United Federation of Planets Communications - Communications Array Alpha

Has anyone went to see that film yet? Put it this way, it's way better than Skyline imo. I'd give it 7.9/10. If your into Alien action invasion and loads of explosions n shit. It's another Skyline but more action in it.

Kelbie wrote:Has anyone went to see that film yet? Put it this way, it's way better than Skyline imo. I'd give it 7.9/10. If your into Alien action invasion and loads of explosions n shit. It's another Skyline but more action in it.

HOW DARE YOU SAY ITS ANOTHER SKYLINE?!

Skyline was a peice of shit compared to battle LA, the storyline was complete shit, they were invading us for our brains really?......yeah that was the Skyline storyline, they want our brains. they prety much killed off every char in the movie, except 1, and that stupid guy who lives on in an alien body, and all of them were shalow so you didn't give a damn weather they made it or died. and the ending was complete SHIT mankind has no hope what so ever......except wait!! One of them was able to die....and his brain took over an alien body,YAY.....right ITS COPLETE SHIT!!!

Battle LA iis MUCH better in every way possible with the exception of ONE thing, and its the ONLY thing that Skyline had going for it, awesome effects, yeah that's it, but Battle LA had them too. Battle LA has a good storyline, they came for our....get this, WATER, not our BRAINS, OMG a resourse that makes sense to invade for!! they make you care about the chars in the movie so that when they die its a sad event, and the ending made much more sense then Skyline. I don't understand why it got so low movie reviews, but then again i am a sifi junkie so meh......

So don't you ever dare compare it to skyline EVER AGAIN....

Since people said Skyline was a piece of S**t....funny how its running for another sequel in development now eh. It was good to see Michelle Rodriguez in this film

8.5/10

It was really good considering some of the crap that comes out now days. And as me and my friends joked about afterward, we now have another way to kill the aliens so we're still ready for the alien invasion.

Is the swearing really necessary in a public forum? I think not.

I have not seen it nor have I seen Skyline. As I just watched a programme focusing on the architecture of a Cathedral followed by Mad Men, it is safe to say I prefer a story over explosions.

Costello wrote:Is the swearing really necessary in a public forum? I think not.

I have not seen it nor have I seen Skyline. As I just watched a programme focusing on the architecture of a Cathedral followed by Mad Men, it is safe to say I prefer a story over explosions.

Thread killer.

Costello wrote:Is the swearing really necessary in a public forum? I think not.

I have not seen it nor have I seen Skyline. As I just watched a programme focusing on the architecture of a Cathedral followed by Mad Men, it is safe to say I prefer a story over explosions.

In other words, don't go to Artful when the aliens come because he'll tell them how to build a Cathedral while they're killing him

Costello wrote:Is the swearing really necessary in a public forum? I think not.

I have not seen it nor have I seen Skyline. As I just watched a programme focusing on the architecture of a Cathedral followed by Mad Men, it is safe to say I prefer a story over explosions.

I agree that my outburst was stronger then it should have been, for that i appologize, however i don't consider the words i said to be swear words

as someone who went to see both movies out when they were in theatre i know that both movies are completely diferent, with the only thing being remotely the same is aliens are coming to invade the earth, one has a good story and plot, the other....want our brains

I am an avid movie going person, i go see 1-2 movies a week and not once have i ever felt like i had been ripped off as much as i did for skyline, and trust me, it takes a BAD movie to make me feel this way....

As for Kelbie, just because it has a sequel coming out doesn't mean the original was good, it just meant they always planned on having a sequel no mater what, the only thing that saved this movie is that it was done on a VERY low budget....

Mr. D wrote: Thread killer.

Yet onwards it strides.

Naruto wrote:I am an avid movie going person, i go see 1-2 movies a week and not once have i ever felt like i had been ripped off as much as i did for skyline, and trust me, it takes a BAD movie to make me feel this way....

As for Kelbie, just because it has a sequel coming out doesn't mean the original was good, it just meant they always planned on having a sequel no mater what, the only thing that saved this movie is that it was done on a VERY low budget....

The majority of Hollywood films are on an inexpensive budget relying on relative nobodies and CGI, the rest are sequels or adaptations that use an existing fanbase. They're cutting costs in this economic climate, artistic originality is rarer these days. Even though Hollywood should know that innovative films don't require a massive budget - although sometimes it pays off (Inception).

But I like the promotional work for Battle: Los Angeles, and action films can be a fine source of escapism or group entertainment. I'll probably catch it on DVD.

Behold, Cameron's epic: