"WHITE HOUSE DOWN" (2013) Review

"WHITE HOUSE DOWN" (2013) Review

Since its release in the movie theaters, "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" has received a good deal of flak from movie critics determined to justified its failure to become a box office hit. But there are some offered another reason why the movie flopped nearly a month ago. And that reason centered around the release of another film some three months earlier called "OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN".

Like the Gerard Butler film, "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" focused upon an assault and invasion of the White House by a group of paramilitary terrorists. The movie begins with U.S. President James Sawyer proposing a controversial peace treaty between allied countries to remove military forces from the Middle East. One of the opponents of the treaty is Speaker of the House, Congressman Eli Raphelson, who is guarded by U.S. Capitol police officer John Cale. Hoping to impress his estranged daughter Emily following his divorce, John attempts to apply for a job with the U.S. Secret Service. He takes Emily to the White House for an interview with his former college schoolmate, Secret Service schoolmate, Carol Finnerty. Unfortunately for John, Carol rejects his application, claiming that his lack of respect for authority and inability to follow through with official reports makes him unqualified for the job.

Following his interview, John joins Emily on a tour of the White House, a paramilitary terrorist sets off a bomb in the rotunda of the Capitol building. Both Congressman Raphelson and Vice-President Alvin Hammond are among those who manage to safely escape. However, the Capitol bombing proves to be a distraction for a more important mission for his colleagues - namely the takeover the White House. Although the latter is officially locked down by the Secret Service following the Capitol bombing, a paramilitary group consisting of ex-servicemen and a computer hacker that managed to infiltrate the White House as janitors, proceed to take over the White House. Their leader is a disavowed ex-Delta Force member named Emil Stenz, who proved to be a hot head. Not only do the terrorists take a group of tourists - including Emily - hostage; they nearly kidnap President Sawyer with the help of Secret Service Agent Martin Walker, Head of the Presidential Detail. Walker sought revenge for the death of a son who had died in an aborted black op mission for the U.S. Army. Fortunately, John manages to rescue President Sawyer before Walker and the terrorists can use him to access the nuclear football for nefarious means. Unfortunately for John and Sawyer, they are trapped inside the White House with no way to get out.

Unlike a good number of moviegoers, I did not readily accept the opinion that "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" was a bad movie. Yes, it had its flaws. After all, it is a Roland Emmerich film. And like other Emmerich films, it possessed the usual cliches - a divorced main character, an annoyingly precocious child character, and slightly cheesy dialogue. The biggest flaw in the movie proved to be a plot point that allowed John and his daughter to get swept into the action inside the White House - a tour of the latter. Apparently, screenwriter James Vanderbilt had forgotten that White House tours have been a thing of the past since the September 11 attacks, twelve years ago. And I found Carol Finnerty's presence with the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Speaker of the House something of a stretch, considering that she is not the Secret Service's Head of the Presidential Detail, let alone head of the agency. But despite these flaws, I still enjoyed the movie.

"WHITE HOUSE DOWN" had its virtues. First of all, it benefited from a strong chemistry between leads Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx, who portrayed John Cale and President James Walker. Two, Vanderbilt's script did not make the mistake of turning the President Walker character into a highly skilled action man, like Harrison Ford in "AIR FORCE ONE". Although he managed to avoid spending most of the film as a hostage, Foxx's Walker made mistakes that struck me as natural for one not to used to violent action. "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" also featured some first-rate action. My favorite scenes turned out to be the initial takeover of the White House by Stenz and his men; John's rescue of President Walker; and the chase sequence on the White House lawn, with John and President Walker inside a Presidential limousine. The biggest virtue of "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" is that the terrorists managed to infiltrate the White House with inside help - namely Secret Service Agent Walker. In the post 9/11 world, I would have found it impossible to accept a terrorist takeover of the White House without such help.

Despite the occasionally cheesy dialogue that marred "WHITE HOUSE DOWN", I was relieved to see that the cast managed to rise above such flaws. As I stated earlier, the movie did benefit from a strong chemistry between Tatum and Foxx. And both actors gave first-rate performances that blend good, solid comedy with well-acted drama. I also found the development of their on-screen relationship very satisfying. And Foxx managed to utter one of my favorite lines in the entire film. Maggie Gyllenhaal gave a strong performance as the no-nonsense Carol Finnerty. I could also say the same about Lance Reddick, who portrayed the equally no-nonsense Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman General Caufield. I do not recall ever seeing Jason Clarke in a villainous role before, but I must admit that he gave a scary performance as leader of the terrorist, Emil Stanz. Jimmi Simpson, on the other hand, was quite funny as computer hacker Skip Tyler. And Richard Jenkins struck me as very effective in his performance as Speaker of the House Eli Raphelson, who found himself with more authority than he was used to. There were a few performances that did rub me the wrong way. I think Zoey King, who portrayed Emily Cale, is a talented actress, but I feel that not even she was able to rise above the precocious dialogue and scenes that Vanderbilt dumped on her. Nicholas Wright's performance as White House tour guide Donnie did not strike me as funny . . . only annoying. Kevin Rankin's portrayal of the uber-aggressive terrorist Carl Killick seemed both hammy and wince-inducing to me.

When I saw "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" at the movie theater, the audience broke into an applause when the film ended. Minutes later, I found myself in one of the theater's restrooms and overheard a woman claimed that although she liked the movie, she noticed that it bore a strong resemblance to "OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN". And she was right. Both movies were about terrorists taking over the White House in order to gain control of the President and his defense codes. Both movies featured female Secret Service personnel trying to help the hero. Both movies featured the Vice-President getting killed and the Speaker of the House becoming the new Head of State. And both featured American elite forces making a failed attempt to save the White House from terrorists. I liked "OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN", but I feel that it was marred by one major flaw - the North Korean terrorists lacked any real inside help and was able to acquire top-secret military technology on their own. This led the Gerard Butler movie resembling some one-note anti-Communist propaganda film. "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" managed to avoid this major trap by allowing the terrorists - who were American-born - receive some serious inside help from within the U.S. government. And this is why I rate "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" over "OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN".

"WHITE HOUSE DOWN" had its flaws. But it also possessed a decent story, first-rate action and some solid acting by a cast led by Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx; thanks to director Roland Emmerich. And although its virtues outweighed its flaw, I suspect that in the end, "WHITE HOUSE DOWN" became a victim of bad timing. Pity. I feel it deserved a better fate.

"WHITE HOUSE DOWN" (2013) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "WHITE HOUSE DOWN", the 2013 action thriller. Directed by Roland Emmerich, the movie starred Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx:



"WHITE HOUSE DOWN" (2013) Photo Gallery

"THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" (2012) Review

"THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" (2012) Review

After seven years, Christopher Nolan's three-movie saga about the D.C. Comics character, Batman, finally came to an end. The saga that began with 2005's "BATMAN BEGINS", ended with this year's "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES".

The new movie, set seven years after 2008's "THE DARK KNIGHT", began with the aerial kidnapping of a nuclear scientist by an escaped terrorist named Bane. The scene shifted to Gotham City, where a fund-raiser was being held at Wayne Manor. The only person missing was millionaire Bruce Wayne, who had given up his vigilante activities as Batman after claiming he had murdered former District Attorney Harvey Dent. During the fundraiser, Bruce caught a maid breaking into his private safe. She turned out to be a resourceful cat burglar named Selina Kyle. Aside from a necklace that once belonged to Bruce's late mother, Selina did not steal any other object from the safe.

Curious over Selina's actions, Bruce resumed his Batman alter ego and tracked down Selina. He discovered that she had been hired by a rival corporate CEO named John Daggett to lift and steal his fingerprints. Bruce also learned that Daggett had hired the terrorist Bane to attack Gotham's stock exchange and bankrupt Wayne Enterprises. And along with Police Commissioner James Gordon and Wayne Enterprises executive Lucius Fox, Bruce also discovered that Bane was a former member of the League of Shadows and planned to continue Henri Ducard's (aka Ra's al Ghul) goal of Gotham City's destruction. Bruce asked fellow millionaire Miranda Tate to take control of Wayne Enterprises to ensure that Daggett and Bane will not gain control of their clean energy project, a device designed to harness fusion power.

Re-reading the above made me realize that Christopher and Jonathan Nolan had created a very complicated plot. For me, the plot became even more complicated two-thirds into the movie. "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" obviously exists under the shadow of its two predecessors - "BATMAN BEGINS" and "THE DARK KNIGHT". I would say that this especially seemed to be the case for the 2005 movie. Batman and James Gordon's decision to lie about the circumstances behind Harvey Dent's death in the second movie had a minor impact upon this third movie. But Bruce's relationship and later conflict with Ra's al Ghul seemed to be the driving force behind his conflict with Bane in this third film.

I had heard rumors that Christopher Nolan was initially reluctant to make a third BATMAN movie. Personally, I found that rumor a bit hard to believe, considering how "THE DARK KNIGHT" ended with Batman accepting the blame for Harvey Dent's crimes and death. But there were certain aspects of the script he wrote with his brother Jonathan that made me wonder if he had truly been reluctant. There were certain aspects of "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" that I found troubling.

It seemed a pity that the second movie ended with Batman and Jim Gordon's decision to lie about the circumstances behind Dent's death. I found their decision unnecessary back in 2008 and I still do. The impact behind their lie proved to be hollow. It merely kept Batman off Gotham City's streets and led Mayor Anthony Garcia and the city to pass a strong anti-criminal law that proved to be hollow following Bane's arrival in Gotham City. I also found Bane's mid-air kidnapping of a nuclear scientist and escape from a U.S. marshal (portrayed by Aidan Gillen) rather somewhat idiotic. I understood that Bane needed that scientist to weaponize the Wayne Enterprise device.  But I never understood why that U.S. marshal failed to take the trouble to identify the hooded prisoner (Bane) before boarding the plane.  In the end, the movie's opening sequence struck struck me as unnecessarily showy. Was this the Nolan brothers' way of conveying Bane's role as a badass to the audience? If so, I was too busy trying to comprehend the villain's dialogue to care. I understood why Batman had not been seen in Gotham for so long. But what was the reason behind Bruce Wayne's disappearance from the public eye?  His physical state was not really that severe.  Rachel Dawes' death? Rachel's death did not stop him from going after the Joker and Harvey Dent in the last movie's half hour. Was it an injured leg? How did he injured it? And why did Gotham's citizens failed to put two-and-two together, when both Bruce and Batman finally appeared in the public eye a day or two apart after many years? The only person who managed to discover Bruce's alter ego - namely Officer John Blake - did so through a contrived reason.

For me, the movie's real misstep proved to be Bane's three-month control over Gotham City. As a former member of Henri Ducard's League of Shadows, he planned to achieve his former leader's goal of destroying Gotham City. And he planned to use Wayne Enterprise's energy device to achieve this. One - why not simply build or snatch his own nuclear device? Why go through so much trouble to get his hands on the energy device? Why did Wayne Enterprises create a device that not only saved energy, but could be used as a bomb, as well? And why did it take three months before the device could become an effective bomb? The Nolans' script could have frustrated Bane's attempts to acquire the bomb during that three-month period . . . or anything to spare the audiences of that second-rate version of the French Resistance. The latter scenario seemed so riddled with bad writing that it would take another article to discuss it. And what was the point of the presence of Juno Temple's character Jen? What was she there for, other than being Selina's useless and cloying girlfriend? And Wayne Enterprises executive Lucius Fox was last seen declaring his intentions to leave the corporation for good, following Batman's misuse of cell phones in "THE DARK KNIGHT". In this movie, he is back, working for Wayne Enterprises. What made him change his mind?

But not all was lost. I found Bruce's introduction to Selina Kyle very entertaining and sexy. Even better, the incident served as Batman's re-introduction to Gotham City and allowed him to discover Bane's plans regarding Wayne Enterprises and the energy device. One of the more interesting consequences of "THE DARK KNIGHT" proved to be Rachel Dawes' last letter to Bruce. Its revelation by Alfred Pennyworth after seven years led to an emotional quarrel between the millionaire and the manservant and their estrangement. At first, I had balked at the idea of Bane carrying out Ra's al Ghul's original goal to destroy Gotham. After all, why would he continue the plans of the very person who had him kicked out of the League of Shadows? But a surprising plot twist made Bane's plan plausible . . . even when I continue to have problems with his three-month occupation of Gotham.

Many critics had lamented the lack of Heath Ledger's Joker in the movie. As much as I had appreciated and enjoyed Ledger's performance in the 2008 movie, I did not need or wanted him in "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES". Tom Hardy's performance as the terrorist Bane was good enough for me. Mind you, I found it difficult to understand some of his dialogue. And when I did, he sounded like the now aging Sean Connery. But I cannot deny that Bane made one scary villain, thanks to Hardy's performance and intimidating presence. Before I saw the movie, I never understood the need for Marion Cotillard's presence in the film. I thought her character, Miranda Tate, would merely be a bland love interest for Bruce. Not only did Cotillard ended up providing a subtle and intelligent performance, her Miranda Tate proved to be important to the story as the co-investor in the energy device and for the plot twist in the end.

"THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" provided some solid performances from other members of the cast. Matthew Modine shined as the ambitious and arrogant Assistant Police Commissioner Peter Foley, who proved to be capable of character development. Another solid performance came from Brett Cullen, who portrayed a lustful congressman that had the bad luck to cross paths with Selina Kyle. Both Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman continued their excellent performances as Bruce Wayne's "heart" and "mind", manservant Alfred Pennyworth and Wayne Enterprises executive Lucius Fox.

In the end, the movie was fortunate to benefit from four outstanding performances. One came from Gary Oldman's excellent portrayal of the now weary, yet determined police commissioner, James Gordon. His guilt over the Harvey Dent lie and discovery of Batman's true identity provided Oldman with some of his best moments in the trilogy. Another came from Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who was superb as Gotham City beat cop John Blake. The actor did a wonderful job of balancing Officer Blake's intelligence, passion for justice and disgust toward the bureaucracy.

When I learned that Anne Hathaway would end up being the fifth actress to portray Selina Kyle aka Catwoman, I must admit that I had my doubts. Then I remembered that Hathaway was an Oscar nominee, who has also done action before. Watching her sexy, yet complicated performance as the complex cat burglar removed all of my doubts. She was superb and her sizzling screen chemistry with star Christian Bale made me wish Selina had been Bruce's love interest throughout the movie. Speaking of Bruce Wayne, Bale returned to portray the Caped Crusader for the third and final time. I must admit that I found his performance more subtle and complex than his performances in the previous two movies. Bale did an excellent job in re-creating a slightly aging Bruce Wayne/Batman, who found himself faced with a more formidable opponent.

I was a little disappointed to see that "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" lacked the Chicago exteriors of the 2008 movie. In the end, Gotham City resembled a collection of East Coast and British cities. But I cannot deny that I found Wally Pfister's photography very eye catching. And Hans Zimmer's entertaining score brought back memories of his earlier work in both the 2005 and 2008 movies.

I have a good deal of complaints about "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES". It is probably my least favorite entry in Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. For me, the movie's main problem centered around the script written by Nolan and his brother Jonathan. But despite its flaws, the movie still managed to be both entertaining and intriguing. It also has an excellent cast led by the always superb Christian Bale. It was not perfect, but "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" did entertain me.

"THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" (2012) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "THE DARK KNIGHT RISES", Christopher Nolan's third entry in hisBATMAN series. Christian Bale stars as Bruce Wayne aka the Batman: 


"THE DARK KNIGHT RISES" (2012) Photo Gallery

"BATTLE: LOS ANGELES" (2011) Review

"BATTLE: LOS ANGELES" (2011) Review

I was surprised to discover that "SKYLINE", an alien invasion movie that had been released last fall, was not the first movie to be directed by Greg and Colin Strause. Three-and-a-half years ago, they directed a movie called "ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM", which managed to generate solid box office, if not critical acclaim. "SKYLINE" generated even less box office and critical acclaim than the 2007 movie, but it did earn a profit. But the movie generated even more – a scandal involving cries of plagiarism that involved the latest alien invasion film called "BATTLE: LOS ANGELES".

Before making ”SKYLINE”, the Brothers Strause had been hired by Sony Pictures and the producers of ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” to generate special effects for the latter. But after working on the latter film, they began producing and directing a film with a similar premise – alien invasion in Southern California. Sony Pictures decided to dismiss the arbitration against the brothers, six days after ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES”, claiming that after the discovery phase they were satisfied that none of the ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” visual effects were used in ”SKYLINE”. After seeing both movies, I personally believe that Sony Pictures had nothing to worry about. ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” made ”SKYLINE” look like a drop of dog poop on the side of the road.

Set in Southern California – mainly in Santa Monica and West Los Angeles, ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” is an alien invasion tale about a squad of U.S. Marines, tasked to search for civilians trapped at a local police station, before the U.S. Air Force can commence upon a saturation bombing of Santa Monica. Before they could find the civilians, the Marines are joined by two others and a U.S. Air Force intelligence tech sergeant, who has information regarding an alien command center that allows the invaders control of the air. But before the Marines can make use of tech sergeant’s information, they have to ensure the safety of the civilians they finally come across and survive the best way they can.

Although ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” is obviously better than ”SKYLINE”, it is not without its flaws. To be honest, I have very few problems with the movie. Perhaps two or three problems. One, I think that screenwriter Chris Bertolini may have rushed the movie’s first fifteen to twenty minutes. From the moment when the camera focuses on lead character Staff-Sergeant Michael Nantz engaged in an early morning jog on a beach near Camp Pendleton to when he and his squad discover that they will be facing invading aliens at the Forward Operating Base at the Santa Monica Airport, at least fifteen to seventeen minutes passed. That seemed a bit . . . too fast to me. I would have preferred if Bertolini had been a little more in-depth in his introduction of the major characters. And I would have preferred if they had discovered that they would be facing hostile aliens, after hitting the streets to find the missing civilians. Oh well. We cannot have everything. Two, it almost seemed as if the Marines were using a strange mixture of military and sports jargon. I have heard it before in a miniseries called ”TOM CLANCY’S OP CENTER”. I found it strange then and I still find it strange. I suppose they use this brand of jargon in the military. But quite frankly, it makes me cringe. After a scene in which some of the Marines survived a traumatic attack by aliens near a freeway, director Jonathan Liebesman followed up with a brief scene of them tramping through the streets before seeking refuge at a convenience store. That scene featured a building that is located in downtown Los Angeles. But the Marines had not reached downtown. Because after leaving the convenience store, they returned to the Santa Monica Airport. There is no way they could have traveled from the West Los Angeles area to downtown Los Angeles and back to Santa Monica . . . that fast. Liebesman should have never included that building in a shot.

Now that I got my complaints out of the way, how did I feel about ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES”? As I had earlier stated, I believe it was at least ten times better than ”SKYLINE”. In fact, it has become one of my favorite movies of 2011 . . . so far. I really enjoyed it. Despite Bertolini’s fast introduction, he did a first-rate job of maintaining some of the personal storylines and angst that plagued the main characters. The most important personal story involved Staff-Sergeant Nantz’s last assignment in Afghanistan. He turned out to be his squad’s sole survivor, which led many Marines to believe he had abandoned the squad. Because of his last tour in Afghanistan, Nantz decided to retire from the Marines. One of the Marines in Nantz’s old squad turned out to be the brother of one of the movie’s survivors, Corporal Jason Lockett. Lockett’s resentment toward Nantz more or less remained on the back burner, until after the tragic circumstances of the freeway battle. Another personal story centered on the squad’s commander, the newly commissioned Second Lieutenant William Martinez and his eagerness to prove himself in battle. Yes, this kind of storyline has been seen in many military films. Yet, thanks to the performances actors Aaron Eckhart (Nantz) and Ramón Rodríguez (Martinez), this storyline actually worked. I read somewhere that the character of Air Force Tech Sergeant Elena Santos was added at the last minute. And yet, this addition worked, for her character provided valuable information for the Marines to do something about the aliens’ command center. Nantz’s emotional connection with civilians like the veterinarian named Michele and a Latino father and son pair named Joe and Hector Rincon provided a great deal of angst in the movie’s center. More importantly, both Bertolini and Liebesman milked these minor storylines throughout most of the movie.

