Jesse Plemons’s role scared the crap out of me again. Like, you know you have a brilliant actor when his brief Cameo role is just as scary as a Breaking Bad villain.
Nah his role was way more tense then Gus or Hector or any of them dudes And breaking bad is the best show ever made imo But Jesse Plemons killed his short role in this movie
I live near Philly so when they said that Philly was dangerous that they couldn’t travel through it. It felt surreal. Seeing American suburbs and malls being war torn felt wild to me. Especially since I live near the areas that the movie was filmed in.
Cailee Spaeny's character almost ruined the movie for me. My absolute most hated movie stereotype (young, reckless person who wants to tag along puts everyone in danger).
I don't think anyone has portrayed the violence, speed, and weight of a gunfight better than Taylor Sheridan. the shootouts in wind river, hell or high water, and sicario are so visceral.
Wind River was great but the same where he shoots the guys with the rifle aren't realistic. Bodies aren't picked up and thrown by big powerful rifles. It's not physically possible. Knock down power is a myth. Big rounds simply blow off large parts of bodies but the entire body is not picked up and thrown anywhere
@@swann433have to correct you on this one, in most circumstances you’re right, except he was using a 45-70. He reloads meaning likely a 400-500 grain cast lead bullet, and was hitting body armor. I think it was overdone yes, but it would certainly throw someone like a rag doll if they were hit on a hard surface with that big of a bullet.
That finale in Wind River really hits me every darn time. And the final confrontation in Hell or high Water was more impacting than a lot of horror movies I've seen.
I've heard Jesse plemmons plays a really good sadistic character. He's Todd from breaking bad for those that don't know. But this film being seen through the eyes of reporters/ journalists, is a great way to tell this type of story.
War journalists do some pretty wild shit, which is apparent if you look at any kind of war documentary footage. So I feel like that criticism isn’t really warranted.
this new girls been a war journalist for like 6 minutes and she was basically shook to her core seeing what that guy did when she wandered off at the beginning. Skip to the next day shes doing fast and furious stunts and jumping straight into the line of fire. Its not only less than believable, It makes for an unlikable character who endangered the veteran journalists throughout the entire movie.
*spoiler alert* Some frustrating bits for me were when the western forces get into the White House, and just start blasting innocent people literally just standing there with hands up. Like, how tf am I supposed to get behind you when that’s the shit you’re doing ? Then there’s finding the president hiding in the Oval Office? Really? There isn’t a bunker? You just have him in this most obvious place? Smh 🤦 There’s a scene where they talk about some of the actions the president has made that caused this , but even then, I’d still like to have some sort of answer as to why…
Did you not listen to the review? You’re not supposed to “get behind” anybody. The point of the film is to be as apolitical as possible. You as the viewer are along for the ride with the journalist, you are effectively supposed to be unbiased. Witnessing the WF act as you saw you with no context would put you in the shoes of a journalist. You’re welcome to form your own opinion with what little information you have or you can “save those questions for the people who look at your pictures” as Lee states We know that congress had surrendered in the last days and that only the presidents secret service remained loyal to him. The war was very likely over at that point but the film touches on the fact that once they kill the president the factions will turn on each other. Given that congress had essentially been disbanded, there was no U.S. Government and those bunkers could have been inaccessible to him, he could have been some crazy lunatic who wanted to stay in the oval office as a last ditch stand against the opposition. I can understand wanting more answers. I think the film should’ve been another hour longer. But the fun part is it forces you to think more and interpret what it’s showing you. You kind of just have to to accept that this is the current situation, it doesn’t necessarily matter how we got here.. just that we got here.
I think they were going for there's no good guys in war angle (which has been done a thousand times now in almost every modern war movie) Your point about the president being in the most obvious place tho is so true tho. I was just rolling my eyes at that point.
"Appreciate more than enjoy" , exactly my thoughts, definitely makes a statement, a window into an alternate reality that really jars you. The sound design is amazing, the way you described it was spot on, you feel vulnerable instead of powerful
In an interview garland said he chose Cali/Texas to emphasize the executive branch of the government must have done something so bad it would drive those specific states to secede and join forces. More than showing us what could happen…this is even more of an anti-war film period. Up there with platoon and born on 4th of July and full metal jacket for how overtly its message is showing how pointless war is. I think cody hit the nail on the head with “appreciate rather than enjoy”.
That’s a lie. Sorry, the movie did pick a side. This is coming from someone who’s independent. There’s dialog that proves it in the movie, you just missed. Here’s the evidence: The scene of them in the car talking about being pro FBI. Or when they mention the North pacific Maoist resistance group. Also, can’t forget about the great Anti-FA massacre. So, if you’d pay attention and truly are aware of the real dangers the country is currently braiding, you could see how this movie corporate, neo fascist liberals wet dream.
@@peterdeliteris7705have you thought about the journalism not giving a fuck who on the left or right or far left / far right die? They just want great shots? That’s the vibe this movie gives me They brought up relevant topics but didn’t side with left or right
@@Man_in_a_Gucci_Suit Oh, it did pick sides. Here’s the proof: Every main character was Pro FBI, that’s in dialog when they were driving in the car. Second: There was mention of the Pacific Northwest Maoist resistance. Oh, we can’t forget the AntiFa Massacre. This movie took a side. They were hoping you just didn’t notice. And, journalism died years ago. There’s only a few honest ones left. And, they’re being censored.
@@Man_in_a_Gucci_Suit As they were driving, the journalist that got killed, the older guy, they were just talking about the war. He mentions in the Pacific Northwest, Oregon, were the Pacific Northwest Maoist resistance. Rewatch that movie, trust me, I’m not conservative and hoped this movie would be non partisan. However, this movie covertly took a side and sent a very dangerous message.
This is not a war movie. It's a character drama/road movie set in a war. You also have a dynamic where the mentor wants to protect the protege, but in the end the torch is passed to the next generation to perhaps repeat the same mistakes all over again. One of the central themes, which was borne out in the last scene was no matter who you are, dead is dead and the world moves on.
It honestly isn't that insane. In the Spanish Civil War, the sides were pretty much a coalition of Catholics, Fascists, and Monarchists against Anarchists, Communists, liberal democrats. But in Navarra, the Basque, despite being very Catholic and very much opposed to leftist politics, largely fought on the side of the Republicans against the Nationalists as they figured they'd get more representation, potentially even self-governing autonomy, if the Republicans won. But by all metrics, you'd think they'd be with the Nationalists.
They aren't really united. They are the "Western Forces" and lots of reviewers are calling them the Western Federation or Western Alliance. Sammy, the older journo from the NYT even predicts that they will fight each other after DC falls because they are only fighting together out of necessity. You get the feeling they are more like co-combatants.
But photo journalism/journalist actually exist. Are we so far from wars of our country that we don't even believe these were actual jobs and people actually did do this for a living?
Apparently! They are vital for bringing the horrors of Vietnam home for Americans to be disgusted by. The war crimes revealed by them are vital for ending that stupid war. Unreal that people are so ignorant.
Offerman was on his fourth term, he started using miltary domesticly, alot was givin when they were talking about what questions they were going to ask.
