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 humanity as slaves. 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.
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.
Thats right. One half of this superbad novel was put to film. The second installment was to be made after the success of the first film.<br/><br/>Yeah! Thank all that is good that didn&#39;t happen.<br/><br/>The movie isn&#39;t all bad. It is a reminder that John Travolta didn&#39;t have a career in American films until Pulp Fiction put him back on the map for a reason. He is not the person to decide if this L Ron Hubbard crap should be inflicted on society.<br/><br/>Barry Pepper is a great actor. But an actor is only as good as the role he has to play and he tried like mad to play &quot;Johhny Goodboy Tyler&quot; and the character just wasn&#39;t playable. <br/><br/>If they try to film the rest of the book I hope that democrats don&#39;t take over the country because I am going to need an assualt rifle.
Come on people. You can say this movie is a pure example of a Hollywood FIASCO. But can all of the people involved in the making of this film be that brainless? If you decide to see it, watch is as you wood Commando. This has to be slapstick. Most of, or all of the characters in this movie are caricatures. The script is a collection of black humor skits. It acts serious, but I was hyperventilating, i.e., gasping for air. It was non-stop laughter. Can anyone believe this story to be plausible? Does anybody think that the scriptwriter was using any authentic, creditable sources in the world of science? I can see how this movie might upset some people, but that&#39;s only if it&#39;s taken seriously. Then it would be straight up trash! Otherwise, enjoy the satire, the absurdities, this absolute preposterous farce of a movie. I am a bit curious about what the genuine followers of Scientology really think…?….
In the pantheon of cinematic train wrecks, from "Ishtar" to "Waterworld," set a place at the table for Battlefield Earth.
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 film as both a follower of L.Ron Hubbard and as a 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&#39;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 such as the 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&#39;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 bankrupt as a 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.
a5c7b9f00b
Batman: Return to Arkham tamil pdf downloadThe Battleship Island in hindi free downloadThe Transporter Refueled hd full movie downloadCh hi, K mei to hariau no koto telugu full movie downloadthe Flower Power full movie in hindi free download hdmalayalam movie download The Golden WebThe Story song free downloadBrothers full movie in hindi free download mp4tamil movie dubbed in hindi free download PlayIn the Line of Fire full movie in hindi 1080p download