Civil War

Forget such questions of whether 'Civil War' is good or bad, fresh or rotten, and any other gradation scale that comes to mind. This film is mandatory.

Civil War enflames our discomfort by bringing the conflict to our own backyard.

With horrific wars raging in other parts of the world, and with politically charged violence part of the fabric of this country, “Civil War” will hit home no matter where you live.

This is a movie I was somewhat dreading—its premise just seems too possible in these fractious days—yet Garland managed to imbue Civil War with a solemnity and maturity that made me grateful for it. Let’s hope it remains a warning, not a weather vane.

It is a film about journalistic ethics and, in its own way, the interpretation of images is grounded in [Dunst’s] outstanding performance. It isn’t an easy role to inhabit, but she does so perfectly.

Civil War works on the level of intellectual exercise: a film clear-eyed on the horrors of war and trauma in which journalists are the unsentimental heroes, and which relies on the audience to supply their own assumptions of American politics rather than spoon-feed reality. But the distance makes for an at times frustrating watch – stimulating on the level of adrenaline, not emotions.

The plot plods along — they drive a bit, guy gets shot, they drive some more, guy gets shot — and the dialogue is bottom of the barrel.

This is not a movie but a documentary of what's to come. Excellent movie. This has already started. We have allowed politicians which or the few to divide us.

I think my expectations were so low due to my previous experiences with Garland that I ended up enjoying this much more than I anticipated. It still retains all the things I dislike about his style like the over-sanitized/digitized look and the lack of a deeper exploration of its characters and themes, but Civil War at least has a sense of momentum to its narrative, going from point A to point B and finding some stuff in the middle. The title and the marketing campaign might have been a bit misleading: this is an almost apolitical film (maybe nonpartisan would be a better term), presenting no real commentary on current political events or trends and simply painting broad strokes and stating things like "xenophobia bad". That isn't necessarily a bad thing, as Garland is interested in exploring another matter: the ethics of war photojournalism. Our main characters are looking for "the perfect shot", but in truth all they chase is adrenaline and the rush of action. In the process of removing oneself from the real world through a camera lens you risk losing your sense of humanity and empathy, becoming a vessel of a supposed "objective truth" through the photos you capture in order to inform the world of what is happening. I couldn't help but be constantly reminded of the controversial Kevin Carter photograph and all the ethical discussions that came from it. In Civil War the press feels removed from reality once they are behind a camera. That's their shield and weapon, that's what gives them a sense of power, as we all know "the cameraman never dies". It's an interesting theme, but it's almost all this film has to offer in terms of intelectual provocation. But that's also all it is, a provocation, a simple arrow pointing to this particular ethical issue, lacking any sort of deeper exploration not only of this theme, but also of its characters. The actors do a fine job with what they're given to work with, but the characters are just too shallow to provoke any sort of connection with the audience. I think Garland's idea of fleshing them out is making them smoke weed together because that's what "everyone" does so the audience will connect with them, right? Old man is old and slow, young girl is young and naive, Kristen Dunst has seen too much and is fed up with the world and Wagner Moura likes the thrill of war and gets drunk sometimes. Oh, and they also smoke da weed. That's enough characterization, right? Jesse Plemons feels more interesting than anyone in our main group (mostly because he's the best and he's the one who had the idea to wear those red sunglasses) and he's on screen for maybe 10 minutes. Some positives I'd have to point out are the sound design and the scope of the film, especially towards the end. It turns into a war spectacle with huge explosions and bombastic deep sounds. The whole ending sequence feels intense, but then it is interrupted by the most obvious outcome being executed in the most silly-looking way. I'm sure there was a better way to shoot all of that "emotionally powerful" moment, but whatever. Also, I wish more attention was given to worldbuilding instead of just relying on dialog and some flags. I want to know more about the reasons for this civil war, and I don't think they're ever really mentioned. Basically, I leave yet another Garland film feeling almost cold. It doesn't **** like I expected it to, but it's still just middle-of-the-road pseudo-thoughtful spectacle. And still, this might be my favorite movie directed by him. I don't regret watching it, but I wish Garland would return to writing those cool scripts from back in the day like 28 Days Later and especially Dredd.

Ce qui lui fait sa note, c'est surtout le fait que je m'attendais à un film très nul d'action lambda et j'ai été extrêmement surpris. Pas le film de l'année, mais cool à voir Le fait de suivre des journalistes est intéressant

A lot of potential but it plays everything way too safe. It can’t decide if it wants to be realistic and immersing the audience in the awful truths of a civil war versus a watered down bite-sized version. The reasoning for the civil war was too black and white, when most civil wars are messy, for a reason. You get a glimpse of everything that would happen in a civil war, but that’s about it. It doesn’t explore anything in depth which is a missed opportunity. The military was fine, the communication, maneuvering, uniforms, were believable. The music was fitting, the cinematography was nice, the acting was good.

Tam bir vakit kaybıydı benim için. Basın zaten "objektif" değil, bir de Amerika da iç savaş varmış güya. TWD daha inandırıcıydı...