Yup all these bits gave me the strong impression that it WAS leaning towards a side without a in-your-face approach. But again it was subtly picking a side which was going against a hypothetical trump 2nd term era.
I didn't necessarily want it to be political or need it to have a bold stance, but I feel it swung too far in the opposite direction. It gets close to saying something meaningful every so often, but shies away from ever doing so. I'm not saying that Garland should've thrown his ideology (whatever it may be) in our faces. I just feel like this film melts in my hand the longer I hold it, leaving very little to actually chew on. I also feel that the lack of worldbuilding and characterization makes it harder to engage with than a film like this should be.
'If you try to make a message that speaks to everyone, more often than not, you speak to no one.' This movie had a vague anti-war message about fellow americans fighting each other, but it doesn't show us how we could even get to that point so that we could work together now to stop it. There's nothing really to take away from this movie other than "war is bad" and it's like "yeah, I already got that. Didn't really need to tell me."
As a photographer, I loved the photojournalist aspect. That’s probably the safest way of portraying the film without picking a side, while simultaneously being able to depict the horrors of war up close. I’m also fine without the context for the war, it might’ve just stirred up more people
13:15 maybe that's why they chose those two states, to stay apolitical and show that it's just an alternate timeline possibility. I haven't seen the movie yet but just a thought
Which is why I cringe at the uppity cultists thinking they need a civil war to serve the interests of the 2020 election loser. Shudder. Did these people forget what it's like now in Haiti, or what it's been like in Syria, or what it used to be like in Bosnia during that nasty little 3-way civil war? Casual butchery appears in that kind of environment. Remember Ratko Mladic, AKA the butcher of Bosnia?
@@jotade2098 Exactly! (thank you) There are demons you don't want to let loose. Just look at Haiti. I shudder to think of how the inevitable local/regional warlords would rule :( You want a carload of canned foods? They want your teenage daughter in trade :(
Based off the thumbnail alone i agree. We were thrown into the climax of something we should have gotten to see more of, maybe two battles/ events, and more context that lead to a longer war in Washington.
They mentioned the president at one point had a third term, so I think Nick Offerman had been President for a long time, and it kinda sounded like that was one of the jump off points for division
I’m seeing it tonight and I was someone who wanted to go into journalism before my calling to ministry. lol so odd. But I mmm very interested in the apolitical journalism approach here because that’s classic, true journalism that is missing today.
As far as your criticism goes, I think that was the point of the movie. At first, as a war journalist, you just go where the story is. They thought that was the president. As she got closer, Lee started to see people not as a good picture, but real people. At the end she changed her view of what was important.That was the journey. I agree that it would have been better with more dialog scenes to express this better.
I’m not sure if I like how the story arc was completed, but I think how it ended, at least to me, was for her partner (the one who wanted to interview the president). That scene in context to the last scene with the guy makes his scene work even better. You can literally see his face go from desperation into excitement and then completely deflate.
As someone who almost joined the Militarily just for war photography, I totally would've tried to get shots up close and personal. Plenty of photographers put themselves at risk just for that money shot.
I totally agree. But I just didn’t like certain instances where there wasn’t even a battle going on, but they make an unnecessarily stupid choice like with those two militia soldiers, the car scene, and the last shot where Jessie just shrugs off Kirsten’s death. I get they predicted that in dialogue and it was obvious how it was going to end, but it’s not how humans behave unless you’re a sociopath.
Speaking of gunfire in film. I think Heat is one of the best films in portraying how loud and alarming gunfire is. Very intense and it feels like you're right there.
2:49 looked like you were about to walk away to grab something lol 13:20 I get the feeling taking polar opposite states and joining them together is a sign of just how nutty things have gotten
12:00 lol logic side of your brain? This type of photo journalism absolutely happens and is often present in other countries. 20 Days in Mariupol is an example of this.
I didn't want more politics but I did want more out of why the war is happening and wanted to see more into it. If they made a full length movie out of Jesse Plemons scene I would of enjoyed it more.
But it's not apolitical Offerman is trump and the ending is obviously a leftists wet dream id post what actually happened but i don't wanna spoil for those who haven't seen it@@Markunator
Unfortunately it won’t. On Twitter the nutters are refusing to see it for various reasons. Their “heroes” pan the film (check Breitbart’s review) so they don’t care. Idiots. And I’m a moderate conservative… God help us from these savages.
I LOVE Alex Garland but man when I watched these trailers nothing about them made me want to see this movie.. Oh well, I always have Annihilation and Ex Machina!
5:11 I see a bit of Holly Hunter circa "Broadcast News" in Jessie (Cailee Spaeny) the young photojournalist. Also 1987's "Broadcast News" was a movie about where the line should be drawn in journalism to maintain integrity and that's also a recurring theme in "Civil War".
Can't see the people of any state agreeing on anything like succession. Even if a state assembly and governor were nuts enough to approve it and the majority of its residents voted to in a referendum, there would still be a huge minority who'd be like, "nah u have fun tho."
Tired of ppl saying this is not political. It absolutely is. It's underhanded bc they changed the movie over time to remove them but the intentions are still obvious
As a war movie I don't think this will appeal to everyone, but as a piece of art in a surreal scenario that could potentially happen I think many will find it fascinating. I personally wanted maybe just one scene of the armies really digging into each other, but I respect that the point of the movie was not to actually know all the angles of the conflict.
That ending showed the Secret Service getting owned in a brutal firefight. You could tell the Western Forces were mowing through DC to end this thing. Scary part is dialog throughout the film suggests once they accomplished their mission, they were going to war with the Florida Alliance. So the war continues… and that is what would happen in this scenario.
Great topic for this movie, btw Cody, if you dont believe in the people who jump in front of bullets to take a pic, you should read online about Juantxu Rodríguez, spanish photographer killed in Panama during the days after Just Cause en 1989
So far Civil War and Abigail are my favorites of 2024. I've always enjoyed war time jornalist movies since Oliver Stone's Salavor (1986) But that was based on true events.
So I watched it yesterday in IMAX. It’s only the second movie I’ve seen this year I saw as a Day 1 behind Godzilla x Kong. I wouldn’t say I hated it like DisGrace Randolph did. But… this movie from a story standpoint and objective does have major problems. *SPOILERS* So the entire point of this movie is to kill the POTUS? And the Western Forces of California and Texas is never truly defined. Why did they break away from the other states to begin with? Texas is a red state, btw. California has stayed liberal since Clinton in 1992. First 30 minutes of it is slow and doesn’t really give us any reason to care about the characters or their motives. Pacing only starts to pick up when we finally see Plemons’ character. Now Kirsten’s real life husband is only in the movie for like 5 minutes but he actually steals the show. My eyes were glued to the screen when he appeared and that scene with him was intense. “What kind of an American?” I don’t get how journalists/war photographers/press can go side by side while soldiers are killing innocent civilians and everybody in the White House. So when Nick Offerman’s POTUS gets capped at the end, I didn’t feel any emotion for it. Same with Kirsten’s character. I laughed at the ending similarly to after I saw the ending to Upgrade (2018). That’s it? A group shot of the WF smiling and standing over the dead POTUS? How can 2 states defeat a country with 48? So California and Texas have enough military strength to destroy DC? Unarmed civilians getting slaughtered left and right. None of the motives makes any sense and similar to most MonsterVerse movies, there’s really no connection to any of the human characters. Didn’t care for the music choices either. I thought this movie would surprise me like The Negotiator (1998), Olympus Has Fallen (2013), and Ambulance (2022) did. I didn’t expect any of those three to be any good but they were better than what I expected. I was getting Olympus Has Fallen vibes from Civil War. But nah. Turned out confusing and very mid. No urge to rewatch it. 7/10 Sean Chandler does help improve the synopsis by explaining a lot of the symbolism in his review. I still wouldn’t want to rewatch it. It looks and feels like a Netflix movie.