And I cannot talk about ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” without bringing up the film’s special effects. As I had earlier pointed out, the Brothers Strause was responsible for the visual effects and I believe they did a first rate job. Between their visual effects, Liebesman’s direction, Lukas Ettlin’s photography and Christian Wagner’s editing, ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” featured some very memorable scenes. Some of the scenes included the squad’s first encounter with the aliens on the fogged-covered streets of Santa Monica; Lockett and Lance Corporal Peter Kerns’ sighting of alien scouts on the roof of the police station and the surviving squad members’ nighttime helicopter ride above battle torn Los Angeles. But the visual centerpieces proved to be – at least for me – the two major battles featured in the movie. And I am referring to the freeway battle that resulted in tragic consequences and the final battle that featured the squad’s attempt to destroy the aliens’ command center. Between the visual effects, the editing and the action, these scenes struck me as mind blowing.

The movie’s producers and Jonathan Liebesman did an excellent job in casting the roles in the films. Aside from a few performances, most of the cast did solid work. I was even impressed by singer Ne-Yo, who portrayed one of the Marines, Corporal Kevin Harris. He and Gino Anthony Pesi (Corporal Nick Stavrou) managed to establish a humorous screen team as two best friends. I am certain that many people are aware that Elena Santos became another one of Michelle Rodriguez’s “tough girls” roles that has become her personal stock over the past decade. Mind you, her Santos came off as mature and did not turn into one of those “in your face” types that many have complained about over the years. And she blended well with the cast. Bridget Moynahan gave a solid performance as one of the civilians trapped at the police station. And she and Eckhart managed to establish a good chemistry without any taint of romance. I was especially impressed by his work in a scene in which his character expressed regret over his failure to leave the police station, when he had the chance. I would like to point out that Adetokumboh M'Cormack (Corpsman Jibril Adukwu), Jim Parrack (Sterns), and Will Rothhaar (Corporal Lee Imlay) did a great job in establishing why Nantz seemed to regard them as three of the sqaud’s most dependable character. And Rothhaar managed to achieve this with a great deal of humor. I just realized that Rodriguez is not the only ”LOST” cast alumni who appeared in this film. M’Cormack did two guest appearances on the show and both acted opposite British actor Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje.


But there were performances that really stood out for me. Michael Peña also gave excellent performance as Joe Rincon, of the other civilians that were trapped at the West L.A. police station. Cory Hardrict gave a first-rate and subtle performance as Jason Lockett, the one Marine who harbored lingering resentment toward Nantz over the death of his brother – especially in one scene in which the two finally faced the matter. The last time I had ever seen Ramón Rodríguez , he portrayed Shia LaBeouf’s frantic roommate in the second ”TRANSFORMERS” movie. Imagine my surprise in seeing him portrayed the squad’s earnest, yet inexperienced leader, Lieutenant Martinez. I am happy to report that his Martinez came off as a lot less frantic (and embarrassing) than his character in ”TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN”. In fact, he did a great job in portraying Martinez’s anxieties and eagerness without even going over the top. And for that I am eternally grateful. However, it was Aaron Eckhart who really carried the movie. And he did a superb job. This is the second time I have seen him in the lead of a movie. And after watching his performance as the competent, yet angst-ridden Michael Nantz, I can only wonder why he has not been cast in the lead in more of the A-studio films. For me, his best scene featured Nantz’s reaction after destroying an alien drone using a walkie-talkie and a grenade. Watching Eckhart’s hand shake, while the other cast members applauded his character’s actions was one of the best examples of silent acting I have seen in quite a while.

I am aware that ”BATTLE: LOS ANGELES” only managed to garner mixed reviews from the critics. I am also aware that the movie is not perfect. Nor is it the best alien invasion movie I have ever seen. But I still managed to enjoy the movie so much that I have to give kudos to director Jonathan Liebsman for his direction of a first-rate movie and an excellent cast led by the always superb Aaron Eckhart. Not surprisingly, I went to see this movie for a second time before it left my neighborhood’s movie theaters . . . and enjoyed it even more.

"BATTLE: LOS ANGELES" (2011) Photo Gallery

Below are images from the new science fiction thriller called "BATTLE: LOS ANGELES". Directed by Jonathan Liebesman, the movie stars Aaron Eckhart, Michelle Rodriguez, Bridget Moynahan, Ramon Rodgriguez, Ne-Yo, and Michael Peña:



"BATTLE: LOS ANGELES" (2011) Photo Gallery