A chilling dystopian action film from director Alex Garland, a director of unique vision, and a film that will possibly divide audiences although as a cinematic experience it's visceral and an assault on the senses. Set in the near future the USA is embroiled in a civil war where the states of Texas and California have united to fight a tyrannical President (a cameo from Nick Offerman). The film doesn't give us much if any political context for the causes off the war although there's the inevitable allegory to Trump albeit a tentative one. This is a narrative around the effects of conflict and close proximity to combat. Kirsten Dunst plays Lee, a veteran combat photo journalist, who has become somewhat immune to the violence she witnesses although she is haunted by the past. She and her colleague are intent on a perilous journey across America to try and get an interview with the President, a risky enterprise as journalists have been summarily executed in Washington DC but as the President appears close to defeat they want the scoop. Tagging along are a fellow veteran journalist (Stephen McKinley Henderson) and Jess (Cailee Spaeny). Jess is terrified by what she sees and Lee becomes a reluctant mentor to her and the film focuses on Jess' emotional arc as she becomes more and more a war junkie. With a road movie structure the travellers go from episode to episode some of which are very traumatising and violence is ever present. This is a violent and at times uncomfortable film and the combat scenes and set pieces are realistic both visually and aurally. This film captures the chilling and terrible momentum of war in a way that Saving Private Ryan (1998) did for the war film genre and in the character structures it reminded me of The Hurt Locker (2008) in the depiction of the numbness to horror and the addiction to the rush of combat that both Lee has and regrets and Jess is obtaining on the journey. An impressive film and one that I'm sure will gain accolades as time goes on.
I am baffled as to why this movie is getting such praise and plaudits; I suspect the reasons are mostly political.
SO there is a Trump-like figure in the Whitehouse; meanwhile. Highly unlikely that Texas and California would secede from the USA and join together though; more likely that the 'flyover' states and the south would, as east/west coast 'liberals' socalled hijack the whitehouse for evermore with minorities of colour support. Actors are fine - I shall watch Wagner Maura in anything after his definitive role as Pablo Escobar in classic TV drama NARCOS.
If you want to watch a great film about the morality of photojournalism in a war then watch THE KILLING FIELDS.
This meandering mess of a movie is a road trip on a quest to get to Washington, and that is it. No real story here, all so woolly and flabby in screenplay terms. Pure SciFi fantasy really, though not quite as bad as Garland's last movie 'MEN' which also had that #metoo agenda. OF COURSE the main character and heroes are female here, or men of colour. Fact is, however, the vast majority of war photographers are male. The odd exception prove the rule, and the few famous ones gets perhaps more attention than they deserve just for being female.
Alex Garland is white male privilege personified - privately educated in poshest London area of all Hampstead, with a famous political cartoonist father, and upper class grandparents, incl a Sir. And, like many privileged liberal white male 'silverbacks' (Jon Snow off Channel 4 News is another), he seems to promote an intense dislike, even hatred, against white males. There is NOT ONE in the main cast, those on the roadtrip, if you count the Maura character as Hispanic - there are 2 east Asians, Hong Kong gets a mention and China - and there is one scene here hammers that point home. All baddies in it and the whole movies are white American males. All of them; all heroes and goodies are female or non-white. It is real tick-box 2-dimensional stuff, a bitter diversity worship which some viewers no doubt adore. I call it out for the racism/sexism against white males it is - very common these days in publishing too, esp kids' books. Depressing BUT we still have the archive, thankfully.
I give it 2 not 1 star as it is watchable, with impressive shooting/war scenes (but if you want that, watch brilliant German TV series GENERATION WAR about a REAL war). BUT make no mistake, this is pure wish fulfilment fantasy film-making for socalled progressives in the USA - no doubt they'll show it at the Democrat convention. Make no mistake - this is political propaganda, a scare story, and anti-Trump, and probably quite deliberately released this US election year.
Nice to see (Viet Nam gay American man) Andy Ngo get a credit at the end - the footage f ANTIFA (socalled) demonstrations and violence intercut with the fiction are taken by him - in real life, he was violently attacked by the fascists who claim they are anti fascist.
And the music is well-chosen. So 2 stars, JUST.
