It's a straight forward alien invasion movie.
-
djmattm2002-913-491227 — 13 years ago(September 25, 2012 09:49 AM)
You can't please everyone. People will hate a cliche movie with cliche characters where the humans win.and people will hate a movie where the aliens actually win. The more popular a movie seems to be, the more they will hate it, just to hate. 0.02
-
Jazzyjae — 13 years ago(October 19, 2012 11:04 AM)
I think most people dislike this film due to failed expectations. The trailers, marketing as well as genre expectations hinted that we were going to get a standard Alien Invasion movie ie following a war movie arc with heroes, tragedy and triumph.
What we got was a survival horror movie with no heroes (the antagonists aren't even that likeable) and no redemption (save for the credits). It has more in common with a zombie movie than a typical invasion/war movie.
As a survival horror its pretty good. As a war movie, its a stinker. -
mark-1 — 13 years ago(October 20, 2012 04:04 PM)
I think the movie scared the living poo out of people,
and they're repressing the experience by saying
it was no good and don't watch it.
It's very realistic: the characters are average people,
not heroes, and the aliens' technology is far beyond ours,
so we're totally helpless against them.
It could happen, and people don't want to think about it. -
Mandingo609 — 13 years ago(October 23, 2012 01:51 AM)
I loved it. The Invaders actually wins this one. I haven't been this enthusiastic since the 70s version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I love when the Aliens wins.
Deh Deh Deh, DA Dabacco-Puert Rican dude from the I aint your Papi episode of COPS. -
busterbboy — 13 years ago(March 09, 2013 03:22 PM)
Yep, I hated this film.
Actually, I take that back - I quite enjoyed ridiculing the film, shouting about the sheer awfulness of it.
It was utterly generic - you could tell immediately who would be monster fodder and who would become a hero.
The special effects sucked - the US bombers moved in a ridiculously unrealistic manner, the flames and explosions were computer-game level.
BUT I quite enjoyed the hysterical 'let's pile in everything' story, and the ending was kinda ma, although the abruptness left a real sense of dissatisfaction. It was original and unexpected, but didn't deliver and didn't prompt any desire to see the sequel.
I felt cheated by this ending, and if I'd paid to watch it in a cinema, I would have asked for my money back as this wasn't a finished film, merely a trailrer for another shot at a rubbish story. -
MaxPhilips — 12 years ago(February 08, 2014 04:21 PM)
It IS different from "Battle: Los Angeles" and "War of the Worlds" and "Independence Day" and a dozen other standard alien invasion movies - it's much better !
Interesting mix of genres, no boring Hollywood cliches, great CGI. I don't understand why people hate it so much too. -
Jazzyjae — 12 years ago(March 13, 2014 11:18 AM)
I really do believe people hate it because it doesn't follow a familiar pattern and go the typical route of invasion movies (Independence Day, War of the Worlds, Red Dawn etc) where the good guys win against all odds.
Admittedly, it doesn't help that it was miss-marketed as a sci-fi invasion movie and that it presents the ray of hope and revenge for humanity during the credits. -
Rena_Mahone — 11 years ago(February 26, 2015 07:35 PM)
Battle Los Angeles and War Of The Worlds? Are you seriously comparing those utterly generic blockbusters to this fresh take on the alien invasion genre?
Boycott movies that involve real animal violence (& their directors) -
randyw01 — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 01:03 AM)
As far as entertainment goes I rate this around 6 out of 10.
Plot? A bunch of aliens arrive to do bad stuff to humanity. What
could
happen that would satisfy people?
Maybe one of the aliens feels bad about all of this.he travels to Tibet and gets guidance from a monk.then he settles down in Chicago, finds a girl to fall in love with, and travels the world for self discovery when he's told he has a fatal disease. Is that all right? ( of course something this wouldn't happen )
Guess what! I've got a fever, and the only prescription is MORE COWBELL!
-Bruce Dickinson- -
daniv1 — 10 years ago(May 30, 2015 12:45 PM)
If you dig deep enough, you will find out why this movie has bad ratings.
When this movie was being made, there was a huge legal fight about the effects team from Battle LA working on Skyline.
Now this movie was on a low budget and was going to be released either before or at the same time as Battle LA, and Sony and its execs were having none of it, though the legal battle would have been resolved too late to have any effect for Battle LA. So what they did was pay a bunch of students to do some "marketing". This "marketing" was basically to go around giving bad ratings to Skyline on places like IMDB, metacritic etc, basically flood it with negative ratings and have it go viral so that even legit people start bashing it too cause its the popular thing to do. Those same students were also supposed to spread positive word about Battle LA.
Since Skyline was a small release the relative amount of negative reviews was very high. Paired with that it wasnt a perfect movie and didnt have a hollywood happy ending caused it to just keep the negativity rolling in.
There are interviews with people who were paid to do these things, but they quickly squashed the interviews calling them lies, and marketing people for the companies denying any involvement.
Im pretty certain this still happens today, but Skyline being a small movie really felt the full brunt of these dirty tactics. Its really sad, cause its actually a good movie thats very different from other in the genre. Its at least a 6/10, or even 7/10.