Battle of Los Angeles

Thank you for rating this movie!

Battle of Los Angeles Movie Poster

2.36 / 5

User rating: 2.36

Based on 60 votes and 18 reviews

  • User rating: 2.36 24.00%
  • User rating: 2.36 8.00%
  • User rating: 2.36 8.00%
  • User rating: 2.36 0.00%
  • User rating: 2.36 60.00%

Please rate between 1 to 5 stars

*How would you rate this movie?


Showing 1 to 18 of 18

User review rating: 1 August 11, 2011

I am sci fi fanatic but this rubbish is an insult. It does not deserves a 1 star either. Do no waste your time. Battle: Los Angeles is a different movie. The acting is very poor, I would prefer to watch the old godzilla alike japanese movies from the late 70's that this called "film".

User review rating: 1 June 26, 2011

The vast majority of reviewers (over 50%) gave this movie a rating of 1 star and for good reason. I had the misfortune of watching this movie when a buddy of mine thought he found "Battle: Los Angeles" on NetFlix. In his defense it was an innocent mistake: Virtually identical title, Sci-fi style cover, released in 2011... but oh how much difference one colon can make. I'm not arguing that "Battle: Los Angeles" was a good movie, but while it might have left me somewhat disappointed, "Battle OF Los Angeles" left me thoroughly disgusted and with a bad headache to boot. Most pornos have better acting than this movie, the F-16 fighter jets look like they were borrowed from Microsoft Flight Sim

User review rating: 5 May 28, 2011

Action movie of the year! Better than Fast Five!

User review rating: 1 May 28, 2011

horrible movie not worth watching, acting was really bad and everything sucked about this movie calling it a B movie would be an insult to B movies

User review rating: 1 May 16, 2011

0 stars...

User review rating: 1 May 15, 2011

0 Stars. Acting is horrible! Furthermore, the CGI is mickey mouse.... A very bad movie trying to capitalize on a block buster movie. I'm surprised they're not being sued, lol.

User review rating: 5 April 28, 2011

it wasn't THAT bad, I enjoyed a lot of the action. If you thought a movie called Battle:LA was going to be a thought-provoking, stunning blockbuster, get your head checked. It's called Battle, and it's about battle. that's it.

User review rating: 1 April 20, 2011

actually 0 stars.

User review rating: 1 April 18, 2011

really bad, attack of the killer tomatoes was better

User review rating: 5 April 18, 2011

Really unsure what people were expecting. Honestly, it deserved about 3.5 stars, just rated it 5 to bring it up a bit because everyone's one star rating is actually unreasonable. Decent movie. Watchable.

User review rating: 1 April 15, 2011

I stopped watching 5 minutes in. This is the first time I have rated a movie because it was such a big waste of my life and I am an avid movie watcher.

User review rating: 0 April 15, 2011

epic movie! way better than district 9 it has lots of great scenes of battle and action

User review rating: 1 April 15, 2011

if i could give this negative stars i would....i stopped watching about 15 minutes in it was so bad and cheesy.

User review rating: 1 April 12, 2011

terrible beyond terrible

User review rating: 1 April 10, 2011

Horrible Movie...bad acting....bad writing....bad directing....bad effects.....just a horrible movie in every way.... 90 minutes of my life wasted

User review rating: 3 April 10, 2011

Good efects needs more battle scenes.

User review rating: 1 April 09, 2011

crap, poor acting, crappy special effects

User review rating: 1 April 05, 2011

Terrible, terrible movie

Change Location