

- Anthony Lane, New Yorker, Monday, March 21, 2011

Rotten: You can't help but wish there had been a lot more heart in this Marine's story.

- Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times, Thursday, March 10, 2011

Audience Reviews

2 stars

Alien invasion movies have a tendency to be... well... bad. None of them seem to get it just right. They focus too much on the wrong things and they usually are way too long for their own good. Over the years they have gone from low budget B-Movies to over budget summer blockbusters, but they still can't seem to get into their groove. The way I see it is that they probably never will, but what they can do is give a breath of fresh air into the genre. A good example of this is 2009's District 9, which changed the whole concept of alien invasion into a more realistic style. Aliens living in slums, considered as lesser being to humans. This made me realize that the real way to go about making a good alien invasion film is by making it realistic. This is pretty ironic because the whole concept of alien invasion films are pretty unrealistic. Still, it works, and apparently Battle Los Angeles took the same lesson and applied it to its Black Hawk Down-meets-Indepence Day style invasion film. But does it help or hinder it? The film is about a group of soldiers that are called to L.A. to help an evacuation when fast moving U.F.O.'s are spotted heading towards the cost. Things quickly go down hill when aliens appear from the objects and attack the city. What was originally an evacuation becomes a rescue operation when the troops are ordered to head to a police station where civilians are holding up and take them back to the forward operations base. They are under a time limit though because in three hours the air force is going to level L.A. because the aliens apparently have no aircraft of their own. The make it to the police station and find that their are only two adults and two children still alive. But when the three ours are over, the bombs don't come falling down, and the soldiers start to realize that things maybe a lot worse than they had expected. The first thing I noticed about the film is that it isn't designed as specifically an alien invasion film, but also a war film. It may not make much sense in writing, but it is really noticeable in the film. Rather than it being about the whole idea of an invasion, it is more about a war where one side is a group of alien invaders. It also avoids many of the huge wide angle shots that make up most of the time in alien films. Instead it uses shaky camera battle scenes in the deteriorating streets of L.A. This is very different from most invasion films, and I kind of enjoyed it. But as you can see from my rating of it, it wasn't perfect. And one of the things I stated earlier caused me a lot of problems when I was watching. This was the shaky camera. For those who don't know; the shaky camera is a technique used in films when the director wants to either make the film seem more realistic or make the entire audience puke out the popcorn they were just eating. And the movie is so repetative! I mean, really repetative! It's actually really annoying because it isn't even repeating creative things as if the writers were like, "Hey, thats a good idea! Lets reuse it, like, five times throughout the movie." The things they were repeating were stupid clitches that didn't even want to see once, let alone 5 more times throughout the movie! Another thing that got on my nurves was Aaron Eckhart. I didn't find that he really fit in with the movie. I don't really know why, but it really feel like he shouldn't have been in the movie. In the end, I'd have to say... meh. I mean, it wasn't anything special and anything original in it became old really fast. If it had relied less on war and alien invasion movie clichs it might have been more entertaining than it ended up being. But it's too late for that, so I've gotta say, It's a 50/50 chance that you'll find enjoyment out of this film. So, if you like those odds than go see it, but I wouldn't personally recommend it.

- hellogoodby, Friday, May 18, 2012

2 stars

SHABLOOIEEE! BLAMMMMM MICHAEL BAYBOOM EXPLOSIONSSSSS! It's well shot but definitely felt restricted. Action was kinda entertaining and the CGI was lacking. The dialogue equivalent with that of many Call of Duty games. Way too long.

- fb1463751009, Saturday, March 10, 2012

2 stars

Good: It's better than Skyline. Bad: That's not saying much. All the elements are there but it never gels into the film it is trying to be. Having so many thin, stupid characters just makes it worse.

- Beefy, Thursday, January 12, 2012