In the hands of Alex Garland, this film about a civil war in the US should be a blockbuster epic, instead of which it’s unbelievably trite and underwhelming. We follow a group of press people trying to photograph the action. Action? If only. As they travel by car from New York to Washington DC there’s one slow talky scene after another, signifying nothing. As observers, they hold no interest as characters. Chief press person Kirsten Dunst remains sullen and stony-faced throughout. What little action there is is ruined by showing it as they photograph it, in staccato stills. What we’re left with is a series of uninvolving tableaux and an equally annoying ending. A dismal score with dire pop songs makes everything even worse. Hard to keep watching without hitting FF.
On its surface, Civil War’s marketing may suggest a politically provocative film. A story about the division of state rights would be highly topical amid an election year. The bad news is that this A24 IMAX film never probes that far into political provocation. The good news is that it is a far more compelling film about journalism amid war, far outweighing whatever centrist claptrap that could’ve been mustered out of this premise.
There isn’t much backstory given for this dystopian future of America. There’s some info available, but all you need to know is this: The US President (Nick Offerman) is in his third term, and the faction known as the Western Forces is seeking to take back Washington and kill this authoritative figure. Photojournalist Lee Smith (Kirsten Dunst) and her colleague Joel (Wagner Moura) hope to get an interview before that execution. Doing so will require venturing into the dangerous territory of Washington D.C., alongside the Western Forces engaged in brutal urban warfare. Along for the ride are the aged journalist Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson) and the young journalist apprentice Jessie (Cailee Spaeny). Despite being prepared for the worst, they’re not ready for the rocky road ahead.
The film is more akin to a road trip with various stops. A gas stop leads to the discovery of armed men hanging neighbors up for execution. The group stops at a makeshift camp for the poor, taking a breather to look at their snapped photos and share their experiences. On the opposite end of the spectrum is a small town with rooftop snipers and a carefree attitude towards the rest of the country’s civil unrest. There isn’t much of an explanation given for the divide, but plenty of room is given to divulge why these characters continue to cover the ongoing war within America.
There’s an almost aggravating level of keeping the focus more at the moment for the drive of the journalists beyond their political beliefs. The politics are far more centered on journalism and its importance during the most chaotic times in history. That insistence on its importance makes covering America’s turmoil as essential and tense as the press covering wars in the Middle East. That sense of pressure and fear oozes out of a particularly memorable moment with Jesse Plemons playing a soldier with shades. He corners the group and asks with a loaded gun what kind of Americans they are. There is no way to know the correct answer, even if one understands the local boundaries and political mindsets that lead to violence. Even if the correct answer is given, is that enough? The immediate question soon becomes how to get out of this situation without getting shot and when a declaration of being a press member is not enough.
In terms of how the film depicts war, Alex Garland keeps a stunning amount of focus on the core moments that matter most. The siege of Washington D.C., as most frequently advertised, are grand and exciting displays that perfectly communicate the severity of the situation. Throughout the carnage, the frame freezes for the powerful shots journalists snap. Even with all the gunfire, there’s still time to chat over the explosions. As the journalists soon catch up with a TV crew, they enthusiastically talk about where they’ve been in the city and what unique sights they’ve captured. The drive is so centered on getting the exclusive footage that nothing else matters. The dangers are there but melt away in the face of providing a clear vision of this crucial moment. They are not present to save the President from execution or take part in that execution. All that matters is a quote, a way to encapsulate this key event so that it is not drowned in myth and mystery.
For what could’ve been a meandering mess of states' rights and electoral politics, Civil War manages to surprise in more ways than one. It narrowly avoids the mistakes that could be made with such a premise and probes into the most crucial corners that other filmmakers might overlook. Despite some claims that the film is not political, there is a great sense of politics in how it portrays the press. Sure, the surface-level politics that might’ve been hinted at in the promos is not there, but considering how demonized the media has become with the rise of far-right politics in the past few years, a film like this feels more meaningful than visceral, despite the staging meant to evoke immediate reactions. Some films highlight real-world examples of journalism’s necessity, as with the award-winning 20 Days in Maripul. Of course, it’s easy for Americans to forget about that need for the press when the atrocities are happening so far away. Civil Wars forces audiences to recognize that devotion to reporting when it’s happening in your backyard. Armed with strong performances and action sequences, that’s a solid way to make a more significant point about journalism through dystopian fiction than a semi-autobiographical love letter.