MovieChat Forums > Outpost 37 (2015) Discussion > Sooo... this is a low budget Battle LA?

Sooo... this is a low budget Battle LA?


Looks like someone liked the idea of Battle LA, and decided to do a cut down version, and introduce a mockumentory filming crew.

3/10 would not bang.

reply

Yeah it looks pretty weak. I think I'll pass.

reply

Why did Battle Los Angeles never get a sequel? And the "aliens" in this are basically humanoid with a makeup job on their faces. In this era of Avatar and motion capture couldn't we have made them more alien than some Babylon 5 or Star Trek Deep Space 9 character?

reply

You know, who's to say Aliens would actually look much different than us?

If they come from an earth like planet, why wouldn't they look similar if not identical to us? Is there something about Earth specifically that made us look like "humans" and wouldn't occur on another planet with the same conditions?

reply

all conditions have do be exactly the same for them to look like us. if their planet is of different size and gravity is even slightly different, or if there is not enough oxygen in atmosphere to breath. or if evolution takes different path. depending how big or small changes are, they are going to have an effect on alien physiology and their looks

reply

You are right about the path of evolution. The planet could be a carbon copy of earth but the geological and physical changes that have happened on earth have altered evolution of life. Take the KT meteor 65m years ago as one example. There are several pinch points in the course of evolution of life on earth. The odds of a near identical path of evolution on a near identical planet just do not seem likely.
I'm thinking if there are other civilizations in the cosmos they'll look different, some radically some not.

reply

But, that doesn't mean it's an impossibility, bipedal life might be one that drastically increase the chances of sentience and high intelligence developing in a species. Maybe Humanoid aliens are common and exotic looking ones are rare, of course we'll never know unless we encounter other intelligent species.

reply

not really. In order to use tools most species of alins would need opposable thumbs. If gravity is similar, they would likely be of similar height because if you are too big thats a negative rather than positive under earth gravity. they would also likely have seperate limbs for walking and working (feet and hands for humans) because otherwise they couldnt do both at the same time. They would also likely use similar methods of consuming energy and oxygen due to how chemistry is setup. the only real alternative is fully silicon based lifeform. carbon based ones will likely eat and breathe. No, they wont look exactly like us, but they would very likely fall under the "humanoid" group of animals.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

reply

because it was a "turkey!"

reply

In this era of Avatar and motion capture couldn't we have made them more alien than some Babylon 5 or Star Trek Deep Space 9 character?
.

Alien Outpost: Budget - $4,000,000.
Avatar: Budget - $237,000,000.

This era of Avatar and Motion Capture isn't cheap!

reply

[deleted]

That's true it looks pretty bad, possibly even outright sexist. I even did a whole article for my blog in which I voice some of my impressions of the trailer:

http://hitchcocksworld.blogspot.ca/2014/11/female-soldiers-and-combat- film.html

I enjoyed Battle: Los Angeles and that one at least had a strong female character in the main cast. This one doesn't have a single actress listed in the cast even though there's no justifiable reason why it had to be all men. It's not like Forbidden Planet where it was made in the 50's and they just didn't anticipate greater gender equality, this is made in the present day by people who should know better.

David Lynch walks into a bar... he won't give me the punchline.

reply

It's specifically said that it's an infantry unit. There's no women in the infantry.



reply

You sure about that? Last I checked most countries in the world now allow women into the military in combat roles. From what I understand there's still a few restrictions in the U.S. (marines, rangers, Navy SEALs) but I was under the impression that general infantry was open to it. I know it is up here in Canada.

If this were a movie made in the 50's, that would make sense, because back then there were no women infantry (outside of maybe the odd woman who disguised herself as a man), but this is supposedly set ten years after an alien invasion that supposedly caused "everyone to become a soldier, whether they liked it or not".

David Lynch walks into a bar... he won't give me the punchline.

reply

I can only speak with authority for the British Army, because I serve in it, but they definitely do not here.

But now that we're talking about it, I do think I remember reading something about women being allowed to attempt US infantry courses. But being allowed to try and passing them are two different things. As someone who serves with female soldiers I can tell you confidently that I have never met a woman who could pass it without the standard being lowered.




reply

For the record, I tried Googling "Women in the British Army" and got several articles talking about movements to lift that barring, most of them seemed pretty optimistic that the movement would be successful. There were even one or two mentions of the U.S. lifting some of the bans I thought were still in place. You were doing okay up until you started to imply that women are weak and incapable of serving.

David Lynch walks into a bar... he won't give me the punchline.

reply

Now look, are you trying to start an argument? I didn't say women are incapable of serving in the Army and I didn't say there are no women in the British Army. Google all you want, there are no women in British infantry.

I'm not interesting in arguing. You have a good night.

Oh, and Michelle Rodriguez's character in Battle: LA wasn't a pilot, she was an EW specialist.




reply

[deleted]

Damn right there isn't.

But hold on, let's wait for him to Google it to make sure we're not wrong.

reply

I on the other hand am not as pacifist as Ceasar so I'll have to call on your BS.

