This year, Hollywood has provided us two similar film involving the hostile takeover of the White House by terrorists - Olympus Has Fallen, earlier in March and now...White House Down. Since they're similar themed with some minor differences, surely there must be comparisons between the two of them.
The significant difference between the two is that White House Down is much less serious, less dark and gritty compared to Olympus. The choice to include some occasional humour in the film somehow reduces the stakes and dramatic weight to the situation.The takeover by incompetent terrorists in this film is questionable (I personally feel that the North Koreans' hostile takeover of the White House within 15 mins in Olympus is more believable than this one).
However, the thrilling action scenes and humour still make it an enjoyable watch. The on-screen budding between John and the President did provide a few laughs here and there. The characters are likable and relatable enough for the audiences to stay throughout the film. I find that John daughter's obsession with the White House and the president is very hard to believe, especially a girl of her age.
The similarly themed 'Olympus Has Fallen' released around March this year is far superior and more entertaining than this film. The dark twisty edge and gore that Olympus presents gives the sense of danger and urgency it needs and requires attention that this incident is a real threat to the nation and the World. The presence of Morgan Freeman as The Speaker is definitely better and more memorable compared to Richard Jenkins with the same role. Aaron Eckhart provide a better performance as the president in facing the threat compared to the 'funny-guy' type president Jamie Foxx. Butler as the highly trained badass to save the president from the terrorists is more believable than Tatum's charismatic, likeable police officer.