CIVIL WAR Divides and Conquers | Movie Review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- Civil War is the latest film from writer/director Alex Garland and the biggest film A24 has ever produced. Does It live up to the hype? Here's my movie review. Have you seen Civil War? Let me know what you thought!
Subscribe to Cineflect for ranked lists, reviews, video essays and more! www.youtube.co...
Written, Narrated & Edited by J.S. Lewis
► Letterboxd: letterboxd.com...
► Twitter: / cineflect
► Email: cineflect@gmail.com
#CivilWar #AlexGarland #A24
______________________________________
MUSIC CREDITS:
♪ “Beyond the Lows" - The Whole Other
♪ “Depth Fuse" - French Fuse
______________________________________
COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER:
Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
► Link to the PDF: www.copyright....
► What is Fair Use? fairuse.stanfo...
► About Fair Use: www.copyright.g...
► The Satire/Parody Distinction in Copyright and Trademark Law: apps.americanb... - Фільми й анімація
What did you think of CIVIL WAR? Let me know!
I just saw it for the second time within a week and it is better than ever
I watched “Civil War” last Saturday night at a local drive-in movie theater. The pacing was real slow, probably because this was not an action/adventure movie per se.
This was a movie about photojournalism, and issues that all journalists face during wartime. The story just happens to take place during a second US civil war.
The comparison of “Civil War” to “Full Metal Jacket”, is a very good one. I am sure that director Alex Garland was inspired by Stanley Kubrick’s work in that 1987 film. Fortunately, “Civil War” is not quite as bloody and violent as “Full Metal Jacket”, in my opinion.
“Civil War”, nonetheless, was an entertaining film aimed toward a patient, mature audience, that is willing to ponder about the issues of journalism in a wartime environment.
Overall I thought it was a good film! If the director was trying to to convey the chaos and barbarism that would likely occur if such a conflict occurred then I think he was successful!
I think that the undercurrent of "whatever, it's us or them" in the movie, compared to some audience demands for world-building detail highlights a key privilege for American audiences: few have served in the armed forces, fewer have served in direct combat roles, and even fewer have seen combat, itself. Additionally, few have witnessed, first-hand, the horrors of a war-torn country. Delving into the whos and whats and whys of conflict are the realm of pundits, historians, and spectators. The immediacy of where, when, and how of conflict are the top concerns of those living it.
Lee's statement of the trailer "...'Don't do this.'..." I think is the point of the film, its "minimal story", and intense production. If there is a war on American soil, so much of the hand-wringing and bickering and internet-arguments will be burned away into brutal survival and victory, which guarantees survival.
Having followed the War in Ukraine from the first days of Russia's invasion, the movie is, to me, a real attempt to put war (from examples across the 20th/21st century) in a context for American audiences to really see "War is Bad" and to really understand "War is BAD" because few really understand it. The stills taken were so composed to be similar to what one might have seen in the old Time Life Magazine, that it bridges the past and now, attempting to bring some weight to the carnage and tension on screen.
I have been thinking about the movie for awhile ever since I saw it. As a movie (plot, setting, etc.) it's pretty good, with some deficiencies here and there. As a message that war is HORRIBLE, dehumanizing, inconsistent, tense, ridiculous, confusing, crushing, chaotic, traumatizing, and changes everyone, it is 10/10.
My Alex Garland rankin:
1. Annihilation
2. Ex Machina
3. Civil War
4. Devs
5. Men
I really wanted to love this movie. I enjoyed it, but it left me wanting more. I loved most of Garland's previous works, particularly Devs, Annihilation, and Ex Machina, they were great at diving deep into philosophical scifi. I agree that war journalism is a unique way into this topic, but Civil War needed to explore the psychology of a conflict like this. What does it really mean to kill your neighbor, someone you grew up with, someone who shares your same experiences. Capturing those stories through photography could've been really interesting. Also I wasn't able to connect with Dunst's character, I was shown that she was suffering from PTSD, but the film didn't allow me to understand why. We see a few glimpses of what she saw at the beginning, but the rest of the film she remained cold. Same with the young photographer who tagged along. She wasn't unique. She felt like shell of a character only there to give audiences a way in.
I also re watched full metal jacket after this film, and it made me realized how Kubrick was able to capture the psychological toll of war through his characters. The 1st half of the story allows the audience to experience the torment of basic training, and how that process can alienate and destroy the minds of those incapable. Then the 2nd half captures the pointlessness of what that training amounts to. We see highly trained and disciplined soldiers behave like horny children. Joker is conflicted with the idea of war and peace. Their squad talks about wanting to kill, but instead gets wiped out by a little girl, and the soldiers executes her while she pleads for death - completely devoid of heroism.
I wished civil war had more of these elements. But I didn't hate it. I loved the world building, and cinematography. If the entire film was on par with that Jesse Plimmon's scene then I would've loved it.
This is an incredible movie and it also made me leave feeling a little sick. People complaining they’re confused about what happened and it’s not explained, but we are living the explanation and we’re supposed to bring the film with us. We know how it all started, our personal definition anyway. The map I think is a little bit of a troll, if the map made you emotional then it kind of answered the question asked midway through the movie. Who are you? Where are you from? Who are you with?