California is blue because of Regan. Regan allowed mass amnesty and that's what changed California, Colorado, and others soon thereafter. Thank you for the informative and intelligent synopsis. As a writer I have realized that it's easy to create a world, but there's nothing intrinsically interesting about a world. Without compelling and dynamic characters it's just a documentary. I get the impression from your review that Civil War is on the 'documentary' side of entertainment spectrum. I recognize the writing strategy. They began with the end in mind - a strategy toxic to character growth. I've realized that the writer chose California and Texas because that achieves neutrality of political implication. That's what everyone seems confused about. Anyhow, Previews brought in $2.8 million and based on comparable earners this movie will probably generate about $140 million which - after advertising - means this movie will probably earn profit and I hope that it does. It shows a luke-warm reception among Killers of the Flower Moon ($156M) and The Exorcist: Believer ($137 M).
It makes no sense like how could two states even if they were some of the most powerful ones defeat 48 states with literally the strongest military in the world. If California and Texas were getting out of hand they would just nuke them even if it would risk some fallout
I hear you about the strength of the different sides, but there are more factions and I believe California and Texas joined the Western Forces and/or the Florida alliance (or what it was called). Would have been interesting to see where Jesse Plemons monster came from.
I loved it. The younger kid didn't bother me. She sold it. Also Ron Swanson is clearly Trump. The disbanding the F.B.I. thing cinched it. Also, I would happily watchbthus again. Damn good film. I loved the musical choices, felt like the better 'Nam flicks. 9/10. My favorite movie so far this year.
This movie got me playing the Washington D.C mission again on Mw2 and I haven’t touched mw2 in a while since I been catching up on my other games, just to show how inspiring this movie is
Yep, you just need to pay attention to the dialogue and background, and it gives a good portion of what's happening. My problem with it is it is the world building is too buried in the background. It's a movie that takes several watches.
@@johnnymidnight2982yep. On my second watch I caught that once the WF terminated the President they were going against the Florida Alliance. So the war continues…
Great discussion. I thought it was brilliant. It reminds me of a realistic Christopher Nolan movie with hints of an Apocalypse Now style mission. The music took me to the post Vietnam Era. Many wanted to know the cause of the war but the context of the war is not important. Most 21st century Americans (except the naive) know how this could happen. Overall, this movie was an essay warning us (Americans) to not let our politicians lead us in this direction because…, in a war everyone loses.
Thank you for your review. This has been the most accurate and honest review of Civil War I've seen, and I am happy to hear someone not complain about the movie not being a message for a political side. I will look for your reviews in the future.
I’m continually baffled when people (like the reviewer) say that the movie doesn’t take a side or is politically ambiguous. I guess maybe if you’re not paying attention? Without spoiling anything, the final scene with the President speaks volumes. Not to mention numerous other situations peppered throughout the film. It’s clear.
As a combat veteran from afghanistan, I understand why you would be frustrated as to why it gave you a lack of information. But understand the movie wasn't about that. The why the war started is not what's important. What's important is showcasing the reality and the brutality of War itself because as I was taught by my ncos is that your political beliefs fly right out the window when bullets are flying at you there's no such thing as right and wrong within War because both sides are doing what they think is right and that's the point of this film and I appreciate that
I feel like the only person who didn’t care that Texas and California teamed up in the film. We seem to forget how quickly people can put their differences aside against tyranny. I was fine with it. I had much bigger issues with the movie than that.
I’ve got a question for u Cody, I’m a kid of the 80’s and grew up with iconic horror icons, why don’t they seem to make descent or original horror movies anymore? Is it cause they don’t use much practical effects any more? Run out of ideas? Nostalgia not sure
I read that the reason the gunshots sound so real is well because they are! They apparently used real gunshot sounds whereas normally movies sorta dilute the sound as it make it less scary :)
They also say outright who some of the soldiers are, like Jesse’s character is a federal soldier, and obviously the guys at the end are WF. The first soldiers they come across with the Hawaiian shirts under their armor have to be Florida Alliance lol and the sniper duo are specifically meant to be kept ambiguous but my money is on WF exclusively because they make sure to showcase the sniper having crazy hair and painted nails. They also talk about some of the things the president did before that point like disbanding the FBI and ordering air strikes on US civilians. I agree that it doesn’t give much information as far as world building goes, but there are breadcrumbs if you pay enough attention.
@@yourewelcome2889wasn’t Jesse’s outfit a LARP? Didn’t see any military insignia but I need to watch it again. I thought he was in a White Nationalist militia which are common in that area.
@@RangerMcFriendly that’s definitely how he acted, considering he shot a couple of Asians presumably for not being American. But, the old guy and I think Joel talk about how it looks like they’re in federal uniforms. It happens in the same conversation where he warns them that they don’t want people to see what they are doing, implying that they’re committing war crimes. I could be wrong myself, but I want to watch it again and really hone in on those little details.
This movie was brilliant. Absolutely loved it. Some of the best military action sequences ive ever watched in a movie. The balance of action, drama, tension, cinematography was top notch. I do agree some of the song choices were a lil off but i think that was one of my few complaints. And yes i would re-watch this just like i can re-watch Sicario.
Tbh i think you need to watch the film again to understand it better because i dont think you got the film the firsy time. I loved this film i just saw it yesterday and i can not stop tbinking about the themes the idea the story and the performances jsut everything including cinematography was incredible and imma go see the film again soon. So cody give it a rewatch since you didnt get it the first time
Yeah but the execution of civilians and surrendering WH personnel is unrealistic. They are still war crimes and should have been omitted. Pretty sure the First Lady and her kids were executed during the WH escape scene.
I saw this last week and really enjoyed it. Between a 7.5 or an 8.5 out of 10. I really appreciated how the focus seemed to be on how war robs people of their humanity to the point that, regardless of how righteous your side might be in a given conflict, you’ll inevitably begin to disregard the humanity of your opponents. For a lot of the film we’re not sure which side any given combatants are on. This makes it all the more difficult to justify their actions beyond “well, that’s just war.” However, I would certainly not call it apolitical. Yes, it purposely tries to avoid the exact divisions that we see in the U.S. today, but it’s still a clearly anti-war film. It’s pointing to armed conflicts and saying that regardless of your ideology, this is the sort of gruesome horror that such conflict produces. I mean, for violent conflict to happen means at least one side has decided not to engage further in diplomacy. That’s a political decision. Lastly (SPOILERS) I liked how Dunst’s detachment rests on her assuming she’s separate from the conflict. The movie very much is concerned with complicity of “observers”. Indeed, her character significantly changes after she’s pulled directly into the conflict. And angry people firing guns don’t often care about your press badge or civilian status. Anyway, didn’t mean to get off on a soapbox, thanks for reviewing this! Cheers!
