Play Conflict of Nations for FREE on PC, iOS or Android: con.onelink.me/kZW6/THTA001 Receive a Unique Starter Pack, available only for the next 30 days!
The movie is purposefully trying to put you in a spot where you have no idea what’s going on. Like many Americans viewing wars outside of their country, the movie feels like they’re taking civil wars in a foreign country and putting in an American style to it.
As it is we know what’s going on in the USA these days, the illegal migration, the transgender madness, BLM , funded wars in Ukraine and Palestine and the sympathizers which don’t see that they American first.
there's a lot of intentional ambiguity in it. I started watching wondering which side I was on and gave up after a while because I didn't have enough context. Because it's so vague the movie really doesn't pick sides. More provocative than I expected.
Well since Hollywood swings left idk it’s 2 hard 2 see what is being implied. In a real civil war I wonder what side would win a bunch of 2nd amendment loving gas guzzling “hicks” or a bunch of green haired confused about what bathroom 2 use snow flakes. Yeah that be a real tough fight
I think it's worth noting the scene in which Lee deletes the photo she took of Sammy dead in the car. I interpreted Jessie and Lee as characters swapping places. As Lee's walls come down, Jessie's go up.
That, or hypocrisy. She would gladly take pictures of other dead people but not her co-workers. Throughout the movie she loses her tolerance to the violence, but if she were being honest with herself, that should have been where she quits. Instead, she makes the exception for her friend and keeps going.
For me, the ambiguity worked just fine. I read it as, no matter our politics, if we can’t connect with eachother on a human level, we risk something like this actually happening…
@@Chicano_pistolero No, stop lying. One side is trying to overthrow Democracy for a wannabe dictator, foreign tyrants, fascist billionaires, and Oligarchs.
@@liferealgood yep,and social media, th big tech giants, every establishment politician and bureaucrat are all against one side, you may trust daddy government but historically they tend to screw over my people so it's impossible for me to
Excellent work. People are hair-splitting and nit-picking this film to discredit it, but the core message remains undeniable: _Is this what you want for America?_
Well, I'm not so sure that was the core message. Although vague, the President can be seen as a liberal caricature of Trump. (He wasn't elderly or senile, so he didn't resemble Biden; but he was a little pudgy and his speech was full of exaggeration, which reminds me of someone else...they might as well have made his skin orange.) Yes, the war is shown as horrible...but in the end, the "anti-Trump" forces are victorious, he is killed in the Oval Office, and if the message is too vague for some, he is executed by a black female soldier (rather unlikely as black females make up a very, very small part of the combat soldiers of the armed forces. Choosing her as the executioner could not have been a coincidence but had to be a deliberate message: leftist propaganda is that minorities and women hate Trump.) In the end, despite all the horror that preceded it, the victors are shown not as sad or regretful for the war, but as jubilant, there was upbeat music, and the impression is left not that "you shouldn't do this", it's more like "It will be horrible but it will be worth it as long as we get the bastard." Or maybe the message IS what you say, but the way to avoid this happening to us is, according to the producer and director and a very liberal Hollywood, "don't elect Trump".
Yes, it is called predictive programming so that we get it and decide not to fight against their agenda because it's scarey. What ever happen to valor..."Give Mr freedom or give me death" . This movie is all about discouraging American valor into fear and letting Confederate states (leftist) take over like Texas and California. PREDICTIVE PROGRAMMING.
I just saw this movie and I love the small indications of Kirsten actually being unable to be desensitized and her humanity essentially floods back in and she's almost intrigued at the moments that she sees that Jesse loses parts of her humanity. I also loved how crucial moments of her characters walls breaking down and how we see through her eyes in general are seen through a camera lense, not a photo, but genuinely she has different focul length when we're supposed to see through her eyes. It accentuates these crucial moments for her, without a picture. Her mental camera, which was just as important. Then she sees the flowers in the middle of potentially dying and she let herself drift into that humanity a little bit, ironically also desensitized. The ability to stop and look at the flowers in the middle of hiding for your life is twisted. Honestly this movie was straight up art
If the film had gone into the weeds of the “why” and “how” audiences would be bringing their own beliefs and biases into, thereby missing the point of the film. By keeping it vague, Garland gives us a space to imagine the idea of a war at home.
But most people have never been in a war, much less a civil war so any imagined conflict they would have on US soil would most likely be inaccurate. The movie could have showed us a realistic depiction of a modern American Civil War with all its socioeconomic and geopolitical consequences. But instead the movie takes the easy route by making it vague. Its disappointing and lazy.
@@AsymmetricalCrimesThat’s kind of the point. There are so many war films (or action films with war as a backdrop) that don’t really fill you in on the details and intricacies of the conflicts they use. And when we watch them, we accept whatever narrative, or lack thereof, that they give us. (As an aside, I think that more speaks to people’s suspension of disbelief than an unwillingness to engage with the politics behind the violence: you have to accept some things in a narrative for the story to work, just inherently). Still the film adds in details that make me wonder if it’s trying to be smart. Like, pairing California and Texas together….surface-level, it kinda doesn’t make sense. But realistically speaking, large parts of both states are conservative, with liberal politics being much more common in cities and on thf coasts. They also both have access to essential resources you’d need to wage and maintain a war. So, if you really know about California and Texas, a union between them does make sense. But you can arrive at the same conclusion from saying ‘well, they’re both big, so why not make them combine into one of the major sides’ which is kinda…head-empty? Not bad but just not the best of reasons narratively. What I’m getting at is, this movie makes a lot of narrative decisions that can be made from either a very informed or completely uninformed perspective. I don’t know if I should view its choices as smart if it really isn’t trying to be.
🤔 you mean the terrorists demanding more hostages or they hurt people are real? WORSHIPPING A MAN WHO PAINTS HIMSELF GOLD NOT ORANGE AS INFALLIBLE? 🤔 Very interesting
I think that y’all don’t understand the movie. This isn’t a movie about a war, this is a movie about journalism, questioning the journalism, not the USA civilization
That would be fine if the movie wasn’t called “civil war”. You can take the theme you just mentioned and apply that to any conflict that involves journalism. So then if they were barely going to show the actual civil war, then why make a movie about one in the first place.
@@anomalyxd825it was about the *IMAGINATION* of one and what would likely trigger it or escalate it to all out war in heavily populated cities amongst the populace. The military vs. Civilian terrorist combatants.... Saw when the white "American" woman blew up the protesters???
Nah there are movies about the journalism, this is literally about the civil war. Hence the name. There is a good episode on Black Mirror about journalism you can check that out.
