Have you ever stumbled upon a movie that feels like a missing piece to a puzzle you didn’t know existed? That’s exactly how I felt watching War Machine, the latest Netflix actioner starring Alan Ritchson. On the surface, it’s a straightforward sci-fi flick—soldier vs. alien tank, humanity on the brink, all that good stuff. But what makes this particularly fascinating is how it inadvertently sets the stage for a forgotten gem of the genre: Battle: Los Angeles. Personally, I think this isn’t just a coincidence; it’s a missed opportunity to build a cohesive sci-fi universe, one that could have been retooled into something truly special.
Let’s start with War Machine itself. Ritchson, fresh off the success of Reacher, delivers a solid performance as a soldier battling a high-tech alien tank. The film is formulaic, sure, but it’s also a spectacle that knows exactly what it wants to be. What many people don’t realize is that this kind of straightforward action flick is a dying breed in an era of overly complex blockbusters. It’s a throwback to the Predator-style films of the 80s and 90s, where the hero’s journey is as simple as ‘survive and fight.’ But here’s the kicker: the ending of War Machine hints at a larger invasion, leaving the door wide open for a sequel. And that’s where Battle: Los Angeles comes in.
Battle: Los Angeles, released in 2011, is a film that never quite got the love it deserved. It’s gritty, intense, and focuses on a platoon of Marines defending Los Angeles against an alien invasion. If you take a step back and think about it, the two films share more than just a premise. Both involve alien invaders arriving under the guise of meteors, both center on military protagonists, and both end with the heroes gearing up for more battle. In my opinion, War Machine could easily be a prequel to Battle: Los Angeles, setting up the invasion on a smaller scale before the full-blown chaos of the latter. What this really suggests is that Hollywood has been sitting on a potential franchise without even realizing it.
One thing that immediately stands out is how War Machine and Battle: Los Angeles could complement each other stylistically. War Machine is more of a survival thriller, while Battle: Los Angeles leans into large-scale urban warfare. Together, they could offer a complete narrative arc—from the first encounter with the alien threat to the all-out war it sparks. A detail that I find especially interesting is how both films treat their alien antagonists. In War Machine, the tank is a single, terrifying entity; in Battle: Los Angeles, the aliens are a coordinated force with advanced technology. This progression makes perfect sense if you view them as connected stories.
But here’s where it gets really intriguing: Battle: Los Angeles was a modest box office success but received mixed reviews. What many people don’t realize is that the film’s reception might have been different if it had been released today, in the age of streaming. Audiences have become more forgiving of mid-budget sci-fi, especially when it’s paired with a strong streaming platform. If Netflix had retooled Battle: Los Angeles as a sequel to War Machine, it could have breathed new life into both films. This raises a deeper question: Are we leaving potential franchises on the cutting room floor because we’re not thinking creatively about how to connect existing stories?
From my perspective, the idea of a War Machine/Battle: Los Angeles universe isn’t just a fan’s pipe dream—it’s a viable strategy for studios looking to capitalize on existing IP. Streaming platforms are constantly hunting for ways to build loyal audiences, and a sci-fi universe with a built-in timeline could be a goldmine. Imagine a series of films or shows that explore different perspectives of the same invasion, from the first encounter to the final battle. It’s not just about recycling old ideas; it’s about reimagining them for a new audience.
Of course, there are challenges. Retconning Battle: Los Angeles as a sequel to War Machine would require some creative rewriting, but that’s not an insurmountable hurdle. What this really suggests is that Hollywood needs to think more like a puzzle master, connecting disparate pieces into a cohesive whole. Personally, I think this is where the future of storytelling lies—not in standalone films, but in interconnected narratives that reward long-term investment.
In the end, War Machine isn’t just a fun action flick; it’s a reminder of what could have been—and what still could be. It’s a prequel to a forgotten sci-fi movie, but more than that, it’s a blueprint for how to build something greater. If you take a step back and think about it, the pieces are all there. All it takes is someone willing to put them together.