I agree fully on the music choices watching a group of US soldiers getting executed as the scene looks like it’s an intense emotional scene whilst 90s hippty hop is playing in the background really killed with what they were going for
My friend told me after we got out of the movie the background information that he'd read about the plot, that is only just barely mentioned or hinted at in the movie... basically Nick Offerman's president refused to leave office after his second term and then started having his political rivals killed, things like that...and while I agree that I'm glad the movie didn't get really political, I think the movie would have benefited from having some of that stuff fleshed out more, even if it would have tilted the viewer's opinion on who is "right" in the movie. There's still plenty of ambiguity to play with there.
The strange music is my only criticism. NO MUSIC would have been more realistic. Have you ever seen The Wire? The lack of music in that show is incredibly effective.
Was trying to figure out who to vote for and this film helped me! I'm gonna seek out the people critical of the film not taking a stance and vote the opposite of them! 😂
Yes. Too real in fact. Had nightmares that night....and I'm not usually like that with movies. Just sat there at the end in silence with everyone else ....
I disagree with you about me “wanting” the film to choose a side. Both sides are the same coin. I just wanted a true representation of what a civil war would look like. The whole story. Not a photo journalism recap of the end. If you’re gonna be bold then be BOLD.
Plenty of war journalists on this planet have put their lives on the line I order to get the story out. For me, it is very believable even though I would personally not chose to do that.
I reviewed Civil War too Cody, at my channel. Was curious of your thoughts. I think you made some great points, but Garland clearly skimped on political details for obvious box office. Not to piss off two opposing sides for boycotts and box office revenue. I discuss the sound design and how they do it too. You should of given a SPOILER warning re the President being killed!! The point of the ending, re what happens to Kirsten Dunst's character in the final moments is to show the brutality of desensitised media, so once one "droos" another ignores it and keeos going, re the young photographer ignoring and not helping but pick8ng up the camera to get the shot!! Showing her character arch of her morphing into what her inspiration had becomes, emotionless and single minded.
Yeah agree with you on most points, worth watching but was disappointed overall. The scene with the bodies reminded me of FarCry3 or Homefront... the journos being so close to the action also didn't make sense. And just alot of the combat scenes seemed too small in scale ... like the final battle was just 1 squad of soldiers vs the White House. Where was the rest of their army? Ok the scene with the army camp and the Ospreys was pretty cool but I wanted to see American cities pounded into rubble, civilians dying en masse like Stalingrad ... it just seemed too small in scale for me like a TV series rather than a 50M movie ... and can clearly see the Zombie apocalypse similarity with the refugee camp and the crashed helicopter outside a mall that looked just like Dead Rising ... anyway thanks for your review buddy, appreciate it!
Jesse Plemons’s role scared the crap out of me again. Like, you know you have a brilliant actor when his brief Cameo role is just as scary as a Breaking Bad villain.
Nah his role was way more tense then Gus or Hector or any of them dudes
And breaking bad is the best show ever made imo
But Jesse Plemons killed his short role in this movie
@@Man_in_a_Gucci_Suithe’s talking about Todd, his character in breaking bad who got 2 seasons worth of backstory
Jesse Plemons, even though he’s only in the movie for about 8-9 minutes, was effectively scary. Amazing tense af sequence.
“Wait? Wait what?” What a performance!
That scene was incredibly tense. The wrong word could be your last word.
Best sequence for sure...great tension
I live near Philly so when they said that Philly was dangerous that they couldn’t travel through it. It felt surreal. Seeing American suburbs and malls being war torn felt wild to me. Especially since I live near the areas that the movie was filmed in.
Probably under seige from the central "Pennsyltucky" region of PA.
I live near Philly as well. I don't ever go there without being armed.
You poor guy
You live in crap bro
I’m IN Philly. Lol
Cailee Spaeny's character almost ruined the movie for me. My absolute most hated movie stereotype (young, reckless person who wants to tag along puts everyone in danger).
Yeah I didn’t get specific but that’s what I was hinting at in my negatives towards the 3rd act
Soo telegraphed.
@@CodyLeachYT The scent with the cars as well
I think she should have died in the movie
Serious case of plot armor.
I don't think anyone has portrayed the violence, speed, and weight of a gunfight better than Taylor Sheridan. the shootouts in wind river, hell or high water, and sicario are so visceral.
Not enough people even talk about Wind River
Wind River was great but the same where he shoots the guys with the rifle aren't realistic. Bodies aren't picked up and thrown by big powerful rifles. It's not physically possible. Knock down power is a myth. Big rounds simply blow off large parts of bodies but the entire body is not picked up and thrown anywhere
@@swann433have to correct you on this one, in most circumstances you’re right, except he was using a 45-70. He reloads meaning likely a 400-500 grain cast lead bullet, and was hitting body armor. I think it was overdone yes, but it would certainly throw someone like a rag doll if they were hit on a hard surface with that big of a bullet.
@@MV3productions83 one of my all time favorite movies. Fantastic performances all around.
That finale in Wind River really hits me every darn time. And the final confrontation in Hell or high Water was more impacting than a lot of horror movies I've seen.
I've heard Jesse plemmons plays a really good sadistic character. He's Todd from breaking bad for those that don't know. But this film being seen through the eyes of reporters/ journalists, is a great way to tell this type of story.
Anyone that watches this channel knows who Jesse Plemons is,Breaking Bad is one of Cody's favorites,are you new to Cody's channel?
Jesse Plemmons always plays that "... there's something off with this guy..." role and plays it very well
His scene was easily the highlight of the movie
@@RobertParks-h7rnah, been here since child's play reviews and ranking. Just letting people who don't know, know. That's all.
Jesse Plemmons is known for Friday Night Lights
War journalists do some pretty wild shit, which is apparent if you look at any kind of war documentary footage. So I feel like that criticism isn’t really warranted.
True he didn't know what he was talking about. That is how they do it. Many war journalist have been killed. It's dangerous.
this new girls been a war journalist for like 6 minutes and she was basically shook to her core seeing what that guy did when she wandered off at the beginning. Skip to the next day shes doing fast and furious stunts and jumping straight into the line of fire. Its not only less than believable, It makes for an unlikable character who endangered the veteran journalists throughout the entire movie.
@@thereviewartistrrp5493yep. Just because you have “PRESS” on your helmet and on your shirt doesn’t mean you aren’t a target.
@@RangerMcFriendly lol
Are war journalists adrenaline junkies? Maybe they are the same "type" as extreme athletes; risking their life for the rush.
A24 keeps bringing back old stars from the 90s and early 2000s I’d like to see van damme get an action movie by them
"From the director of Annihilation" is all the information I need to make me interested in this movie
*spoiler alert*
Some frustrating bits for me were when the western forces get into the White House, and just start blasting innocent people literally just standing there with hands up. Like, how tf am I supposed to get behind you when that’s the shit you’re doing ?
