The theoretical alliance between Texas and California is based on assets and military resources rather than political ideologies. This could make more sense than you might think if state powers had to form alliances to unseat an unlawful third term presidential administration. As it relates to this movie, the politics behind the cause of the war aren’t important at all. The war and the fallout from the war serve as a backdrop for the actual story. They could have called it “Journalists,” but that wouldn’t have been as compelling a title as “Civil War.” 😂
@@pablozee6359 I really appreciate the knowledge on this- I felt like because there was so much going on in the background of the film, we were trying too hard to make sure we were understanding everything.
My theory is that since they’re the two most powerful states, they’ve joined forces to defeat Washington and secure independence for each other. That way, once the dust settles, neither has to be in the Union together anymore. Really though, the fact the country is so polarized and split that a movie about a civil war is being criticized because two American states that are still currently part of the same country would “never ally with each other”… I feel like that in itself says something about the state of the US
@@JakvsMetalheads999Not just powerful (both have multiple military bases), but they also have the money to back it up. California and Texas are some of the very few states that would have no problem being independent. They give more to the american government than they receive.
The whole mysterious background really enforces the “It doesn’t matter the reason people shouldn’t be killing each other much less Americans killing each other” it also leaves it up to personal interpretation
It makes sense if you think of CA and TX they have some of the most and biggest Military bases, equipment,guns, choppers, planes. They also have some of the biggest Reserve and National Guard troops. They are also the biggest GDP’s in the country which means they have the money and infrastructure to wage war. It’s really not far fetched once you think about it. It’s called an “alliance” doesn’t mean they aren’t going to govern themselves after taking out the federal government.
They would still need the agreement of other states to stand down considering the distance to be travelled from both California and Texas to Washington DC. Frankly if the Prez still had control over the military at large, he could have stayed aboard an aircraft carrier just off the Atlantic Coast and conducted war from there.
IMHO The best movie of the year hands down....not meant to be linear story telling or logical, but to be ambiguous and controversial like politics and conflict are in reality. It is meant cause emotional distress and discourse about its message and meaning, which it did between both of you. The trailer and movie title were meant to lure audiences in, so Garland could get this movie seen by the masses, which he accomplished. The soundtrack was meant to be diametrically opposed to the visuals, again to cause reverie and reflection.Sammy's death scene with the burning embers is so poetic and beautiful with Sturgill's Breakers Roar in the background. I expect the film will be nominated by the Academy for best soundtrack, movie, and acting by Dunst. Plemmons may win best supporting for that one indelible scene.
that forest fire scene honestly got me to near crying. it's very poetic but sad. Last thing Sammy sees is the world burning around him. But like Lee said, there were so many other ways it could've gone. That said, its my favorite scene in the movie
So when it comes to warfare journalism and photojournalism, while it's still incredibly risky and dangerous, there are still "rules of war" that each country "tries" to abide by, which are observed by international legal bodies via the UN. And when it comes to war journalists, it's considered a war crime, thus punishable under the authority of the Hague, to kill or torture them because they're not combatants. This is also why, as shown in the film and IRL, journalists will have their vehicles, equipment, and gear practically bullhorning "PRESS! WE ARE THE PRESS!" It's so they 𝘥𝘰𝘯'𝘵 get shot and/or tortured...in an ideal world/situation, that is.
@@MooreNotLessReactions for sure! And honestly, that's also sort of the point of why the film feels confusing or lacking critical details. This is through the "lens" of war photojournalists. It doesn't matter who the sides are or which one you're covering in that moment; it's about getting those moments captured on film. IRL there are people doing this right now on both sides of every major conflict. Ukraine/Russia, Palestine/Israel, US/entire fucking world. You can watch journalists here on UA-cam doing coverage in Iraq and Afghanistan, attached to Taliban units, providing insight into that side of the conflict(s).
Thank you, I also hated the music choices, despite loving the film. It's like they gave the scoring job to the editor's little hipster brother who's trying to make a name for themself as a music director in the indie film scene lol
I also didn't like some of the music choices but I think when they put very flippant music on after an intense moment e.g. during the execution, it is supposed to reinforce how this is the new normal, this is people's lives in this civil war. Just like how the war photos we see in real life, that is the reality for some people today
With you with the music choices. Tonally they do not make any sense to me (and I hate Country). The who fights who and why is not supposed to make sense as viewers in America are so polarized between right and left to fanatical levels, so it was the director's choice to leave ambiguity in there. It was a warning - DON'T DO THIS HERE !
