Taking Up Arms for Battle: Los Angeles
"It was a very complicated collaboration because a lot of them had to share assets," Burrell suggests. "But we warned them that the film was going to be all hand-held, a lot of zooms and roto and tracking and we had to share assets. I couldn't award it all to one company, because not one company was big enough. And we couldn't afford ILM or Weta or even Sony Imageworks, so we spent our money wisely. The most difficult part was getting vendors to match assets with one another. It certainly kept us on budget doing it this way, but it kept it hard for me and my staff to keep track of everybody."
Bill Desowitz is senior editor of AWN & VFXWorld.
Printer-friendly version
Uh, no offense, but could you post the film review over at IMDB or somewhere else?
Sorry if you didn't like the film (I did) but this isn't the place for it. This is about the VFX of the movie, not whether it was good or bad--which is a subjective view point.
Battle Los Angeles: Big Brother's Latest Big Budget Brainwasher
Last Saturday we used a gift card to go and see the new "Battle: Los Angeles" flick, a psyops collaboration between Pentagon war profiteers and TinselTown CGI geeks in which a Few Good Men accompanied by a couple of forgettable kids and has-been hotties Hoo-Rah their way from product placement to product placement in what is no doubt the first installment of a perpetual war for our planet's most precious resource (in this script water, not oil). Aside from making millions for Hollywood movie moguls, the purpose of this propaganda piece is to reverse the American military's real-world role as a resource aggressor and, during the suspension of disbelief, imprint on the minds of the audience that sacrificing our sons and daughters if not ourselves in an endless and ever-expanding war for riches and resource control is both honorable and a patriotic obligation.
Post new comment