Sammy didn't sacrifice himself, the rest of the journalist killed him. That each of their ego driven purpose for engaging a clearly dangerous situation is what finally breaks dunsts character.
When Lee (Kirsten Dunst) is shot at the end of the movie, it is inconclusive if she died. There was no visible blood and she was wearing a bulletproof vest. Since the combatants were shooting submachine guns, which fire pistol ammo, it is very plausible that bullets only knocked her out.
At that range, with automatic weapons, are you kidding? The vest isn't protecting the major arteries in your legs, or arms, or your neck or head. And there's no guarantee that multiple strikes are going to be kept out.
@@abadazadytgaming7200 There was absolutely no blood in that scene. A head shot would have blown out the front of her face. Her shirt is white and her hair is blonde, and there is not a trace of blood on either. Furthermore, the carpet is RED.
It wasn’t quite what I expected but I enjoyed the film nevertheless. It almost felt like a coming-of-age or road trip buddy movie at times. I agree with this take - Dunst’s character talking about sending images as a warning was the ‘aha’ moment for me.
Jessie, the Young journalist is responsible for the death of Kirsten Dunst’s character. Jessie was so ignorant she thought she was impervious the bullets.
she ruined 1h40 of entertainment in 10sec, not by the stupid young human mistake, but by taking a photo of it while it happened BECAUSE of her, i'm also not feeling okay about that tackle, you want to save someone from a line of fire you don't push them down and stay in the middle of the shot, you use your body weight and momentum to both get out of the way, but i'm nitpicking, i know the director wanted to show this particular shot but it could have been done better. She goes for a tackle they both get on the other side of the corridor, she sees she got shot and take a pic. I would not have been so disapointed
@@fouchi3203 sorry about you not getting that familiar old fashioned hollywoodized warm and fuzzy feeling kind of story ending to mainly satisfy the majority mentally passive movie audience. Hope that sense of quandary was alleviated with ice cream.
Democracy is one's power over another. So when politicians say "our democracy is at stake," they don't mean the American people. They mean "their own power over the people is at stake."
Well, not really. Democracy, as a concept, quite literally means "power to the people". What american politicians call democracy, however, is really just a dictatorship of the rich. We should strive for real democracy, not Democracy™
The only issue I took with this film, and I thought it was overall a great movie, was how unrealistic I thought the way the journalists moved with the soldiers. How on earth are they able to get permission to stay with these front line combat soldiers documenting everything? I get that war photographers risk their lives and do go into active combat zones, but surely there’s no way they’d be that entrenched with the squads in the thick of firefights. Maybe someone with more knowledge can correct me if I’m wrong, but I just find it unbelievable considering they’d be a hindrance more than anything and an open target for the enemy given their lack of combat training.
I was thinking the same... I kept saying OMG get the fuck out of the soldiers way. And it got worse when that little shit kept going on and doing her own shit which then got Lee killed.
It's very possible. All that needs to happen is the same party monopoly in both states. Texas has talked about secession. Parts of California have talked about secession. The secessionist just need to get state power. Then it would be possible.
They have said this in the past about modern westernization never falling into dictatorship. That’s why people would question why so many Jews never left Germany when Hitler took over because it was slow moving and it was kind of inconceivable to them at the time. Which many world history scholars have debated with other people who have said that the US will never fall into a dictatorship. Which ridiculous because in the end the constitution is just a piece of paper we can absolutely fall. If a large mass of the civilians loses its senses.
I enjoyed this film for what it is, a jaw-dropping, heart-pounding, beautiful movie experience. I'm going again with family this time! Alex garland is a genius and thoroughly enjoy all of his films. Also, watching this film in IMAX is absolutely breath-taking!
Civil War lacked passion entirely. If you want a good combat photographer's film, try Harrison's Flowers. Everyone in that film did a great job. Adrian Brody got some of the best lines in cinema in that movie, at least regarding the state of combat journalism.
when i saw the trailer for this film, i was disgusted. i thought it was going to be a sensationalized film capitalizing on the fears of the american public. honestly, given that it was a24 producing it, i should've known it wouldn't be like this. glad to know there's a deeper narrative going on underneath
Thanks for your point of view. I believe some of the negative criticism comes from many who have not served in the military or likely do not have any experience in war planning or fighting because their reviews are all based on modern action movies and dramas that they grew up watching instead of being actually deployed to a poor, ravaged foreign country and being looked at with great vitriol, threatened and/or shot at just because they’re an American. Simply put, people are scared. Living in a society where the powers that be have created a fear based existence and I don’t see this changing for a long, long time. My perspective comes from someone who’s been used around the world to satisfy the goals of the empire and who believes that as a result of our global expeditions and campaigns, we’ll eventually experience those pains in our homeland someday and I’m not happy about that, but I am a realist who knows enough to prepare for difficult times ahead. So I see the movie as a sort of documentary whose goal is to open our eyes to a reality that many Americans still deny. Many people may not think the events depicted in the film could ever happen but think of this, the U.S. is structured like a large version of Europe with states that mimic individual countries held together by the state’s promise to uphold the Constitution in which the mentalities of 21st century political leaders and citizens have clearly concluded, is just an old piece of paper. This format once proved that a massive civil war could and did occur and often history repeats itself, whether people want to believe it or not. Sure it’s just a movie, but it’s a serious one and there is a major message in it for us which is, war is truly hell and it’s not something that we should glorify nor something that we should ever hope occurs in our communities. Critics should stop trying to analyze this film like they’re watching some make believe superhero movie, an Oscar contender’s review or some political circus commentary akin to the events of the 2020 election. I suggest we watch it like we’re analyzing potential future “real world” events because the premise of this movie might be much closer than some of the many naive Americans think. From a military (not militia or political) perspective, often wartime strategic alliances form strategic partnerships which are not necessarily based ideological similarities. States like Texas and California both are very large populations (30-40 million residents), massive police and national guard forces and GNP’s that are comparable or larger than some of the current top ten percent of wealthiest countries on the globe. Texas was once its own republic and has governed that way since. An alliance of these to states and perhaps a third one of similar status and structure would be a major problem for DC politicians. Given today’s times, we need to hope for the best but only those who can’t see or hear won’t prepare for the worst. Most Empires haven’t lasted more the 500 years throughout history so, I think it’s very important for people to accept their possible future or that of their children, grandchildren or great grandchildren because we are definitely heading for a major change down the path of U.S. history. This fate is even foretold in the book of Revelation and in greater, specific detail in the “extra-biblical” text of 2nd Edras. Time and experience has proven the old Mark Twain quote that, “truth is stranger than fiction” I thought it was brilliant. It reminds me of a realistic Christopher Nolan movie with hints of an Apocalypse Now style vibe. 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. A future cult classic movie for sure!