It's more than a message of "don't do this here" to me. The film focuses on existential and philosophical film more than anything. Despite it, they don't elaborate of what the world is going through. The film simply puts you in the middle of the battle through the eyes of the journalists. The moment Lee (Kirsten Dunst), says "every time I survived a warzone and got the photo. I thought I was sending a warning home...But here we are." The core of the film is finally explained. Everything that is happening is dreadful and harrowing. "Civil War" could've taken place in any other country; many countries even today are still in a war sadly. But this film specifically chose the United States as its setting. But it doesn't matter What "Civil War" focuses on is that "war" aspect. It's extremely difficult to justify and live with what you experience in those battles. And a photo (as Lee is struggling with) seems to be insignificant in the grand scheme of things. As no one seemed to listen anyway. So, what's the point? War is cynical by nature and its unfortunately cyclical. Lee seeing Jessie (Cailee Spaeny) as a reflection is also a constant reminder of that same existential dread she's feeling. Here she is sending "warnings" home and here's a younger version of herself essentially becoming who Lee is trying to dissociate from. The most important and powerful scene is Lee deleting the photo of Sammy over that country song "Breakers Roar - Sturgill Simpson". A song about the struggle of opening your heart to others in spire of your negative thoughts. Which juxtaposes tragically with Lee's character and is why she completely breaks during the Siege of Washington D.C. And tragically again, seeing Jessie become Lee as Jessie heartlessly focuses on getting the good shot while Lee has a breakdown in the midst of the battle. Sure it's their job to get the photos. But again, the banality of war is the lack of any sense. What is it worth to capture an image like that when its glorified (the ending credit photo of them smiling with the dead president) and or indifferent. It's nowhere near a bitter or emotional ending. It just ends abruptly; its cyclical and all of the violence and horror will occur again. Maybe Im reading too much into it, but I saw the film as something very heartbreaking to watch. The forest fire scene is what did it for me.
The theoretical alliance between Texas and California is based on assets and military resources rather than political ideologies. This could make more sense than you might think if state powers had to form alliances to unseat an unlawful third term presidential administration. As it relates to this movie, the politics behind the cause of the war aren’t important at all. The war and the fallout from the war serve as a backdrop for the actual story. They could have called it “Journalists,” but that wouldn’t have been as compelling a title as “Civil War.” 😂
@@pablozee6359 I really appreciate the knowledge on this- I felt like because there was so much going on in the background of the film, we were trying too hard to make sure we were understanding everything.
My theory is that since they’re the two most powerful states, they’ve joined forces to defeat Washington and secure independence for each other. That way, once the dust settles, neither has to be in the Union together anymore. Really though, the fact the country is so polarized and split that a movie about a civil war is being criticized because two American states that are still currently part of the same country would “never ally with each other”… I feel like that in itself says something about the state of the US
@@JakvsMetalheads999Not just powerful (both have multiple military bases), but they also have the money to back it up. California and Texas are some of the very few states that would have no problem being independent. They give more to the american government than they receive.
The whole mysterious background really enforces the “It doesn’t matter the reason people shouldn’t be killing each other much less Americans killing each other” it also leaves it up to personal interpretation
It makes sense if you think of CA and TX they have some of the most and biggest Military bases, equipment,guns, choppers, planes. They also have some of the biggest Reserve and National Guard troops. They are also the biggest GDP’s in the country which means they have the money and infrastructure to wage war. It’s really not far fetched once you think about it. It’s called an “alliance” doesn’t mean they aren’t going to govern themselves after taking out the federal government.
They would still need the agreement of other states to stand down considering the distance to be travelled from both California and Texas to Washington DC.
Frankly if the Prez still had control over the military at large, he could have stayed aboard an aircraft carrier just off the Atlantic Coast and conducted war from there.
@@Hibbs4Prez agreement…maybe yeah or surrender lol remember it’s a war and war means conquering your enemies land to win the war.
IMHO The best movie of the year hands down....not meant to be linear story telling or logical, but to be ambiguous and controversial like politics and conflict are in reality. It is meant cause emotional distress and discourse about its message and meaning, which it did between both of you. The trailer and movie title were meant to lure audiences in, so Garland could get this movie seen by the masses, which he accomplished. The soundtrack was meant to be diametrically opposed to the visuals, again to cause reverie and reflection.Sammy's death scene with the burning embers is so poetic and beautiful with Sturgill's Breakers Roar in the background. I expect the film will be nominated by the Academy for best soundtrack, movie, and acting by Dunst. Plemmons may win best supporting for that one indelible scene.
that forest fire scene honestly got me to near crying. it's very poetic but sad. Last thing Sammy sees is the world burning around him. But like Lee said, there were so many other ways it could've gone.
That said, its my favorite scene in the movie
This was fun..
So when it comes to warfare journalism and photojournalism, while it's still incredibly risky and dangerous, there are still "rules of war" that each country "tries" to abide by, which are observed by international legal bodies via the UN. And when it comes to war journalists, it's considered a war crime, thus punishable under the authority of the Hague, to kill or torture them because they're not combatants.