Women ARE physically weaker than men. For not noticing this till your age or choosing to gobble up the current PC-ness liberals and/or feminists like to spread around you must be the moron of the year.

reply

Like I said in his other post, if the woman is built like Brienne of Tarth (Gwendoline Christie 6'3" 168lbs) they may have a chance but just because they act tough, Michelle Rodreguez at 5'5 and 120lbs has a hell of a lot harder job carrying her own combat load, a weapon and another soldier who weights 220lbs ALONE + combat load + Weapon + getting shot at.

reply

may have a chance is well put, because even then, against a male with similar characteristics (75kg being an average male) the chances are rather low. It has to do with lots of morphological factors - bone density, speed and endurance given by the hormonal makeup, muscle fiber composition and lots of other stuff feminists won't comprehend anyway, because... we're all equal. And pen!s. And patriarchy!

reply

Why don't you try telling that to the women who serve in the Canadian infantry, facing precisely the same standards as men, and proving themselves every bit as capable:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10363980/Meet-the-female- soldiers-proving-the-case-for-women-on-the-front-line.html

I have a blog now! http://hitchcocksworld.blogspot.ca/

reply

yeah, Canada the most retarded feminist country on Earth. After Sweden probably.

Just read an article how the standards are lowered for women - fewer push-ups, etc. 'cause we're all equal and BS

reply

Don't matter when they fire a bullet into your head though does it? Guns mean that even if a women can't carry as much she can still kill just as easily as a male soldier, same thing with airplanes, doesn't matter if you can fly better than an enemy so long as he sees and shoots a missile at you first he wins, you die.

reply

In most countries the boots on the ground infantry is not available to women. women often are allowed to serve in the military, but in roles such as medic, communication, base operations. They are usually barred or have very limited to actual combat, certainly not front line combat. This is mostly due to the fact of human phisiology, women are simply weaker and thus less fit for front line combat that depends a lot of human strength, even today. There were movements to lift the ban all over the place, most of them ending unsucesfully.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

reply

There should be ONE standard for joining the army, and if women can't handle it, they simply don't get to join.. thats my opinion and i stand by it.

reply

Russian/Soviet army had women on the front lines as as early as WW1

reply

Does the film feature a Russian/Soviet unit?





reply

I don't know, but last I checked most countries were opening up their militaries to include women, and if there really was an alien invasion the army would need all the help they could get.

I have a blog now! http://hitchcocksworld.blogspot.ca/

reply

Well go and check and see if it's about a Russian/Soviet unit then come back to me.





reply

So, is sexism your cause de jour? What'll it will it be next week--transphobia? Are you just bored and want to start a topic?
I've seen a number of documentaries about fighting in Afghanistan and didn't see one female. I know they're there in some non-combat roles, there was even an A-10 Warthog female pilot, but it's no skin off either of our noses if there aren't any women in a war movie...Relax...Paint your nails and get over yourself.
I tried to contain myself but I escaped.

reply

Seems like he gave up when real life experts put his google to shame...

Even to this day... There are no woman in the US Marine Corps infantry either. Marine Corps are refusing to lower the training standards and very few are passing the basic qualifications without even making it to advance Infantry School.

The reason you saw Michelle Rodriguez in the "Combat Role" in Battle: LA is because she was Air Force performing technological recon when they were spotted and killed. She was the only survivor and teamed up with a couple of Army Soliders that were later found by the Marines. She was serving a support role in a combat environment.... Which women do in US Military today.

reply

No women =/= sexism. There is no justufyable reason, or at least you presented none, why there should be women in the movie. Gender equality does NOT mean gender parity.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

reply

It's an insult to Battle LA to say that Alien Outpost has anything in common with that movie. If you actually watch both, you'll see what I mean.

On second thought don't waste your time with Alien Outpost.

It's amusing how this thread degenerated into some type of feminism soapbox. Stupid internet.

reply

Battle LA is hardly some kind of high water mark.

That a film can be made in 2014, and set a generation in the future and have ZERO females IS remarkable. That there are no women in particular combat roles in rl today is hardly relevant.

This film conforms to a teenage white boy view of life, with all its macho ridiculous cliches. Either the film makers knew their market or they are just backward. Perhaps even both.

Fwiw I watched this to kill an hour or so. Because boredom breaks were necessary, I sometimes found myself in the other room where my teenage sons were playing some kind of alien shoot up game. It looked a lot like this movie. They had the advantage of at least being able to interact with the silliness.

reply

Waaah no women in the movie. Boo hoo. Who gives a *beep* This movie sucked, and it would have still sucked even with some female presence.

reply

To be fair, a strong female lead would have offered something of redeeming value. Perhaps not much but it would be something it could be given credit for.

I have a blog now! http://hitchcocksworld.blogspot.ca/

reply

Bullsh t. Only a feminist would have been satisfied with a "strong woman lead." You could have put a Lesbian Jewish Black Woman in the lead role to satisfy any discrimination nazis and the movie would have still sucked.

reply

Worst movie ever.

reply

No, not even, it's a bunch of soldiers goofing around in a shoddily constructed base that never gets attacked by aliens.

reply

If this was low budget they did an excellent job. It was much different than the usual alien invasion type movie we see. The interviews were an interesting thing to add and then the idea that they were implanting something in humans to control them to aid them in fighting us was also interesting. I definitely look forward to a sequel and hope someone out there throws some more money for the people making these cuz this wasn't a bad start at all. A very entertaining movie even if it was more slow paced than other movies.

reply

This is way better than Battle L.A! I went in expecting (because I saw Adrian Paul was in it) a 4 stars at the most, but ended up giving it 8 star rating.

reply

Battle LA??
Outpost 37 is better in so many ways...

I just don't understand why the aliens left... still...

reply

It's funny, I just got done watching this movie and half-way through I thought to myself "this movie is like the unofficial sequel to Battle LA".

reply