Battlefield Earth

[akiratubo]

I finally saw Battlefield Earth ...

And I LOVED it!

Worst movie of all time?  Hell, no, it's hardly even bad enough to notice.

Quite frankly, Battlefield Earth isn't any worse than any of the Lord of the Rings movies.  Wacky camera angles?  Zillions of slow motion zooms on people going "NOOOOOOOO!"?  Bad acting?  Incredibly stupid villains?  Extremely overwrought melodrama?  LOTR has Battlefield Earth beaten hands down in all of those departments.

Battlefield Earth has one extremely important thing going for it: it's fast.  It goes by so quickly you barely even have time to register it all.  1000 year old, yet still functioning military equipment?  No time to worry about that, next scene!  Terl not being the least bit suspicious how the humans smelted his gold into bars?  Trifling matter, next scene!

I'm even going to give the acting a full pass.  Barry Pepper is bland as a bowl of oat bran but, hell, he's The Hero.  What else is he going to be?  He's supposed to be bland so we can project whatever personality we want onto him.  Forrest Whitaker is actually quite effective as Ker.  I'm even going to support Travolta's performance here.  Yes, Terl is a cackling, moustache-twirling, cartoon villain ... but I get the idea that's exactly what Travolta wanted him to be.  I'm sure not going to criticize someone for accomplishing what he set out to do.  Besides, I like that kind of villain.

So, yeah, I love Battlefield Earth.  It's got personality.  It's got heart.  It might fail by all convential measures but, damn it, I was smiling when the credits rolled and that's all that really matters.

[indianasmith]

Granted, I have not seen BATTLEFIELD EARTH  . . .  but for dissing LOTR, you have earned the official Indiana Smith seal of disapproval.  May unicorns come in the dark of the night and harvest your kidneys!!!

[Jim H]

I will agree that Battlefield Earth is not the completely godawful train wreck people make it out to be.  I was entertained.  It's pretty bad, but watchable.  I was much more entertained by the book though, even if it is about 200 or so pages over long.

Wacky camera angles?  Zillions of slow motion zooms on people going "NOOOOOOOO!"?  Bad acting?  Incredibly stupid villains?  Extremely overwrought melodrama?  LOTR has Battlefield Earth beaten hands down in all of those departments.

Not to go into too much detail, but I have to say all the "wacky" camera angles in LOTR were used far more effectively.  I've always thought Peter Jackson had a good eye for visuals, going all the way back to Bad Taste.  Somewhat like Sam Raimi, only less exaggerated.

I also think you'd be better off accusing the HEROES of LOTR of being stupid. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU

[akiratubo]

I also think you'd be better off accusing the HEROES of LOTR of being stupid.

Those movies were just stupid in general.  Battlefield Earth really isn't any worse than them, imho.  (I guess I could also say the LOTR movies are no better than Battlefield Earth, whichever floats your boat.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU

[Nukie 2]

I disagree, it's one of the worst for all time for a big budget movie. But its enjoyably bad.

[metalmonster]

I Actually Thought BATTLEFIELD EARTH Wasn't Too Bad

Not To Mention It Is A Hundred Times Better Than Some Of The Other Movies That John Travolta Has Starred In

[RCMerchant]

Never seen BATTLEFIELD EARTH....but will agree that LOTR blows chunks.

[indianasmith]

AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

Not listening!!!!!!  LALALALALALALALALALALALALALA!!!!!!!

(Curls up in fetal position, repeating "Elbereth Gilthoniel" again and again)

[Jack]

I've never understood why Battlefield Earth is singled out for such disdain.  It was pretty bad, but not any worse than a lot of stuff Hollywood puts out.  A lot better actually, at least it wasn't boring.  And at least you knew what was going on.  And it wasn't edited by a 12 year old on speed.  And the characters had some personality. 

[hotspur]

I tried to watch this a couple of times and never could get through it.  I found it really dull. 

[peter johnson]

I guess I'll have to seek out "Battlefield Earth" now & see what the fuss is all about -- I keep meaning to, but end up always going for something else instead.

The only thing I found wrong with "Lord of The Rings" was the decision not to include the Scouring of The Shire sequence from the books -- to me, the entire trilogy was leading up to that point of Evil Writ Large is the same as Evil Writ Small/the world was saved so the Shire could be saved, etc.  Tolkien didn't just tack that ending on -- it was the whole point and conclusion of all 3 books!

That said, I find the 3 films to be supremely satisfying cinema.  I do think it helps to have read and understood the books first before watching, though, as I usually find that people who didn't like the films are unfamiliar with the books.  Everything plays out the way it does for a reason.

peter johnson/denny crane

[MilkManPictures]

I've never understood why Battlefield Earth is singled out for such disdain.  It was pretty bad, but not any worse than a lot of stuff Hollywood puts out.  A lot better actually, at least it wasn't boring.  And at least you knew what was going on.  And it wasn't edited by a 12 year old on speed.  And the characters had some personality. 

It gets singled out because of it's Scientology connection...

[metalmonster]

The Movie Is Based On A Book By L. Ron Hubbard Who Is The Man Who's Books Are What Scientology Is Based On

[ghouck]

L Ron Hubbard IMO, as much of a wack-job, idiot, f***tard as he was (is), did write some rather good SciFi. I really enjoyed the book Battlefield Earth, but not as much his decology "Mission Earth". Scientology isn't just based on his books, he's widely held as the founder, and opened the first C.O.S. The "Hubbard Association of Scientologists International" has been around much longer than most people think.

I wonder how the approval/disapproval ratings of both LOTR and B.E. align with people who have or have not read the books. I enjoyed the LOTR books, and couldn't stand the movies. Keep in mind I read LOTR back in 1990. and B.E. probably around 1997.

I don't think the average viewer makes the Scientology connection as people say, it's just that there was SOO much left out that it didn't make sense at times, or rather made some implausible leaps that were explained in the book. The book was over a half a million words, and the movie only covered about the first half or maybe two thirds, but really it just skimmed across it. J.T. also seemed as if he were trying to win an award for overacting to me.

[Jim H]

The book was over a half a million words, and the movie only covered about the first half or maybe two thirds

It's more like 1/3.  The novel could have been divided into three separate novels...  Retaking Earth, Consolidating Control of Earth, and Keeping Earth.  And the movie is basically just that first part.