a5c7b9f00b It's the year 3000 A.D.; the Earth is lost to the alien race of Psychlos. Humanity is enslaved by these gold-thirsty tyrants, whom are unaware that their 'man-animals' are about to ignite the rebellion of a lifetime.
In the year 3000, humanity is no match for the Psychlos, a greedy, manipulative race on a quest for ultimate profit. Led by the seductive and powerful Terl, the Psychlos are stripping Earth of its resources, using the broken remnants of humanityslaves. What is left of the human race has reverted to a primitive state, believing the invaders to be demons and technology to be evil. After humanity has all but given up any hope of freeing themselves from alien oppression, a young man named Tyler decides to leave his desolate home high in the Rocky Mountains to discover the truth, whereupon he is captured and enslaved. It is then that he decides to fight back, leading his fellow man in one final struggle for freedom.
This film sets a new benchmark for the worst film in history. <br/><br/>Move over "Plan 9 From Outer Space." (At least "Plan 9" could boast economical special effects.)<br/><br/>Set your script dialog and story editor to "random," and you'd get a film better than Battlefield Earth. This film was really Travolting!<br/><br/>"One" is too high on a scale of one to ten.
This movie was *slated*.<br/><br/>Travolta's reputation took a pounding and it was regardedan overblown flop in the mould of Waterworld.<br/><br/>But having viewed it myself it's not actually all that bad at all. By no means is it great, but it's certainly no worse than the 'mainstream' high budget popcorn munchers suchJurassic Park and Independence Day that Hollywood throws out.<br/><br/>It's based on an epic novel which is seenone of the great sci-fi novels. Now I have not read this book so I can only judge this movie on its own merits rather thanan adaptation, but it really is quite watchable.<br/><br/>It's not the best movie I've ever seen, but by no means is itdirethe critics would have you believe.<br/><br/>I stuck the video on thinking it was going to be laugheably bad and that I'd want to kill it half-way through, but, no, it warranted watching.<br/><br/>The performances are fairly staple, and some of the dialogue less than inspiring, but if you ignore the bad press and just watch it on its own merits you may get a kick out of it. <br/><br/>I did.
The film is Travolta's baby, but indifference and boredom is everywhere.
Yes, Battlefield Earth is loosely based on the novel of the same title by author and founder of Scientology L. Ron Hubbard. Originally intended to be a two-part move, Battlefield Earth depicts the first half of the novel. A sequel was intended to be made shortly after, but these plans never occurred. No. While the author of the novel Battlefield Earth, L. Ron Hubbard, is also the founder of the Church of Scientology, little or no Scientologist views are presented in the book. John Travolta was intent on making this filmboth a follower of L.Ron Hubbard anda fan of the source material. However, the film focuses on the science fiction aspects of the original novel, and does not intentionally promote any religious agenda. Slight similarities between themes of the novel and film and teachings of Scientology do exist, but the connection is more incidental than anything else. Several things. The book was long and verbose, and was difficult to condense into a two-hour movie; in fact, only the first half was filmed, with the second intended to be the sequel. The pulp science-fiction plot was considered to be clunky and outdated, and despite John Travolta's enthusiasm for the film, many studios were unwilling to finance the movie.<br/><br/>Upon release, the film received a critical drubbing, with common criticisms suchthe poor acting, an outrageous and inconsistent plot, and a baffling visual style employed by the director (which included an excessive use of slow-motion and Dutch angles). This led to poor word of mouth before and after the release. In addition, the often poorly portrayed image of Scientology instantly tainted public perception, and the motives behind making this movie based on a novel by Scientology's founder <a href="/name/nm0399196/">L. Ron Hubbard</a> seemed to overwhelm viewer objectivity.<br/><br/>Lastly, production company Franchise Pictures was sued in 2004 by its German investors when it was discovered that it had been inflating film budgets, including that of Battlefield Earth. Franchise Pictures was forced to pay $121 million in damages and ultimately went bankrupta result.<br/><br/> The British Version misses a headbutt. Approx 2 seconds are cut. Originally, there were plans to make a sequel to Battlefield Earth, since the movie covers roughly half of the novel of the same title. Shortly after Battlefield Earth was released in 2000, Travolta indicated he would move forward with a sequel. However, a year later he stated that a sequel was not in the works. Because of the poor reception that Battlefield Earth received, coupled with the collapse of Franchise Pictures, plans for a sequel failed to gain any serious traction and were abandoned.
tamil movie Centurion free downloadDevil Hunter Yohko full movie hd 720p free downloadRat movie free download hdthe Tom Hanks Green Day full movie in hindi free downloadDownload Baltimore Qualifying Part 2 full movie in hindi dubbed in Mp4Life with bacteria movie in hindi hd free downloadToxic Shark download torrentAkaKILL! Theater: 24th Elimination - Party for Mission Accomplished full movie in hindi free download mp4the The Brave hindi dubbed free downloadArmy Girl full movie online free