Thank you for your summation and breakdown of the ideological aspects of the movie compared to where we are as a nation now. I haven't seen it yet, but I am looking forward to watching it with an open mind. Sometimes life imitates art, or vice versa. I appreciated your comment. Thank you for your service, and thank you for your perspective.
Yes! This movie is also a window to American Foreign Policy. All this has been incited in most countries the average civilian watches on TV and thinks nothing of it. And whether it was internally or by external forces, The US will unleash its full brutal military violence amongst themselves. So they can have a taste of their own medicine.
some of california biggest counties fresno and kern are red. there is a lot of conservative farmers in the central valley. just the liberal cities over power the valley
I seen the movie and i enjoyed it. I did notice how the Western Forces seemed to have POC in their ranks while the Govt forces were almost all white save for the Secret Service. Moreover, the soldier portrayed by Jesse Plemons was tending to a mass grave where the corpses were mostly POC. His whole "what kind of american" bit was actually him separating "real" american (read White) from Not american (POC). He then unalived the two asian reporters at the site then turned his attention to the reporter played by Wagner Moura because he didn't buy that was American even though Moura said he was from Florida. Soldier Jesse Plemons even said out loud he thinks Reporter Moura is from Central or South America, meaning NOT america. But maybe im readying into because I am Latinx.
@@Dapryor Latinx is the gender inclusive form of Latina/Latino. It's kinda like a fighting word in my community so I wouldn't encourage you use it in conversation unless you wanna get an earful about *checks notes* real academia de espana, the gay agenda, and white people telling brown people how to live
There's a true war in Ukraine right now. Russia bombed my city just today. I feel it so weird that somewhere people still want to watch any related to wars content as an enjoyment... Wars are horrible. People are killed, raped, injured, left homeless. Real wars aren't entertaining.
Mic Drop! The issue is that we Americans are sick people. War has been occurring (abt. 230 of our 247 year existence) since the beginning of the nation and today, the greatest selling video games and movies are nearly all war themed. The fact that most of the citizens here have never experienced the annihilation of others around them and the massive destruction of society’s institutions and infrastructure has lead to a mass hypnosis of society in which the atrocities of “real” wars are desensitized with the belief that that type of human carnage would never happen here in the U.S. I sure hope they’re right but from my own life experiences, I think it’s less of an if, and more of a when.
And yet the whole character arc for the protagonist are about getting the perfect shot no matter what........ There are plenty of movies that convey this message in earnest and dont pussyfoot around the idea that war is horrific. Movies like All Quiet on the Western Front, Stalingrad, Come and See, Deer Hunter, Threads, Sama
As a Ukrainian woman, who is staying in the warzone country, this movie was deeply offensive to me. There was no deeper message than the one about the journalists, who went out of their way to mess around the battlefield, leading to the death of soldiers, just to get a perfect shot.
The power which establishes a state is violence; the power which maintains it is violence; the power which eventually overthrows it is violence. -Kenneth Kaunda (1924-2021)
I don’t understand why people would still be surprised that this kind of thing could happen in this country. The danger is real given how extreme and uncompromising some people’s beliefs have become. I have been getting ready for it since 2020. When it comes to that, I will fight to defend the values that I stand for and the people that I care about. No qualms and ambivalence from me at all.
I think it is about the media and their pursuit about bigger stories without telling any story. Who were the men hanging in the car wash? That doesn't matter. Obviously there is a story there, but it gets untold. When they see the battle at night in the distance, that attracts their attention and they pursue that. With the sniper scene as well, or the Plemons scene. Who are these people and what motivates them? Actually their whole journey basically gets ignored as they chase the biggest fish, the president. In their pursuit of this big story, the viewer realizes that no story is being told. These journalists are like moths in the dark, and the light-bulb they gather around is power. I think as an audience member you can feel it. Why are Texas and California together? What is the Antifa Massacre? Why are the highway systems 'vaporized?' You never find out because the camera pursues the action. Sammy gets killed. He was the only true story teller, and he get erased as the team pursues the bigger 'story.' Jessie, who takes a photo of Lee Smith when they first meet, and also takes a photo of Smith when she dies and departs, captures in her lens the media as being part of the story, especially Joel who is a writer but doesn't try and find the story, but wants to become the story himself. He is not an observer, he is part of the action. And Jessie taking pictures in the college shoot-out scene, and the death of the president, captures Joel as a part of the action. When the group is in the small town, Jessie takes a photo of Smith, but not one of Joel when he tries on a hat. Joel wants to be the story and is disappointed when Jessie refuses the photo. Ultimately I think the film is about the failure of media to tell real stories.
I really liked the urban combat showed in this film. Easily the best part. It felt so real and visceral like you were witnessing something that could happen in your neighborhood. The sound design was excellent as well.
Speaking as someone coming to age in the 1980's I remember how disturbing the premise of stories like "The Day After" and "Red Dawn" were of Cold War "what ifs" The former being the most disturbing of the two. I'm kind of expecting this to be kind of the same thing. BTW: Why is my "rust bucket" state part of the loyalist faction? Do I need to move?
Saw a roughy cut of the movie a couple months back to give feedback about what we thought of it so far. I haven’t seen the final product yet, but from what I remember my biggest criticism was the ambiguity of the conflict. It’s felt sloppy, but like you said that way have been the point. That from a certain perspective war just becomes a mess of decontextualized violence from people not living it day to day. The friend I saw it with hated the movie because of this, and doesn’t wish to see it again. She mostly found the whole thing silly. What I liked most about it was that it was made from the perspective of war journalists, I think that’s genuinely its biggest strength and saves it from being just another war/action movie for me.
Spectacular insight. Jesse Plemons was fantastic as always. That dude brings it in every role he's ever been in. I had ants crawling under my skin when he was talking holding his gun peacefully.
Post apocalyptic? How? It is just thr USA which is in shambles. By that logic what would they have done with frontline pictures of ww2? It was a much bigger conflict.
For one, it's ridiculous that so many states stuck with the original regime. For another, it's infuriating that they called the movie civil war whenever it it's really about journalism. They should have called it snapshot or headshot or something.
Jesse Plemons showed again in this film how underrated of an actor he is. Genuinely one of the best in the world that whole sequence with him was terrifying
I enjoyed how unpolorizing this film was, not like captured media is in America. But arms are limited also, so who’s in charge of producing the machine?
This movie didn’t make sense. The writer is extremely disconnected with reality. However, I did love the aspect of shooting from the photographers perspective. It showed the terrors they encounter along the way.