It's his best movie in my opinion. I like ExMachina but this one is better
I rank CIVIL WAR as #2 for Alex Garland's features, but #3 overall:
1. Ex Machina
2. Devs
3. Civil War
4. Annihilation
5. Men
I also loved his writing on 28 Day Later and Sunshine. I picked up his 1996 book THE BEACH this morning at the library. Can't wait to delve into it!
I found the leather recliner theater seat more stimulating than this movie.
From interview with 'Garland'.. he said with his movie his objective to avoid representing which side is whom. Both warring parties wear the same military uniform, not mentioning about R or D, Blue or Red.. None at all in his movie. Okay thats good right? But read on..
The context of the story is that Southern States in which he mixed the 2 states - TX and CA were already taken over or have divided themselves out of the Union. Garland joined Texas and California which both states stands on opposite ideology of todays America. TX is pro America and CA is pro invaders of South American countries. With his movie is to erase clashes anything between Blue vs Red or such.
Where he also clearly depicted corrupt president in DC is the last standing old United States. Western Front aka WF are basically rebellions and do not represent the 'old' USofA. Which that scene the ragtag republic sympathizers guy in Elton John shades - asked a very simple question... "where are you from? Oh HongKong... thats China!" Go meet Jesus on the spot. The movie avoided everything about Communist, Socialist, South American invaders, Russians nor any Middle Eastern war of today... But that if you are from 'China'... you are dead!
It not even about the evil 'Communist' China. He is not at war an he does not have any weapons on him. He is a journalist like any color skins of the planet earth.
SO... Garland's ploy is very clear. he doesnt like a selected human race of the planet.. that's his message with his movie.
I really enjoyed it. It depicted the horrors of war quite well. And such a war happening on American soil amongst Americans really makes you pause.
Have you seen "LAGAAN"? This movie was nominated for oscar and first movie in india to use sync sound. This movie has british antagonist like RRR. You will love this movie.
Great movie
Anyone else pick up on the irony of the name lee
Haven't seened it yet, but seems interesting
While it's a divisive one, I highly recommend experiencing it for yourself-in IMAX if possible.
i don’t what is harder to believe an excursion going 1000 miles on a tank of gas or journalist being neutral
It was disappointing. The movie shy away from political lines and focuses on journalism but its narrative didn’t really resonate with me. More disappointing than Alex Garland’s previous film Men
*No video on Bahubali.* T_T
Civil bore. They were so afraid of being controversial they ended up doing nothing. I've noticed no one's really talking about it anymore, which happened fast.
And yet here you are talking about it.
Came to say what the scoppie said. Also, while not “controversial”, if you’re entirely objective, you can get little flavors and accents. Think about all of the encounters. Aside from the skirmishes and battles, an encounter happened with:
Backwoods rednecks
Rogue/probably AWOL racist/xenophobic soldiers (the Jesse Plemons scene)
A suicide bomber who charged into a crowd with the American flag.
A President who you can hear in one radio broadcast, “not only were they (referring to loyalist/US military) victorious, but it was the greatest victory in the history of our great country.” (Yeah, no reference to Donald Trump.
Also, they made a point to show the elite fire teams of the Western Forces including women.
Encounters they didn’t have:
Any race driven groups ie BLM
Antifa or any other radical leftist groups.
disappointed. Maybe I was expecting too much. Some of the scenes were done very well. I had some issues with a few situations they were in and the fact it was quite unrealistic.
great story line for a video game not a movie I thought the whole time I have seen this before and it hit me pvp call of duty and some other decades old games I played this isn't new the photographers are the main story aka players background are npc or now ai yep big yawn here
I went into this film with some pretty massive expectations. But, I was not even 15 minutes into this film and I already knew something was wrong. This film is trying to be a lot of things. It's attempting to be a thriller. A timely political film. An action film. A war film and a character driven drama
Tries to be everything, fails to be anything.
I agree that it attempts to do a lot of things. Sounds like it worked better for me overall though. I'm just glad Garland chose to focus on this group of journalists, it could've been even more unwieldy otherwise.
I disagree. The focus of the film is how terrible life would be for everyday Americans in the midst of a second American Civil War.
@@brianschlicher59
I agree.
Obama is in his 3rd term.
😂
& you are in a cult! 😅
Disbanding the FBI, talking about a 3rd term.. That was tRump and maga talking about that. Obama left when it was time to go.
-The Devil- Obama “made me do it.”
😂
Great 🎥 movie! ☆☆☆☆☆ BidenHarris2024 ❄️ 🌎 ❄️
😂🫵🏽😂🫵🏽🫵🏽😂😂🫵🏽😂🤣🥴
@@jw7019 Idkwtm
Garbage...................
Woke movie
Wah wah wah woke woke woke wah 😭
How so?
woke is something that people say when they dont like or get something.
@@TarboxArt The babyfied maga snowflakes crying is awesome! BidenHarris2024 ❄️ 🌎 ❄️
HOW?