Rating: 
Summary: One Big Mistake!
Review: Alot can be said about Battlefield: Earth. Some good, some bad. Mainly bad is my opinion. All I can say is it could have been good if someone else directed and written this film. Roger Christian was the wrong choice. For some reason beyond me (and could helpfully be explained by Christian himself) he chose to shoot the entire film in Slant-O-Vision. A technique that good directors use to tilt their cameras for effect. Obviously Christian has no idea why but does it anyway. Its a distracting mistake that this film makes which almost makes the viewer tilt their head. But thats what this film makes me do, tilt my head in awe. Its a low-rate film that looks like it was shot on a t.v. movie budget. Although with 80 million dollars, youd expect more than grubby special effects and lousy diolouge. It looks like Travolta is the only one having fun with their character. While the rest of the cast only appears for a favor. For sure, there must be alot of angry Scientologists out there for the mockery of this film and writer, L. Ron Hubbard. I am currently reading the book, which is far better than the film. Although the plot of the book is intriguing, the film somewhat presents a distilled version. Providing only the first half of the book. Surely Hubbards idea of his book translated into this is defninitely not what it deserves. It would have made an interesting film, having hiring someone else to write and direct it. With the $80 million they had, they would have at least provided better visual effects. But instead gave us obvious green screen effects and matte paintings. You'd think in the year 3000 that the Psychlos would use a bit more advanced technology than Radio Shack walkie talkies. The only thing I liked about the film was the score by Elia Cmiral. But the rest is a flop. If Christian's Cinematographer had sobered up and put the camera at a regular angle, this film would have been a little bit easier to look at. The trailers for the film looked like we were going to get an epic. How wrong they were.
Rating: 
Summary: Sorry . . .
Review: I know I'm in a very small minority group here, but I love this movie! The man-animals play it straight, and the aliens, especially Travolta and Whitaker, play it strictly for laughs. Bought it sight unseen because of low price, and found it to be a real bargain. Great DVD transfer -- both picture and sound. This is the kind of film which, after viewing all the way through one time, I go back to check out certain scenes when I'm in the mood for some wall-banging sound! Found it interesting how the cinemaphotography made it appear that the non-humans really were big, towering over the humans. Great special effects. Also found it very interesting that so many people expended the effort to write a review (mostly negative). Wonder if they saw it in the theater? Or on a big screen projection TV w/surround sound? Might make a difference folks!
Rating:
Summary: On a scale 0f 1(pathetic) to 10(fabulous)this is -50
Review: What can I say, the plot is juvenille, the acting dire, the greatest waste of celluloid, of money and time. It's not even about the money I spent on this turkey, it's the time, I can't believe I wasted over an hour of my life on this muck.
I haven't read any Hubbard but c'mon they must have altered the book to make the script, a ten year old would have been embarrased to write it.
I could feel the life being sucked out of me with each passing minute of this trash.
Rating: 
Summary: Has all the makings of an obscure nerds' classic
Review: I've read a lot of bad words about this movie, but aren't you all missing the point? The most vitriolic come from those who invested Time thinking it was going to be good, spent Money on going to see it, and had a Headache after as they tried to reconcile their previous feelings about it with the terrible truth. The sheer length of some bitter reviews showed they feel strongly about it, something the film makers can take comfort from. This at least should mean it is remembered (or maybe they all want to forget it?) As to the plot, who cares? Haven't you all seen enough clever plots about aliens and such? The movie has a strained, "Whose Brain Thinks This Way?" feel. That and the strong colour filters is enough entertainment. And at least Travolta actually Was Travolta, if you see what I mean. Plus, just you wait, this will be seen in the future by many obscure nerds as a camp classic, deserving a dusty place alongside other fine efforts as Logan's Run and Dune blah blah blah etc. Your science fiction education can do without this movie in the curriculum, but do borrow it from a nerd if you know any. They put the same manic effort into the DVD as into the movie. It looks and sounds as good as the best of them...
That movie is actually bad for you.
Rating:
Summary: Should be over the top and mildly amusing... but it isn't.
Review: Battlefield Earth appeared on the Canadian Movie Network a couple of months ago, so I finally saw what many has told me was the worst major studio release of 2000. Some films typically classified as "bad" are also so strange that one finds them either amusing, intriguing, or both. While some people may put Battlefield Earth in that category, I can't seem to manage it. There is really nothing interesting here, just the usual explosions and battle for freedom without any interesting context. The evil aliens walk only in slow motion, John Travolta's alien villain cackles and glares endlessly, and it's all quite dull and stupid. Rather than inducing the expected smug, reminds-me-of-Ed-Wood laughter, one is left staring blankly at the screen wondering if now would be a good time to turn off the TV. Even trying to read between the lines to find some dreadful Scientology subtext seems to be a waste of time. I'd like to think that Battlefield Earth could have been over-the-top, goofy fun, and that director Roger Christian might have been forced to play things straight by star/producer Travolta. One other thing to consider when renting or purchasing this DVD is a new security feature called Regional Coding Enhancement, or RCE for short. Most DVDs are coded to play only on DVD players in certain geographic regions, such as North America, Europe, and China. Some people who would like to watch DVDs from others regions, such as Japan, purchase a DVD player with regional encoding disabled. The new RCE "feature" stops region encoded DVDs from playing on region-free DVD players, so some buyers might have trouble playing the Battlefield Earth DVD. More information about RCE can be found at http://www.dvdtalk.com/rce.html.