Then there’s finding the president hiding in the Oval Office? Really? There isn’t a bunker? You just have him in this most obvious place? Smh 🤦
There’s a scene where they talk about some of the actions the president has made that caused this , but even then, I’d still like to have some sort of answer as to why…
Did you not listen to the review? You’re not supposed to “get behind” anybody. The point of the film is to be as apolitical as possible. You as the viewer are along for the ride with the journalist, you are effectively supposed to be unbiased. Witnessing the WF act as you saw you with no context would put you in the shoes of a journalist. You’re welcome to form your own opinion with what little information you have or you can “save those questions for the people who look at your pictures” as Lee states
We know that congress had surrendered in the last days and that only the presidents secret service remained loyal to him. The war was very likely over at that point but the film touches on the fact that once they kill the president the factions will turn on each other. Given that congress had essentially been disbanded, there was no U.S. Government and those bunkers could have been inaccessible to him, he could have been some crazy lunatic who wanted to stay in the oval office as a last ditch stand against the opposition.
I can understand wanting more answers. I think the film should’ve been another hour longer. But the fun part is it forces you to think more and interpret what it’s showing you. You kind of just have to to accept that this is the current situation, it doesn’t necessarily matter how we got here.. just that we got here.
@@WalkrFilms clearly you don’t understand what I am saying
I think they were going for there's no good guys in war angle (which has been done a thousand times now in almost every modern war movie)
Your point about the president being in the most obvious place tho is so true tho. I was just rolling my eyes at that point.
"Appreciate more than enjoy" , exactly my thoughts, definitely makes a statement, a window into an alternate reality that really jars you. The sound design is amazing, the way you described it was spot on, you feel vulnerable instead of powerful
In an interview garland said he chose Cali/Texas to emphasize the executive branch of the government must have done something so bad it would drive those specific states to secede and join forces.
More than showing us what could happen…this is even more of an anti-war film period. Up there with platoon and born on 4th of July and full metal jacket for how overtly its message is showing how pointless war is.
I think cody hit the nail on the head with “appreciate rather than enjoy”.
That’s a lie. Sorry, the movie did pick a side. This is coming from someone who’s independent. There’s dialog that proves it in the movie, you just missed. Here’s the evidence: The scene of them in the car talking about being pro FBI. Or when they mention the North pacific Maoist resistance group. Also, can’t forget about the great Anti-FA massacre. So, if you’d pay attention and truly are aware of the real dangers the country is currently braiding, you could see how this movie corporate, neo fascist liberals wet dream.
@@peterdeliteris7705have you thought about the journalism not giving a fuck who on the left or right or far left / far right die?
They just want great shots? That’s the vibe this movie gives me
They brought up relevant topics but didn’t side with left or right
@@Man_in_a_Gucci_Suit Oh, it did pick sides. Here’s the proof: Every main character was Pro FBI, that’s in dialog when they were driving in the car. Second: There was mention of the Pacific Northwest Maoist resistance. Oh, we can’t forget the AntiFa Massacre. This movie took a side. They were hoping you just didn’t notice. And, journalism died years ago. There’s only a few honest ones left. And, they’re being censored.
@@peterdeliteris7705 what was the context of the Pacific Northwest Maoism thing? I stepped out of the theater for 3-4 minutes so I think I missed that
@@Man_in_a_Gucci_Suit As they were driving, the journalist that got killed, the older guy, they were just talking about the war. He mentions in the Pacific Northwest, Oregon, were the Pacific Northwest Maoist resistance. Rewatch that movie, trust me, I’m not conservative and hoped this movie would be non partisan. However, this movie covertly took a side and sent a very dangerous message.
This is not a war movie. It's a character drama/road movie set in a war. You also have a dynamic where the mentor wants to protect the protege, but in the end the torch is passed to the next generation to perhaps repeat the same mistakes all over again. One of the central themes, which was borne out in the last scene was no matter who you are, dead is dead and the world moves on.
Very well said.
Precisely
Yes!
Texas and Cali being united should put this movie in the sci-fi/fantasy category
Evidently you are totally missing the point.
It honestly isn't that insane. In the Spanish Civil War, the sides were pretty much a coalition of Catholics, Fascists, and Monarchists against Anarchists, Communists, liberal democrats. But in Navarra, the Basque, despite being very Catholic and very much opposed to leftist politics, largely fought on the side of the Republicans against the Nationalists as they figured they'd get more representation, potentially even self-governing autonomy, if the Republicans won. But by all metrics, you'd think they'd be with the Nationalists.
It's a metaphor for the movies A-political position. In case you missed the totally obvious point.
They aren't really united. They are the "Western Forces" and lots of reviewers are calling them the Western Federation or Western Alliance. Sammy, the older journo from the NYT even predicts that they will fight each other after DC falls because they are only fighting together out of necessity. You get the feeling they are more like co-combatants.
Once you see the film, that not the case at all
But photo journalism/journalist actually exist. Are we so far from wars of our country that we don't even believe these were actual jobs and people actually did do this for a living?
I had no idea people didn't believe they exist.
Yes
Apparently! They are vital for bringing the horrors of Vietnam home for Americans to be disgusted by. The war crimes revealed by them are vital for ending that stupid war. Unreal that people are so ignorant.
Who's claiming they don't exist?
@kodywalker5842 it's how all these movie reviewers are acting. Like it's never been done before
I’m pretty simple. I see a new video from Cody, I click.
Me too lol every time
But it’s not about an American civil war - it’s just a backdrop - it’s really a road movie
whats a road movie
@@platinumpineapple9943 people go on a journey together, and some change some don’t like stand by me
Yea way different then what I expected
That being said it was still great
Offerman was on his fourth term, he started using miltary domesticly, alot was givin when they were talking about what questions they were going to ask.
And he started dismantling law enforcement and FBI
Man there was significantly less carnage for a tyrant using the military domestically
Yup all these bits gave me the strong impression that it WAS leaning towards a side without a in-your-face approach. But again it was subtly picking a side which was going against a hypothetical trump 2nd term era.
Dunst’s performance combined with the cinematography at times gave me Melancholia feels
I didn't necessarily want it to be political or need it to have a bold stance, but I feel it swung too far in the opposite direction. It gets close to saying something meaningful every so often, but shies away from ever doing so. I'm not saying that Garland should've thrown his ideology (whatever it may be) in our faces. I just feel like this film melts in my hand the longer I hold it, leaving very little to actually chew on.
I also feel that the lack of worldbuilding and characterization makes it harder to engage with than a film like this should be.
I LOVED this movie, but I think your point is entirely valid.
Spot on. I felt it was too afraid to say anything, so it said nothing. It didn't give me much too care about.
'If you try to make a message that speaks to everyone, more often than not, you speak to no one.'
This movie had a vague anti-war message about fellow americans fighting each other, but it doesn't show us how we could even get to that point so that we could work together now to stop it. There's nothing really to take away from this movie other than "war is bad" and it's like "yeah, I already got that. Didn't really need to tell me."