I thought Kirsten was the main actor, then I found out she's a supporting actor. The story is about young, aspiring photographer journey to becoming war photographer amidst civil war on US ground. Kirsten role got somehow wattered down trough out the movie...
I saw it this past Wednesday. It didn't take long for it to fall apart. I saw the entire movie and kept hoping that by the end it would explain what caused the war in the first place. It never said. The heavy set black guy was the most interesting character and he deserves recognition.
It did: the president's third term and fascist grip on power triggered the war in an already highly polarized America. The choice of not being super specific about the cause and factions was for the same reason Texas and California were on the same side. It was about the tragedy of a civil war, but to make it super clear which side was which, like by putting Texas and California on opposite sides, would've been more polarizing, dividing the audience, and contradicting the message of the movie. Clearly the president was not a good guy, but Garland didn't want to make it an explicitly Left versus Right dynamic.
@@Len124gee, I wonder who Garland was trying to portray? Another TDS hollyweirdo. All you people think is that people you disagree with are Nazi members. You are so delusional and brainwashed by MSM.
It really felt like the message was that after a while it doesnt matter how it started or who believes what. Eventually it's just fighting for the sake of winning
Civil War gave too much information. Audiences are wondering more about why things are that way then the movie's message. Annihilation gave less info and let people come to their own conclusions about what it all means. People are talking more about why California and Texas join forces than about the meaning of the movie. (And why is it called the Western Forces when Texas isn't a Western state?)
The point of the movie to me was to be well prepared to take care of yourself and your community in case of inevitable governmental breakdown or corruption.
Someone here mentioned that the story about the war itself is vague so that it prevents people from bringing in bias and their own beliefs. I think that is true, because someone else also pointed out that even though the WF technically won, America is in pieces, like how do you move on without any grudges or rebellion? My take on this film is that in a war, being right does not matter because the cost that it comes with is huge. In this case it came with a torn country.
Na they didn’t want to explain the narrative they put it perfectly while in the car “ we don’t ask questions we capture events so others ask questions thought in the beginning they lowkey say what caused the war you just need to pay attention
@@wolf2966 I see but still think the story is good, it would of been nice to sit down and explain it a bit better, I feel like we was thrown in the middle of the cluster f, would of been nice to see what happened for it to lead up to the civil war
I hate the ending of this movie, where the 2 journalist completely ignore their collague who has been shot. It tarnishes the entire storyline and feels unrealistic to me.
Saw the movie. But sad to say, for all the advertisement, the movie did not have the development it needed to maintain the films hipe!! I found it vague and empty. It seemed like showing violence just foe the sake of violence. Sorry, but although understanding where the film tried to go, it did not get there. I got the political reference to the current political situation, but this film never got to that level...😒😪😴🤕🤒🥴😵💫
Revelation 17-18 Woe! Woe to you, great city, where all who had ships on the sea became rich through her wealth! In one hour she has been brought to ruin!’
It shows our bias- everyone here is fixating on the why and how did this conflict happen; none of us had the same fixation on why/how for Haiti, Palestine or Ukraine…
Why would the Pres leave his Impenetrable bunker? Why not just push her out the way, they were driving too fast for them to stop and basically get shot, too vague for me. Cali and Texas mmmmh I kinda understand that but I’m sure Arizona and Nevada would be in that alliance too
Two states winning against united states are complete fallacy.Imagine strategic military locations which are preposition already and DC losing in a quicker rate.Fantasy 😂 But the real meaning of the movie is about the deep meaning of journalism.
There may be details that are vague but two things are very clear and they show the side Alex Garland is on. The President in this movie is an analog for Donald Trump. No other President in American History is as authoritarian as Trump and the President in this movie. Not a coincidence. At the end, the movie relishes and celebrates his undignified murder. He is made to be embarrassingly pathetic as he pleads for his life. The movie's most terrifying character is Jessie Plemon's White Nationalist. The movie is very clear that he is a bad guy. He is a monster. Zero ambiguity with him. He's clearly an analog for The Proud Boys and other MAGA militias. Now, in the press junket Alex can't say he and the movie picks a side because that would launch a million MAGA trolls and Right wing influencers on him. He's betting on the fact that most of the MAGA are idiots and all this will fly over their heads. So far, so good. And for the rest of us, well that ending was delicious fan service.
This movie is lame. It's just a movie about some insufferable, entitled brats who are totally unlikable, with a war in the background that we don't care a bit about. Just a waste in every way.
This movie is like watching “ The 5 Day War” ( real life incident) in the USA. Maybe then; War Crimes, Genocide and war atrocities will be taken notice instead of intermission of the football game or reality stupidity show
The Ambiguity was clever. You could not find a side to sympathize with for most of the film. which reflects real life, society is experiencing and existential crisis through a loss of trust in all factions of the American politic. Also the effect is to remain somewhat neutral as a viewer, until there is a clear goal directed at the removal of the dictator President...until that climax you travel along feeling lost and uncomfortable about who are the good guys, which is kind of the point. If America does reelect a dictator the scale of any civil war scenario will be very different to the movie. Missiles and such would be the order of the day, not so much this conventional ground war in the film, if the military divides then much more devastating weapons and destruction will result.
Spielberg did this in 1998 with saving private Ryan and black hawk down came out like 1 year later. Those were much better films, GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE, the movie was total mid. Get your views tho I gues…..
The President was serving a 3rd term, launching drone attacks on civilians, disbanded the FBI, and allowed the killing of Journalists. In short, they made him out to be a dictator that refused to leave.
They never tell the best indications came from the scene when Joe is talking with the older journalist. They coment that the president was on a 3rd term, he dissolved congress, the FBI and was bombing US cities. We also hear in a talk between Lyn and the young girl that Lyn became a legend for shooting the "Antifa masscer" when she was in college which is probably at least 15 years before the film's events. My take is that polirazation in the US was leading to this carnage between civilian events (like if Charlottsville irl scalated more and was frequent) and probably a civil war was brewing. Then, president Nick Offerman probably used it as scuse to declare martial law and take dictatorial powers which was the tipping point for several states rebelling against the federal govt.
Play Conflict of Nations for FREE on PC, iOS or Android:
con.onelink.me/kZW6/THTA001
Receive a Unique Starter Pack, available only for the next 30 days!
The fact that Conflict of Nations specifically sponsors every Civil War movie youtube video is humorous.
Didn't you know we weren't suppose to notice that? lol lol
Yes, I thought it was just me. I noticed that too.😂
Same on the Chris Stuckmann review, super weird
I wasn't paying attention! What is the tea? I might go back and look specifically for this.