This is also why, as shown in the film and IRL, journalists will have their vehicles, equipment, and gear practically bullhorning "PRESS! WE ARE THE PRESS!" It's so they 𝘥𝘰𝘯'𝘵 get shot and/or tortured...in an ideal world/situation, that is.
@@BJMurphy Thank you so much for all the insight! We were definitely worried for them during the movie!
@@MooreNotLessReactions for sure! And honestly, that's also sort of the point of why the film feels confusing or lacking critical details. This is through the "lens" of war photojournalists. It doesn't matter who the sides are or which one you're covering in that moment; it's about getting those moments captured on film.
IRL there are people doing this right now on both sides of every major conflict. Ukraine/Russia, Palestine/Israel, US/entire fucking world. You can watch journalists here on UA-cam doing coverage in Iraq and Afghanistan, attached to Taliban units, providing insight into that side of the conflict(s).
Message to the dog: Blink twice if you are being held against your will....
Oh my God, I’m so glad you guys did this. I just watched this last weekend. XOXO.
@@pamschneider2568 I always love when things work out that way! 😊 Hope you enjoy 🍿
California, Texas, and Florida can definitely team up. All three states have very large Hispanic populations.
But it's texas and California.....
@@dodovolcano So?
This movie really brings into prespective what Israel is doing to journalists in gaza, great filmmaking.
Maybe people will eventually see them for what they are. And realize just how badly WW2 ended for everyone.
Thank you, I also hated the music choices, despite loving the film. It's like they gave the scoring job to the editor's little hipster brother who's trying to make a name for themself as a music director in the indie film scene lol
Kirsten divorce now! It's Todd from Breaking Bad.
Jesse is perfect acting psychopath
37:09 pet DENIED 🤣
🤣🤣🤣
You guys are amazing I really enjoy your reaction ❤
Oh yes, I’m here for this!!! You two crack me up❤❤❤
@@jareeohs Thank you so much! We are happy to make you laugh 😂🍿
Music choices mean your trying to be happy because you're privileged. Just try to cope, talking from a diagnosed depression
I also didn't like some of the music choices but I think when they put very flippant music on after an intense moment e.g. during the execution, it is supposed to reinforce how this is the new normal, this is people's lives in this civil war. Just like how the war photos we see in real life, that is the reality for some people today
With you with the music choices. Tonally they do not make any sense to me (and I hate Country).
The who fights who and why is not supposed to make sense as viewers in America are so polarized between right and left to fanatical levels, so it was the director's choice to leave ambiguity in there.
It was a warning - DON'T DO THIS HERE !
It's more than a message of "don't do this here" to me.
The film focuses on existential and philosophical film more than anything. Despite it, they don't elaborate of what the world is going through. The film simply puts you in the middle of the battle through the eyes of the journalists.
The moment Lee (Kirsten Dunst), says "every time I survived a warzone and got the photo. I thought I was sending a warning home...But here we are." The core of the film is finally explained.
Everything that is happening is dreadful and harrowing. "Civil War" could've taken place in any other country; many countries even today are still in a war sadly. But this film specifically chose the United States as its setting. But it doesn't matter
What "Civil War" focuses on is that "war" aspect. It's extremely difficult to justify and live with what you experience in those battles. And a photo (as Lee is struggling with) seems to be insignificant in the grand scheme of things. As no one seemed to listen anyway. So, what's the point?
War is cynical by nature and its unfortunately cyclical. Lee seeing Jessie (Cailee Spaeny) as a reflection is also a constant reminder of that same existential dread she's feeling. Here she is sending "warnings" home and here's a younger version of herself essentially becoming who Lee is trying to dissociate from.
The most important and powerful scene is Lee deleting the photo of Sammy over that country song "Breakers Roar - Sturgill Simpson". A song about the struggle of opening your heart to others in spire of your negative thoughts. Which juxtaposes tragically with Lee's character and is why she completely breaks during the Siege of Washington D.C.
And tragically again, seeing Jessie become Lee as Jessie heartlessly focuses on getting the good shot while Lee has a breakdown in the midst of the battle. Sure it's their job to get the photos. But again, the banality of war is the lack of any sense. What is it worth to capture an image like that when its glorified (the ending credit photo of them smiling with the dead president) and or indifferent.
It's nowhere near a bitter or emotional ending. It just ends abruptly; its cyclical and all of the violence and horror will occur again.
Maybe Im reading too much into it, but I saw the film as something very heartbreaking to watch. The forest fire scene is what did it for me.
@@bunnyfoxparagon7100 All of Garland's work, from his books to his screenplays are focused upon the theme of "self-destruction".
@@o0pinkdino0o he does that theme masterfully imo
Very heavy tho