As a photographer, I loved the photojournalist aspect. That’s probably the safest way of portraying the film without picking a side, while simultaneously being able to depict the horrors of war up close. I’m also fine without the context for the war, it might’ve just stirred up more people
Playing it safe was a pussy move, no one gets far when "playing it safe".
@@EMB-o9p If you’re upset that the film didn’t choose right or left, or a reason for the war, then you completely missed the point of the film.
He could have easily not picked sides and told an actual story. Trash writing.
13:15 maybe that's why they chose those two states, to stay apolitical and show that it's just an alternate timeline possibility. I haven't seen the movie yet but just a thought
07:28 Wise words Cody. We had a civil war in Spain almost a century ago and the effects still show. Fuck war and fuck civil war more. Big hug mate :)
Which is why I cringe at the uppity cultists thinking they need a civil war to serve the interests of the 2020 election loser. Shudder. Did these people forget what it's like now in Haiti, or what it's been like in Syria, or what it used to be like in Bosnia during that nasty little 3-way civil war? Casual butchery appears in that kind of environment. Remember Ratko Mladic, AKA the butcher of Bosnia?
@@jotade2098 Exactly! (thank you) There are demons you don't want to let loose. Just look at Haiti. I shudder to think of how the inevitable local/regional warlords would rule :( You want a carload of canned foods? They want your teenage daughter in trade :(
Agreed, the foreign intervention didn't help either.
Based off the thumbnail alone i agree. We were thrown into the climax of something we should have gotten to see more of, maybe two battles/ events, and more context that lead to a longer war in Washington.
They mentioned the president at one point had a third term, so I think Nick Offerman had been President for a long time, and it kinda sounded like that was one of the jump off points for division
I’m seeing it tonight and I was someone who wanted to go into journalism before my calling to ministry. lol so odd. But I mmm very interested in the apolitical journalism approach here because that’s classic, true journalism that is missing today.
As far as your criticism goes, I think that was the point of the movie. At first, as a war journalist, you just go where the story is. They thought that was the president. As she got closer, Lee started to see people not as a good picture, but real people. At the end she changed her view of what was important.That was the journey. I agree that it would have been better with more dialog scenes to express this better.
I’m not sure if I like how the story arc was completed, but I think how it ended, at least to me, was for her partner (the one who wanted to interview the president). That scene in context to the last scene with the guy makes his scene work even better. You can literally see his face go from desperation into excitement and then completely deflate.
@@yourewelcome2889Joel was such a great character. They all need therapy now. I would.
As someone who almost joined the Militarily just for war photography, I totally would've tried to get shots up close and personal. Plenty of photographers put themselves at risk just for that money shot.
I totally agree. But I just didn’t like certain instances where there wasn’t even a battle going on, but they make an unnecessarily stupid choice like with those two militia soldiers, the car scene, and the last shot where Jessie just shrugs off Kirsten’s death. I get they predicted that in dialogue and it was obvious how it was going to end, but it’s not how humans behave unless you’re a sociopath.
Speaking of gunfire in film. I think Heat is one of the best films in portraying how loud and alarming gunfire is. Very intense and it feels like you're right there.
That is true.
2:49 looked like you were about to walk away to grab something lol
13:20 I get the feeling taking polar opposite states and joining them together is a sign of just how nutty things have gotten
the run time is literally only an hour and 40 minutes. Based on the scope of the trailer it looks like it should be way longer
12:00 lol logic side of your brain? This type of photo journalism absolutely happens and is often present in other countries. 20 Days in Mariupol is an example of this.
No kidding!
I didn't want more politics but I did want more out of why the war is happening and wanted to see more into it. If they made a full length movie out of Jesse Plemons scene I would of enjoyed it more.
Making an “apolitical” war movie about a second American civil war is _extremely_ cowardly and creatively bankrupt.
But it's not apolitical Offerman is trump and the ending is obviously a leftists wet dream id post what actually happened but i don't wanna spoil for those who haven't seen it@@Markunator
Spot on. It said nothing. They could of made somethings creative, but didn't even try.
Shootout at the end of Heat has similar sound design definitely worth a watch if you haven’t Cody
Hopefully the horrific scenes of this film will discourage those who are calling for civil war.
Unfortunately it won’t. On Twitter the nutters are refusing to see it for various reasons. Their “heroes” pan the film (check Breitbart’s review) so they don’t care. Idiots. And I’m a moderate conservative… God help us from these savages.
There is a movie called "Shadow on the land"" 1968. Very good.
I LOVE Alex Garland but man when I watched these trailers nothing about them made me want to see this movie.. Oh well, I always have Annihilation and Ex Machina!
If you think Kirsten Dunst was good in civil war, check out Fargo Season 2, Holy sh!t she is out there in Fargo.
5:11 I see a bit of Holly Hunter circa "Broadcast News" in Jessie (Cailee Spaeny) the young photojournalist.
Also 1987's "Broadcast News" was a movie about where the line should be drawn in journalism to maintain integrity and that's also a recurring theme in "Civil War".
Can't see the people of any state agreeing on anything like succession. Even if a state assembly and governor were nuts enough to approve it and the majority of its residents voted to in a referendum, there would still be a huge minority who'd be like, "nah u have fun tho."
But yet it happened in our history. Crazy, huh?
He directed EX MACHINA? Oh, I have to check this out now!
Joe Rogan has entered the chat.
Tired of ppl saying this is not political. It absolutely is. It's underhanded bc they changed the movie over time to remove them but the intentions are still obvious
Name two or three examples of their political intentions
As a war movie I don't think this will appeal to everyone, but as a piece of art in a surreal scenario that could potentially happen I think many will find it fascinating. I personally wanted maybe just one scene of the armies really digging into each other, but I respect that the point of the movie was not to actually know all the angles of the conflict.
That ending showed the Secret Service getting owned in a brutal firefight. You could tell the Western Forces were mowing through DC to end this thing.
Scary part is dialog throughout the film suggests once they accomplished their mission, they were going to war with the Florida Alliance. So the war continues… and that is what would happen in this scenario.
@@RangerMcFriendly as a floridian, dang
It’s not a war movie..
@cubswincubswinao sorta my point big dawg, but for a movie called civil war I personally would've liked just one zoom out shot of all the factions.
Great topic for this movie, btw Cody, if you dont believe in the people who jump in front of bullets to take a pic, you should read online about Juantxu Rodríguez, spanish photographer killed in Panama during the days after Just Cause en 1989
So far Civil War and Abigail are my favorites of 2024. I've always enjoyed war time jornalist movies since Oliver Stone's Salavor (1986) But that was based on true events.
So I watched it yesterday in IMAX. It’s only the second movie I’ve seen this year I saw as a Day 1 behind Godzilla x Kong. I wouldn’t say I hated it like DisGrace Randolph did. But… this movie from a story standpoint and objective does have major problems.
*SPOILERS*
So the entire point of this movie is to kill the POTUS? And the Western Forces of California and Texas is never truly defined. Why did they break away from the other states to begin with? Texas is a red state, btw. California has stayed liberal since Clinton in 1992.
First 30 minutes of it is slow and doesn’t really give us any reason to care about the characters or their motives. Pacing only starts to pick up when we finally see Plemons’ character. Now Kirsten’s real life husband is only in the movie for like 5 minutes but he actually steals the show. My eyes were glued to the screen when he appeared and that scene with him was intense. “What kind of an American?”