Civil war didn’t end the way you wanted…Come play conflict of nations 😂
The movie is purposefully trying to put you in a spot where you have no idea what’s going on. Like many Americans viewing wars outside of their country, the movie feels like they’re taking civil wars in a foreign country and putting in an American style to it.
As it is we know what’s going on in the USA these days, the illegal migration, the transgender madness, BLM , funded wars in Ukraine and Palestine and the sympathizers which don’t see that they American first.
there's a lot of intentional ambiguity in it. I started watching wondering which side I was on and gave up after a while because I didn't have enough context. Because it's so vague the movie really doesn't pick sides. More provocative than I expected.
so is the WF like a liberal army and the president is suppose to be a republican like trump?
@@reza_dc2No, man. They INTENTIONALLY avoided all that.
Well since Hollywood swings left idk it’s 2 hard 2 see what is being implied. In a real civil war I wonder what side would win a bunch of 2nd amendment loving gas guzzling “hicks” or a bunch of green haired confused about what bathroom 2 use snow flakes. Yeah that be a real tough fight
I think it's worth noting the scene in which Lee deletes the photo she took of Sammy dead in the car. I interpreted Jessie and Lee as characters swapping places. As Lee's walls come down, Jessie's go up.
Jessie also asked Lee if Lee would take a picture of her dying if she was shot, giving your interpretation another layer
That, or hypocrisy. She would gladly take pictures of other dead people but not her co-workers. Throughout the movie she loses her tolerance to the violence, but if she were being honest with herself, that should have been where she quits. Instead, she makes the exception for her friend and keeps going.
For me, the ambiguity worked just fine. I read it as, no matter our politics, if we can’t connect with eachother on a human level, we risk something like this actually happening…
Same here, I liked how it focused on the journalists and their journey
Only one side of the country is jailing and charging people for political reasons….
@@Chicano_pistolero No, stop lying. One side is trying to overthrow Democracy for a wannabe dictator, foreign tyrants, fascist billionaires, and Oligarchs.
@@Chicano_pistoleroboth sides have their issues.
@@liferealgood yep,and social media, th big tech giants, every establishment politician and bureaucrat are all against one side, you may trust daddy government but historically they tend to screw over my people so it's impossible for me to
Excellent work. People are hair-splitting and nit-picking this film to discredit it, but the core message remains undeniable:
_Is this what you want for America?_
So the only way for a country to split is to have a civil war? What if there was a way to separate without violence?
Only one side is threatening a civil war if their Orange cult leader is not elected in November.
Well, I'm not so sure that was the core message. Although vague, the President can be seen as a liberal caricature of Trump. (He wasn't elderly or senile, so he didn't resemble Biden; but he was a little pudgy and his speech was full of exaggeration, which reminds me of someone else...they might as well have made his skin orange.) Yes, the war is shown as horrible...but in the end, the "anti-Trump" forces are victorious, he is killed in the Oval Office, and if the message is too vague for some, he is executed by a black female soldier (rather unlikely as black females make up a very, very small part of the combat soldiers of the armed forces. Choosing her as the executioner could not have been a coincidence but had to be a deliberate message: leftist propaganda is that minorities and women hate Trump.) In the end, despite all the horror that preceded it, the victors are shown not as sad or regretful for the war, but as jubilant, there was upbeat music, and the impression is left not that "you shouldn't do this", it's more like "It will be horrible but it will be worth it as long as we get the bastard." Or maybe the message IS what you say, but the way to avoid this happening to us is, according to the producer and director and a very liberal Hollywood, "don't elect Trump".
That and the journey of desensitization to violence and chaos
Yes, it is called predictive programming so that we get it and decide not to fight against their agenda because it's scarey. What ever happen to valor..."Give Mr freedom or give me death" . This movie is all about discouraging American valor into fear and letting Confederate states (leftist) take over like Texas and California. PREDICTIVE PROGRAMMING.
I just saw this movie and I love the small indications of Kirsten actually being unable to be desensitized and her humanity essentially floods back in and she's almost intrigued at the moments that she sees that Jesse loses parts of her humanity. I also loved how crucial moments of her characters walls breaking down and how we see through her eyes in general are seen through a camera lense, not a photo, but genuinely she has different focul length when we're supposed to see through her eyes. It accentuates these crucial moments for her, without a picture. Her mental camera, which was just as important. Then she sees the flowers in the middle of potentially dying and she let herself drift into that humanity a little bit, ironically also desensitized. The ability to stop and look at the flowers in the middle of hiding for your life is twisted. Honestly this movie was straight up art
If the film had gone into the weeds of the “why” and “how” audiences would be bringing their own beliefs and biases into, thereby missing the point of the film. By keeping it vague, Garland gives us a space to imagine the idea of a war at home.
But most people have never been in a war, much less a civil war so any imagined conflict they would have on US soil would most likely be inaccurate. The movie could have showed us a realistic depiction of a modern American Civil War with all its socioeconomic and geopolitical consequences. But instead the movie takes the easy route by making it vague. Its disappointing and lazy.
@@AsymmetricalCrimesThat’s kind of the point. There are so many war films (or action films with war as a backdrop) that don’t really fill you in on the details and intricacies of the conflicts they use. And when we watch them, we accept whatever narrative, or lack thereof, that they give us. (As an aside, I think that more speaks to people’s suspension of disbelief than an unwillingness to engage with the politics behind the violence: you have to accept some things in a narrative for the story to work, just inherently).
Still the film adds in details that make me wonder if it’s trying to be smart. Like, pairing California and Texas together….surface-level, it kinda doesn’t make sense. But realistically speaking, large parts of both states are conservative, with liberal politics being much more common in cities and on thf coasts. They also both have access to essential resources you’d need to wage and maintain a war. So, if you really know about California and Texas, a union between them does make sense. But you can arrive at the same conclusion from saying ‘well, they’re both big, so why not make them combine into one of the major sides’ which is kinda…head-empty? Not bad but just not the best of reasons narratively.
What I’m getting at is, this movie makes a lot of narrative decisions that can be made from either a very informed or completely uninformed perspective. I don’t know if I should view its choices as smart if it really isn’t trying to be.
Without a backstory is just a warpictures movie. Needs more dept
Someones in denial
I saw this a few nights ago and it stuck with me. It’s been a long time since I had a theater experience like that.
Same here. It was very disturbing and when we left the theater there was a car circling the parking lot and I was scared. The movie freaked me out.
@@frankswif3y😂
🤔 you mean the terrorists demanding more hostages or they hurt people are real? WORSHIPPING A MAN WHO PAINTS HIMSELF GOLD NOT ORANGE AS INFALLIBLE? 🤔 Very interesting
@@JavierMartinez-il6od 😂
Liberals
As a reporter why didn’t Joel have a tape recorder for the President’s quote?
