Two trailers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_pAsPPDdC8&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfDmk3vg7NU

Interactive invasion map with small attack clips located around the world:

http://www.battlela.com/interactivemap/

 

Yep........

 

While Battle: Los Angeles will most likely have that usual cliched humanity wins in the end finish, the shorter trailer leaves this up in the air: Will we push them off Earth from all fronts or did we just win a respite from the invaders with the sole vistory being in L.A?

That is the question.

Going by the trailers, I think this will be it.

All the other major cities are lost, or are in the process of being lost/heavily attacked, so Los Angeles would represent the one front where Humanity kept them at bay.... a rallying point.

 

This movie looks retarded. On the levels of Skyline and Cloverfield retarded.

 

I think a better question would be: If the aliens really want LA that badly, do we really care?

 

Bu..but... what about all the movie stars?

 

Why make a stand at LA? Why not Washington? Or NORAD? Or any other major military installation?

 

It's obvious the woolly mammoth evolved to be the dominant species in the future but had to come back in time to take over the planet before we made it too hot for their liking.

 

^This is probably due to the fact that we cloned it wrong like we usually tend to. Stupid frog DNA!

I'm still relatively excited about this movie. I'm hoping it will be a defeatist movie. Brief victory then, Swish Swish Stab and everyone is dead.

But Cowboys and aliens will probably be better.

 

This. Daniel Craig as a cowboy? Olivia Wilde as (what I assume is a) bar wench/prostitute? Harrison Ford as a fucking lynch organizer? Do want.

Now if they'd only change the title to something people could take seriously. It would have been better if they didn't put out the trailer right next to that Warrior's Way shit, but, well, spilled milk.