I don’t get how journalists/war photographers/press can go side by side while soldiers are killing innocent civilians and everybody in the White House. So when Nick Offerman’s POTUS gets capped at the end, I didn’t feel any emotion for it. Same with Kirsten’s character.
I laughed at the ending similarly to after I saw the ending to Upgrade (2018). That’s it? A group shot of the WF smiling and standing over the dead POTUS? How can 2 states defeat a country with 48? So California and Texas have enough military strength to destroy DC? Unarmed civilians getting slaughtered left and right.
None of the motives makes any sense and similar to most MonsterVerse movies, there’s really no connection to any of the human characters. Didn’t care for the music choices either. I thought this movie would surprise me like The Negotiator (1998), Olympus Has Fallen (2013), and Ambulance (2022) did. I didn’t expect any of those three to be any good but they were better than what I expected. I was getting Olympus Has Fallen vibes from Civil War. But nah. Turned out confusing and very mid. No urge to rewatch it.
7/10
Sean Chandler does help improve the synopsis by explaining a lot of the symbolism in his review. I still wouldn’t want to rewatch it. It looks and feels like a Netflix movie.
California is blue because of Regan. Regan allowed mass amnesty and that's what changed California, Colorado, and others soon thereafter.
Thank you for the informative and intelligent synopsis. As a writer I have realized that it's easy to create a world, but there's nothing intrinsically interesting about a world. Without compelling and dynamic characters it's just a documentary. I get the impression from your review that Civil War is on the 'documentary' side of entertainment spectrum. I recognize the writing strategy. They began with the end in mind - a strategy toxic to character growth.
I've realized that the writer chose California and Texas because that achieves neutrality of political implication. That's what everyone seems confused about.
Anyhow, Previews brought in $2.8 million and based on comparable earners this movie will probably generate about $140 million which - after advertising - means this movie will probably earn profit and I hope that it does. It shows a luke-warm reception among Killers of the Flower Moon ($156M) and The Exorcist: Believer ($137 M).
Yea it seems like the scope of the film shoulda been way bigger based on the concept and trailer
It makes no sense like how could two states even if they were some of the most powerful ones defeat 48 states with literally the strongest military in the world. If California and Texas were getting out of hand they would just nuke them even if it would risk some fallout
I hear you about the strength of the different sides, but there are more factions and I believe California and Texas joined the Western Forces and/or the Florida alliance (or what it was called).
Would have been interesting to see where Jesse Plemons monster came from.
Ambulance was amazing. It was like edge of my seat eccentric the entire time man what an adrenaline tush
I loved it. The younger kid didn't bother me. She sold it. Also Ron Swanson is clearly Trump. The disbanding the F.B.I. thing cinched it. Also, I would happily watchbthus again. Damn good film. I loved the musical choices, felt like the better 'Nam flicks. 9/10. My favorite movie so far this year.
This movie got me playing the Washington D.C mission again on Mw2 and I haven’t touched mw2 in a while since I been catching up on my other games, just to show how inspiring this movie is
I find it ironic that you think it's totally apolitical. It tries to be slick, but the Easter eggs give it away. It's not overt, but it's there.
Also it's Alex Garland lol.
Yep, you just need to pay attention to the dialogue and background, and it gives a good portion of what's happening. My problem with it is it is the world building is too buried in the background. It's a movie that takes several watches.
Does it really matter?
@@johnnymidnight2982yep. On my second watch I caught that once the WF terminated the President they were going against the Florida Alliance. So the war continues…
Great discussion.
I thought it was brilliant. It reminds me of a realistic Christopher Nolan movie with hints of an Apocalypse Now style mission. The music took me to the post Vietnam Era.
Many wanted to know the cause of the war but the context of the war is not important. Most 21st century Americans (except the naive) know how this could happen.
Overall, this movie was an essay warning us (Americans) to not let our politicians lead us in this direction because…, in a war everyone loses.
I’ve just finished watching this. What an absolute masterpiece. Shocking, brutal and intense.
Thank you for your review. This has been the most accurate and honest review of Civil War I've seen, and I am happy to hear someone not complain about the movie not being a message for a political side. I will look for your reviews in the future.
I’m continually baffled when people (like the reviewer) say that the movie doesn’t take a side or is politically ambiguous. I guess maybe if you’re not paying attention? Without spoiling anything, the final scene with the President speaks volumes. Not to mention numerous other situations peppered throughout the film. It’s clear.
Just saw this movie last night, really liked it. Like the comparison of Lee to Jesse at the end.
You need to check out 2006 "Children of men". Since we are close to a bleak future😅
Top tier cinema
And a MUCH better film.
Great
Children of men .Great film.
He already mentioned he saw it and didn’t care for it
As a combat veteran from afghanistan, I understand why you would be frustrated as to why it gave you a lack of information. But understand the movie wasn't about that. The why the war started is not what's important. What's important is showcasing the reality and the brutality of War itself because as I was taught by my ncos is that your political beliefs fly right out the window when bullets are flying at you there's no such thing as right and wrong within War because both sides are doing what they think is right and that's the point of this film and I appreciate that
I wanted Ron Swanson to be President, but not like this.
I feel like the only person who didn’t care that Texas and California teamed up in the film. We seem to forget how quickly people can put their differences aside against tyranny. I was fine with it. I had much bigger issues with the movie than that.
Honestly dunst been giving all star performances since interview with a vampire. She was the best part of this film.
That iffy edit at 2:50 😂
My cell phone started ringing and I didn’t have the time to reshoot. Is what it is.
A happy lil accident
I’ve got a question for u Cody, I’m a kid of the 80’s and grew up with iconic horror icons, why don’t they seem to make descent or original horror movies anymore? Is it cause they don’t use much practical effects any more? Run out of ideas? Nostalgia not sure
Have you seen war documentaries such as Restrepo or A Hornets Nest?
Thanks Cody. I usually always wait for your review on a film that I’m on the fence about seeing. This is one I’ll go and see.
12:10 I get the same thing like why would you do this but like realistically hell yes people would do that and are presently doing it.
I read that the reason the gunshots sound so real is well because they are! They apparently used real gunshot sounds whereas normally movies sorta dilute the sound as it make it less scary :)
It says in the movie that the president had given himself a third term due to the civil war - so it did answer that question in the movie
They also say outright who some of the soldiers are, like Jesse’s character is a federal soldier, and obviously the guys at the end are WF. The first soldiers they come across with the Hawaiian shirts under their armor have to be Florida Alliance lol and the sniper duo are specifically meant to be kept ambiguous but my money is on WF exclusively because they make sure to showcase the sniper having crazy hair and painted nails. They also talk about some of the things the president did before that point like disbanding the FBI and ordering air strikes on US civilians. I agree that it doesn’t give much information as far as world building goes, but there are breadcrumbs if you pay enough attention.
@@yourewelcome2889wasn’t Jesse’s outfit a LARP? Didn’t see any military insignia but I need to watch it again. I thought he was in a White Nationalist militia which are common in that area.