Probably got destroyed or didn’t have one I mean it’s civil war not as easy to obtain things
I was wondering that myself
As soldiers, why did they have an entire firefight before popping the first flash bang?
Probably ran out of Canadian money.
Maybe the soldier dose, they equipped with a camera.
I think that y’all don’t understand the movie. This isn’t a movie about a war, this is a movie about journalism, questioning the journalism, not the USA civilization
Yeah I agree, that moment where Dunst’s character talks about that was very meaningful
That would be fine if the movie wasn’t called “civil war”. You can take the theme you just mentioned and apply that to any conflict that involves journalism. So then if they were barely going to show the actual civil war, then why make a movie about one in the first place.
@@anomalyxd825it was about the *IMAGINATION* of one and what would likely trigger it or escalate it to all out war in heavily populated cities amongst the populace.
The military vs. Civilian terrorist combatants....
Saw when the white "American" woman blew up the protesters???
It does make more sense as a critique of journalists as war tourists
Nah there are movies about the journalism, this is literally about the civil war. Hence the name. There is a good episode on Black Mirror about journalism you can check that out.
I watched the whole movie and never knew wtf was happening
Facts.
Really? Wow
Same here! Lol The trailer was better
Sammy didn't sacrifice himself, the rest of the journalist killed him. That each of their ego driven purpose for engaging a clearly dangerous situation is what finally breaks dunsts character.
Nah Jess got them killed fr, all she had to do was stay in the truck🤦🏽♂️ like that scene pissed me off so heavy 😤
@@atauzedakingjust like she got lee killed 😂
She got 4 people killed!
@@atauzedakingsame with the last scene
Jessie got multiple people killed. I was so annoyed that Lee died because of her
*“I Remember the Secret Service Being Tougher”*
-Red (2010)
"The thing people don't realize about the Gear Wars is that it was never about the gears!"
As a veteran this movie disturbed me
DEI Hire?? LOL
@@ricksmith4736 Racist? Yep, you are.
When Lee (Kirsten Dunst) is shot at the end of the movie, it is inconclusive if she died. There was no visible blood and she was wearing a bulletproof vest. Since the combatants were shooting submachine guns, which fire pistol ammo, it is very plausible that bullets only knocked her out.
if she survived we would've seen that in the movie. but i also found it surprising bc of her vest
At that range, with automatic weapons, are you kidding? The vest isn't protecting the major arteries in your legs, or arms, or your neck or head. And there's no guarantee that multiple strikes are going to be kept out.
Dead
There was blood coming from her head, you can clearly see it when she's on the floor 😂
@@abadazadytgaming7200 There was absolutely no blood in that scene. A head shot would have blown out the front of her face. Her shirt is white and her hair is blonde, and there is not a trace of blood on either. Furthermore, the carpet is RED.
It wasn’t quite what I expected but I enjoyed the film nevertheless. It almost felt like a coming-of-age or road trip buddy movie at times. I agree with this take - Dunst’s character talking about sending images as a warning was the ‘aha’ moment for me.
Jessie, the Young journalist is responsible for the death of Kirsten Dunst’s character. Jessie was so ignorant she thought she was impervious the bullets.
To be fair that’s the point
I don’t think you’re supposed to condone her actions; only understand the inhuman demands of journalism
she ruined 1h40 of entertainment in 10sec, not by the stupid young human mistake, but by taking a photo of it while it happened BECAUSE of her, i'm also not feeling okay about that tackle, you want to save someone from a line of fire you don't push them down and stay in the middle of the shot, you use your body weight and momentum to both get out of the way, but i'm nitpicking, i know the director wanted to show this particular shot but it could have been done better.
She goes for a tackle they both get on the other side of the corridor, she sees she got shot and take a pic. I would not have been so disapointed
@@fouchi3203 I so agree!!!
@@fouchi3203 sorry about you not getting that familiar old fashioned hollywoodized warm and fuzzy feeling kind of story ending to mainly satisfy the majority mentally passive movie audience. Hope that sense of quandary was alleviated with ice cream.
@@al28854 sorry about you missing my point
Democracy is one's power over another. So when politicians say "our democracy is at stake," they don't mean the American people. They mean "their own power over the people is at stake."
Yes change (our democracy) with “my career”
Well, not really. Democracy, as a concept, quite literally means "power to the people". What american politicians call democracy, however, is really just a dictatorship of the rich. We should strive for real democracy, not Democracy™
"There are no happy endings in war. Only the carnage left in its wake and the trauma born of its brutaliy." Such great writing!
The only issue I took with this film, and I thought it was overall a great movie, was how unrealistic I thought the way the journalists moved with the soldiers. How on earth are they able to get permission to stay with these front line combat soldiers documenting everything? I get that war photographers risk their lives and do go into active combat zones, but surely there’s no way they’d be that entrenched with the squads in the thick of firefights. Maybe someone with more knowledge can correct me if I’m wrong, but I just find it unbelievable considering they’d be a hindrance more than anything and an open target for the enemy given their lack of combat training.
Yeah, not only were they distracting but having to cover them/pull them, didn't seem like an efficient way to operate.
Just ask the journalists who tagged along with the US Marines when Iraqi freedom kicked off.
Anything is possible with the right paperwork
@@SoulBrute those 'journalist' should be wearing helmets, also one of my cringe moments
I have seen a documentary about civil war in Mynamar. The journalists tag along like that, they are in the thick of actions.
I was thinking the same... I kept saying OMG get the fuck out of the soldiers way. And it got worse when that little shit kept going on and doing her own shit which then got Lee killed.
Civil war is just a road trip to a battle scene in DC.
Yep, I was unimpressed.
You got it! You absolutely understood what this film was about!
The most unrealistic thing about this movie is California and Texas joining forces.
So funny
It's very possible. All that needs to happen is the same party monopoly in both states. Texas has talked about secession. Parts of California have talked about secession. The secessionist just need to get state power. Then it would be possible.
They have said this in the past about modern westernization never falling into dictatorship. That’s why people would question why so many Jews never left Germany when Hitler took over because it was slow moving and it was kind of inconceivable to them at the time. Which many world history scholars have debated with other people who have said that the US will never fall into a dictatorship. Which ridiculous because in the end the constitution is just a piece of paper we can absolutely fall. If a large mass of the civilians loses its senses.
The two largest states is the reason but not likely.
I enjoyed this film for what it is, a jaw-dropping, heart-pounding, beautiful movie experience. I'm going again with family this time! Alex garland is a genius and thoroughly enjoy all of his films. Also, watching this film in IMAX is absolutely breath-taking!