Rating: 
Summary: It's pretty bad, but not a complete disaster
Review: Having just read L. Ron Hubbard's immense, and immensely excellent novel, I couldn't help checking this movie out despite the fact that it has almost universally negative reviews. After all, how can you turn such an excellent book into something so horrible? Well, now I know, though I don't think it's quite as bad as some people say. First off, I was very surprised by the fact that the first half of the movie seems quite true to the novel, while the second half is something totally different. I had thought the first half, with its general lack of action scenes, would be the thing the director would have cut. Instead, it seems they left that almost perfectly intact and altered all the battle portions into something you would barely recognize as the same story. Okay, so you barely even hear mention of the philosophical point of Battlefield Earth- that man cannot be considered an animal under any circumstances- but the movie wasn't so bad at portraying the revolutionary aspect of the novel. The special effects were also pretty good, as far as those go. I also have to say that Travolta did a pretty decent job despite the fact that his character was pretty darn shallow compared to the book equivalent. A few major points of contention against the novel I would like to point out include the very flat development of Chrissie (she's just a decoration), the total lack of the global aspect of the battlefield (do you seriously think the Psychlos would just have one base at Denver?), and the very dumb turn of plot the screenwriters made at the end. Also, most of the cast of the novel simply aren't there (Chrissie is supposed to have a sister, for one). In the novel, there were no humans in captivity at the start, and Johnnie had to assemble his allies from all over the world before making his move. He also had a much more interesting plan- I'll leave that for you to read on your own. The changes the screenwriters made are quite simply stupid. Don't you think the Psychlos would have found all that gold at Fort Knox if it was the most valuable stuff in the universe? Surely they would have at least taken a peek (and in the book, it was specifically mentioned they did). Also, I somehow doubt that the Harriers would still be useful after a thousand years. Jet fuel just doesn't keep that long, and Sidewinder missiles have a shelf life of just 10 years. Also, if the Psychlo battle planes were half as good as they were in the book, the jump jets would have been about as much use as the 'flying spears' they were described as. Additionally, as Ebert cynically noted, nobody can explain how the military base has power. I can partially forgive the producers from killing the whole intergalactic aspect of the story. It would have been so long that the movie would have to be broken into two installments. Then again, perhaps that would have been a better idea. At any rate, let's just say that there's far more to the story than a desolate Terl being locked up in Fort Knox. The screenplay also lacked a decent explanation for why the Psychlos didn't just come and flatten the pitiful remains of humanity, while Hubbard left a very good explanation in his novel. Despite its pitfalls, I enjoyed quite a few of the scenes, especially early in the movie. The part where Terl is trying to figure out what humans eat is especially well done, amusing, and correct. The screenplay also has some of the best post-apocalypse sets since Logan's Run, though you unfortunately get only short glimpses. The bottom line is: rent, do not buy. This movie isn't good enough to fork over 15 bucks for. If you've read the book, some parts of it you will like, but the majority you will not. I am hoping that sometime in the near future, someone will get it into their head to redo the film correctly- even if it ends up with a 5 hour runtime. You just can't do justice to Battlefield Earth with a 2 hour flick. Also, if you saw the movie and hated it, but never read the book, do NOT let the movie deter you from picking it up. It is one of the best sci-fi novels out there!
Rating:
Summary: I've never heard the word "leverage" so many times....
Review: I knew this movie stunk... but I mean... it really DOES stink!
The word "leverage" is repeated over and over, it's like the director wanted to hypnotize his crowd with subliminal messages. The past reviewer said it all... "It's like riding horses", read that one too.
This movie is riduculous, I'm a SFX designer and I felt insulted with the mokery made towards Sci-Fi films along this one.
My advice avoid this one... no... scartch that... rent it and watch HOW messed up can a movie actually be. Buah haa haa haaa haa!
Rating:
Summary: Don't buy it unless...
Review: ...unless you love hearing dumb cliches, unless you love seeing John Travolta being full of himself for two hours, unless you love seeing good literature burnt at the stake, unless you have trouble sleeping... Get the idea... This was the worst film I saw in 2000.
Rating:
Summary: Travolta's new imbaresment!
Review: I honestly can't believe I see this many good reviews up here. Walking by the bookstand one day, I got the book, thinking that if 30 million copies have been sold (as the cover claims) that it must be good. Not so. The book was a thousand pages of plodding, derivative, horribly un-scientific (bad for a sci-fi novel, eh?) (...). The movie was worse. Definitely the worst movie I've seen in my life, if not the worst ever made, it's a wonder some schmuck film exec ever let this get off the ground. The only reason I saw this movie was for a good laugh; after seeing a short preview off the internet, I knew it would be bad. But the countless faults of Battlefield Earth quickly wore through any good humor I brought with me to the theatre, leaving me, by film's end, a depressed, bleary-eyed wreck with a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach.
Rating:
Summary: A Movie that would make Ed Wood proud
Review: Where to start??...Was it just the concept of taking L. Ron Hubbard's bombastic overwritten "War & Peace" length novel and bringing it to the big screen, the horrible make-up and costumes, the insultingly childish dialog, or what truly may be John Travolta's most pathetic performance ever, or a combination of all the above to make what without a doubt may be the worst "sci-fi" movie since "Plan 9 From Outer Space." At least "Plan 9" was made with the best of intentions. "Battlefield Earth" is dreadful...tiresome to watch, a plot that goes nowhere, script-writing straight out of 2nd Grade classroom and a Vinny Barbarino-esque main character, Terl, that is just painful to watch. This trash needs to be locked away with a sign that reads "Open Only In Case of Glitter Pt. 2"
| 