@@RangerMcFriendly that’s definitely how he acted, considering he shot a couple of Asians presumably for not being American. But, the old guy and I think Joel talk about how it looks like they’re in federal uniforms. It happens in the same conversation where he warns them that they don’t want people to see what they are doing, implying that they’re committing war crimes. I could be wrong myself, but I want to watch it again and really hone in on those little details.
Black Sun: Nanking Massacre. Take photos.
This movie was brilliant. Absolutely loved it. Some of the best military action sequences ive ever watched in a movie. The balance of action, drama, tension, cinematography was top notch. I do agree some of the song choices were a lil off but i think that was one of my few complaints. And yes i would re-watch this just like i can re-watch Sicario.
Civil War (2024) was fucking awesome. Also, my favorite Alex Garland Movie is Dredd (2012).
I did not know he made dredd! Great movie
@@natethegreatreviews He wrote the screenplay for Dredd.
Like the True Romance T. That and the corrupt cop in Leon are my favorite Gary Oldman, hes a sick ass bad guy
Cody have you, or anyone in the comments, seen the trailer for Boy Kills World? It looks so ridiculous and off the wall it might just work.
Tbh i think you need to watch the film again to understand it better because i dont think you got the film the firsy time. I loved this film i just saw it yesterday and i can not stop tbinking about the themes the idea the story and the performances jsut everything including cinematography was incredible and imma go see the film again soon. So cody give it a rewatch since you didnt get it the first time
lol you explained absolutely nothing about what I didn’t understand.
People are still gonna complain if the movie had a political message in it anyways so why the fuck would it matter?
Always love and enjoy hearing your thoughts about movies! Thanks and keep going!! 👍👍
I get 28 weeks vibes from your review just full on no holds barred violence people gettin blow torched etc haha
The last stand at the white house was pretty based
Yeah but the execution of civilians and surrendering WH personnel is unrealistic. They are still war crimes and should have been omitted. Pretty sure the First Lady and her kids were executed during the WH escape scene.
I saw this last week and really enjoyed it. Between a 7.5 or an 8.5 out of 10.
I really appreciated how the focus seemed to be on how war robs people of their humanity to the point that, regardless of how righteous your side might be in a given conflict, you’ll inevitably begin to disregard the humanity of your opponents. For a lot of the film we’re not sure which side any given combatants are on. This makes it all the more difficult to justify their actions beyond “well, that’s just war.”
However, I would certainly not call it apolitical. Yes, it purposely tries to avoid the exact divisions that we see in the U.S. today, but it’s still a clearly anti-war film. It’s pointing to armed conflicts and saying that regardless of your ideology, this is the sort of gruesome horror that such conflict produces. I mean, for violent conflict to happen means at least one side has decided not to engage further in diplomacy. That’s a political decision.
Lastly (SPOILERS) I liked how Dunst’s detachment rests on her assuming she’s separate from the conflict. The movie very much is concerned with complicity of “observers”. Indeed, her character significantly changes after she’s pulled directly into the conflict. And angry people firing guns don’t often care about your press badge or civilian status.
Anyway, didn’t mean to get off on a soapbox, thanks for reviewing this! Cheers!
People have done that type of crazy photography in every war. And yeah it couldn't be me
This is now one of my favorite movies ever. Incredible. Exceeded my expectations.
This and “Late night with the devil” are such a strong start to 2024 for movies
Such a great film. The audience we sat in totally got thrown off thinking it would be different
I agree fully on the music choices watching a group of US soldiers getting executed as the scene looks like it’s an intense emotional scene whilst 90s hippty hop is playing in the background really killed with what they were going for
My friend told me after we got out of the movie the background information that he'd read about the plot, that is only just barely mentioned or hinted at in the movie... basically Nick Offerman's president refused to leave office after his second term and then started having his political rivals killed, things like that...and while I agree that I'm glad the movie didn't get really political, I think the movie would have benefited from having some of that stuff fleshed out more, even if it would have tilted the viewer's opinion on who is "right" in the movie. There's still plenty of ambiguity to play with there.
This is best movie of the year
You haven't seen too many films this year then. 😂
13:30 I think the journalists mentioned that the president took a 3rd term during the war
Cody if you see this n have time you should review “Night Shift” (2024) wanna hear your take on it‼️🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
4:25 she was in jumanji
Yeah.... that is what he said.
Just saw it. I don’t know if I liked it or could recommend it. Haven’t we seen this in real life anyway?
I'm very interested in this movie and I have no idea what it is about. Thank you for the review.
It's good but disturbing and will stay with you for a few days...
The strange music is my only criticism. NO MUSIC would have been more realistic. Have you ever seen The Wire? The lack of music in that show is incredibly effective.
Was trying to figure out who to vote for and this film helped me! I'm gonna seek out the people critical of the film not taking a stance and vote the opposite of them! 😂
lol. Both extremes of the political spectrum hate the movie. Wonder why… they are the mirror reflection of themselves!
I really loved this movie
Hey great review, been looking forward to this film. Can't wait to see it.
I’m kind of looking forward to watching it. I’m just wondering what this take is and what other people think of it
It's great but disturbing as hell
@@swann433 is there a sense of realism in it?
Yes. Too real in fact. Had nightmares that night....and I'm not usually like that with movies. Just sat there at the end in silence with everyone else ....
I agree in that the complete lack of any sort of context given to the viewer about what is going on sort of takes away from the experience
I disagree with you about me “wanting” the film to choose a side. Both sides are the same coin. I just wanted a true representation of what a civil war would look like. The whole story. Not a photo journalism recap of the end. If you’re gonna be bold then be BOLD.
The movie was all about journalism......................
Plenty of war journalists on this planet have put their lives on the line I order to get the story out. For me, it is very believable even though I would personally not chose to do that.
Hey Cody! Would love to see a reaction/hopes/expectations vid for Maxxxine as the trailer dropped a few days ago
I reviewed Civil War too Cody, at my channel.
Was curious of your thoughts. I think you made some great points, but Garland clearly skimped on political details for obvious box office. Not to piss off two opposing sides for boycotts and box office revenue.
I discuss the sound design and how they do it too.
You should of given a SPOILER warning re the President being killed!!
The point of the ending, re what happens to Kirsten Dunst's character in the final moments is to show the brutality of desensitised media, so once one "droos" another ignores it and keeos going, re the young photographer ignoring and not helping but pick8ng up the camera to get the shot!!
Showing her character arch of her morphing into what her inspiration had becomes, emotionless and single minded.
Yeah agree with you on most points, worth watching but was disappointed overall. The scene with the bodies reminded me of FarCry3 or Homefront... the journos being so close to the action also didn't make sense. And just alot of the combat scenes seemed too small in scale ... like the final battle was just 1 squad of soldiers vs the White House. Where was the rest of their army? Ok the scene with the army camp and the Ospreys was pretty cool but I wanted to see American cities pounded into rubble, civilians dying en masse like Stalingrad ... it just seemed too small in scale for me like a TV series rather than a 50M movie ... and can clearly see the Zombie apocalypse similarity with the refugee camp and the crashed helicopter outside a mall that looked just like Dead Rising ... anyway thanks for your review buddy, appreciate it!