Civil War lacked passion entirely. If you want a good combat photographer's film, try Harrison's Flowers. Everyone in that film did a great job. Adrian Brody got some of the best lines in cinema in that movie, at least regarding the state of combat journalism.
when i saw the trailer for this film, i was disgusted. i thought it was going to be a sensationalized film capitalizing on the fears of the american public. honestly, given that it was a24 producing it, i should've known it wouldn't be like this. glad to know there's a deeper narrative going on underneath
the fact that a film like CIVIL WAR 2024 was made
in itself
is SCARY
Thanks for your point of view.
I believe some of the negative criticism comes from many who have not served in the military or likely do not have any experience in war planning or fighting because their reviews are all based on modern action movies and dramas that they grew up watching instead of being actually deployed to a poor, ravaged foreign country and being looked at with great vitriol, threatened and/or shot at just because they’re an American. Simply put, people are scared. Living in a society where the powers that be have created a fear based existence and I don’t see this changing for a long, long time.
My perspective comes from someone who’s been used around the world to satisfy the goals of the empire and who believes that as a result of our global expeditions and campaigns, we’ll eventually experience those pains in our homeland
someday and I’m not happy about that, but I am a realist who knows enough to prepare for difficult times ahead. So I see the movie as a sort of documentary whose goal is to open our eyes to a reality that many Americans still deny.
Many people may not think the events depicted in the film could ever happen but think of this, the U.S. is structured like a large version of Europe with states that mimic individual countries held together by the state’s promise to uphold the Constitution in which the mentalities of 21st century political leaders and citizens have clearly concluded, is just an old piece of paper. This format once proved that a massive civil war could and did occur and often history repeats itself, whether people want to believe it or not.
Sure it’s just a movie, but it’s a serious one and there is a major message in it for us which is, war is truly hell and it’s not something that we should glorify nor something that we should ever hope occurs in our communities.
Critics should stop trying to analyze this film like they’re watching some make believe superhero movie, an Oscar contender’s review or some political circus commentary akin to the events of the 2020 election.
I suggest we watch it like we’re analyzing potential future “real world” events because the premise of this movie might be much closer than some of the many naive Americans think.
From a military (not militia or political) perspective, often wartime strategic alliances form strategic partnerships which are not necessarily based ideological similarities. States like Texas and California both are very large populations (30-40 million residents), massive police and national guard forces and GNP’s that are comparable or larger than some of the current top ten percent of wealthiest countries on the globe. Texas was once its own republic and has governed that way since. An alliance of these to states and perhaps a third one of similar status and structure would be a major problem for DC politicians.
Given today’s times, we need to hope for the best but only those who can’t see or hear won’t prepare for the worst. Most Empires haven’t lasted more the 500 years throughout history so, I think it’s very important for people to accept their possible future or that of their children, grandchildren or great grandchildren because we are definitely heading for a major change down the path of U.S. history. This fate is even foretold in the book of Revelation and in greater, specific detail in the “extra-biblical” text of 2nd Edras.
Time and experience has proven the old Mark Twain quote that, “truth is stranger than fiction”
I thought it was brilliant. It reminds me of a realistic Christopher Nolan movie with hints of an Apocalypse Now style vibe. 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.
A future cult classic movie for sure!
Thank you for your summation and breakdown of the ideological aspects of the movie compared to where we are as a nation now. I haven't seen it yet, but I am looking forward to watching it with an open mind. Sometimes life imitates art, or vice versa. I appreciated your comment. Thank you for your service, and thank you for your perspective.
Did you serve in the American army by chance?
Predictive programming, just like the Simpsons, this will happen to America in the very near future.
Yes! This movie is also a window to American Foreign Policy. All this has been incited in most countries the average civilian watches on TV and thinks nothing of it.
And whether it was internally or by external forces, The US will unleash its full brutal military violence amongst themselves.
So they can have a taste of their own medicine.
Excellent analysis!
California and Texas teaming up lost me. That will never happen.
Sending all of Austin TX, back to CA would happen....
some of california biggest counties fresno and kern are red. there is a lot of conservative farmers in the central valley. just the liberal cities over power the valley
That's just a lack of imagination on your part.
Me too lol
The greatest fiction told in this film was that the media was objective and unbiased.
I seen the movie and i enjoyed it. I did notice how the Western Forces seemed to have POC in their ranks while the Govt forces were almost all white save for the Secret Service.
Moreover, the soldier portrayed by Jesse Plemons was tending to a mass grave where the corpses were mostly POC. His whole "what kind of american" bit was actually him separating "real" american (read White) from Not american (POC). He then unalived the two asian reporters at the site then turned his attention to the reporter played by Wagner Moura because he didn't buy that was American even though Moura said he was from Florida. Soldier Jesse Plemons even said out loud he thinks Reporter Moura is from Central or South America, meaning NOT america.
But maybe im readying into because I am Latinx.
What’s latinx?
@@Dapryor Latinx is the gender inclusive form of Latina/Latino.
It's kinda like a fighting word in my community so I wouldn't encourage you use it in conversation unless you wanna get an earful about
*checks notes*
real academia de espana, the gay agenda, and white people telling brown people how to live
I've never met a single Latino or Latina who called themselves Latinx
@@DogeickBateman probably told to call herself that by a university professor.
@@DogeickBateman I live in a diverse part of the country and I don’t think my Hispanic friends are even aware that that’s a thing.
There's a true war in Ukraine right now. Russia bombed my city just today. I feel it so weird that somewhere people still want to watch any related to wars content as an enjoyment... Wars are horrible. People are killed, raped, injured, left homeless. Real wars aren't entertaining.
As someone who's briefly been in a war zone, I completely agree. War is not our natural state and we shouldn't glorify it in entertainment.
That’s what the film is saying. It’s an anti war message.
Enjoying fictional conflict, especially one that's very obviously anti war isn't bad. This is such a dumb, virtue signal.
Mic Drop!
The issue is that we Americans are sick people. War has been occurring (abt. 230 of our 247 year existence) since the beginning of the nation and today, the greatest selling video games and movies are nearly all war themed.
The fact that most of the citizens here have never experienced the annihilation of others around them and the massive destruction of society’s institutions and infrastructure has lead to a mass hypnosis of society in which the atrocities of “real” wars are desensitized with the belief that that type of human carnage would never happen here in the U.S.
I sure hope they’re right but from my own life experiences, I think it’s less of an if, and more of a when.
And yet the whole character arc for the protagonist are about getting the perfect shot no matter what........
