<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[..quality. Amazing. I guessed $70 million+.  Shame about the acting&#x2F;script! If they do a sequel, please get better write]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Skyline</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>terryperring104</strong> — <em>12 years ago(July 04, 2013 04:11 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">..quality. Amazing. I guessed $70 million+.  Shame about the acting/script! If they do a sequel, please get better writers and actors??!!!!</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/253680/quality-amazing-i-guessed-70-million-shame-about-the-acting-script-if-they-do-a-sequel-please-get-better-write</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 15:46:12 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/253680.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 15:10:32 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to ..quality. Amazing. I guessed $70 million+.  Shame about the acting&#x2F;script! If they do a sequel, please get better write on Wed, 06 May 2026 15:10:36 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>mvitale24</strong> — <em>9 years ago(November 24, 2016 06:36 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Apparently the directors of Skyline were working on Battle Los Angeles and in their off-time, started work on Skyline, borrowing everything from resources to equipment to make the money which is probably why it cost so little to produce.<br />
They got sued, of course and eventually reached an agreement. Doubt a sequel is in the works.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2150912</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2150912</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 15:10:36 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to ..quality. Amazing. I guessed $70 million+.  Shame about the acting&#x2F;script! If they do a sequel, please get better write on Wed, 06 May 2026 15:10:35 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>terryperring104</strong> — <em>12 years ago(July 08, 2013 03:39 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I looked at the FAQ's - apparently, it cost 500,000 to shoot and 10,000,000 was spent on the digitals.<br />
I watched it again last night (it was broadcast) and realised the problem. Lack of dialogue. Questions and panic/fast speaking would happen to most people but they hardly spoke. It was slightly frustrating.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2150911</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2150911</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 15:10:35 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to ..quality. Amazing. I guessed $70 million+.  Shame about the acting&#x2F;script! If they do a sequel, please get better write on Wed, 06 May 2026 15:10:34 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>lilmarkuk</strong> — <em>12 years ago(July 07, 2013 01:08 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">while the effects are a bit ropey in areas, for $10 million no one can argue that they are great<br />
I would have expected maybe $40-$50 million</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2150910</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2150910</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 15:10:34 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>