There are plenty of movies that convey this message in earnest and dont pussyfoot around the idea that war is horrific. Movies like All Quiet on the Western Front, Stalingrad, Come and See, Deer Hunter, Threads, Sama
Most depressing movie I've ever seen. 10/10 everyone should see this
In the movie civil war there are no democrats there are no republicans. No left no right .
The quote you use is fucking hilarious. Scenes of violence being "surprisingly unpleasant". Talk about desensitized
As a Ukrainian woman, who is staying in the warzone country, this movie was deeply offensive to me.
There was no deeper message than the one about the journalists, who went out of their way to mess around the battlefield, leading to the death of soldiers, just to get a perfect shot.
Yes. The man and young girl were responsible for their companions deaths.
Cry about it 😊
The power which establishes a state is violence; the power which maintains it is violence; the power which eventually overthrows it is violence.
-Kenneth Kaunda (1924-2021)
What is power?
Good question
The D.C. siege was epic
The film really highlights something that I think most people don’t understand,and I applaud Alex garland for reminding us: war is REALLY bad
It would be very unlikely that California and Texas would team up for any reason.
Democracy is not that delicate. It creates the illusion of fragility, but the government has a stronghold on its "citizens"
Evil always becomes the end result when people force what is DEEMED "good".
I don’t understand why people would still be surprised that this kind of thing could happen in this country. The danger is real given how extreme and uncompromising some people’s beliefs have become. I have been getting ready for it since 2020. When it comes to that, I will fight to defend the values that I stand for and the people that I care about. No qualms and ambivalence from me at all.
I think it is about the media and their pursuit about bigger stories without telling any story. Who were the men hanging in the car wash? That doesn't matter. Obviously there is a story there, but it gets untold. When they see the battle at night in the distance, that attracts their attention and they pursue that. With the sniper scene as well, or the Plemons scene. Who are these people and what motivates them? Actually their whole journey basically gets ignored as they chase the biggest fish, the president. In their pursuit of this big story, the viewer realizes that no story is being told. These journalists are like moths in the dark, and the light-bulb they gather around is power. I think as an audience member you can feel it. Why are Texas and California together? What is the Antifa Massacre? Why are the highway systems 'vaporized?' You never find out because the camera pursues the action. Sammy gets killed. He was the only true story teller, and he get erased as the team pursues the bigger 'story.' Jessie, who takes a photo of Lee Smith when they first meet, and also takes a photo of Smith when she dies and departs, captures in her lens the media as being part of the story, especially Joel who is a writer but doesn't try and find the story, but wants to become the story himself. He is not an observer, he is part of the action. And Jessie taking pictures in the college shoot-out scene, and the death of the president, captures Joel as a part of the action. When the group is in the small town, Jessie takes a photo of Smith, but not one of Joel when he tries on a hat. Joel wants to be the story and is disappointed when Jessie refuses the photo.
Ultimately I think the film is about the failure of media to tell real stories.
💯%.
I really liked the urban combat showed in this film. Easily the best part. It felt so real and visceral like you were witnessing something that could happen in your neighborhood. The sound design was excellent as well.
The movie is misnamed - it should have been called "Objective Journalism" - it's not a war movie.
Speaking as someone coming to age in the 1980's I remember how disturbing the premise of stories like "The Day After" and "Red Dawn" were of Cold War "what ifs" The former being the most disturbing of the two. I'm kind of expecting this to be kind of the same thing.
BTW: Why is my "rust bucket" state part of the loyalist faction? Do I need to move?
Saw a roughy cut of the movie a couple months back to give feedback about what we thought of it so far. I haven’t seen the final product yet, but from what I remember my biggest criticism was the ambiguity of the conflict. It’s felt sloppy, but like you said that way have been the point. That from a certain perspective war just becomes a mess of decontextualized violence from people not living it day to day. The friend I saw it with hated the movie because of this, and doesn’t wish to see it again. She mostly found the whole thing silly. What I liked most about it was that it was made from the perspective of war journalists, I think that’s genuinely its biggest strength and saves it from being just another war/action movie for me.
"Let's have a war. Clean up this place!"
This film just shows how much journalists are blinded by their addiction for a story.
Spectacular insight. Jesse Plemons was fantastic as always. That dude brings it in every role he's ever been in. I had ants crawling under my skin when he was talking holding his gun peacefully.
in the post-apocalyptic world presented in Civil War, what are they going to do with those photos anyway?
Post apocalyptic? How? It is just thr USA which is in shambles. By that logic what would they have done with frontline pictures of ww2? It was a much bigger conflict.
Willing to pay more than a few bucks to view the cutouts left on editing room floor.
For one, it's ridiculous that so many states stuck with the original regime. For another, it's infuriating that they called the movie civil war whenever it it's really about journalism. They should have called it snapshot or headshot or something.
I came away making a mental note to add to my 5.56 inventory.
Jesse Plemons showed again in this film how underrated of an actor he is. Genuinely one of the best in the world that whole sequence with him was terrifying
I enjoyed how unpolorizing this film was, not like captured media is in America. But arms are limited also, so who’s in charge of producing the machine?
"Non western conflict " proceeds to put images from Haiti
Haiti is not in the West, it's in the Global South.
@@gosnooky what u mean? Its in the western hemisphere and its north of the equator🤔
This movie didn’t make sense. The writer is extremely disconnected with reality. However, I did love the aspect of shooting from the photographers perspective. It showed the terrors they encounter along the way.
I thought Kirsten was the main actor, then I found out she's a supporting actor. The story is about young, aspiring photographer journey to becoming war photographer amidst civil war on US ground. Kirsten role got somehow wattered down trough out the movie...
I saw it this past Wednesday. It didn't take long for it to fall apart. I saw the entire movie and kept hoping that by the end it would explain what caused the war in the first place. It never said. The heavy set black guy was the most interesting character and he deserves recognition.
It did: the president's third term and fascist grip on power triggered the war in an already highly polarized America. The choice of not being super specific about the cause and factions was for the same reason Texas and California were on the same side. It was about the tragedy of a civil war, but to make it super clear which side was which, like by putting Texas and California on opposite sides, would've been more polarizing, dividing the audience, and contradicting the message of the movie. Clearly the president was not a good guy, but Garland didn't want to make it an explicitly Left versus Right dynamic.
The war is a framing device, not the point of the film. It's about the moral issues and importance of conflict photojournalism.
@@Len124gee, I wonder who Garland was trying to portray? Another TDS hollyweirdo. All you people think is that people you disagree with are Nazi members. You are so delusional and brainwashed by MSM.
Go and watch John Wick if you need your films spoon-fed to you.
It really felt like the message was that after a while it doesnt matter how it started or who believes what. Eventually it's just fighting for the sake of winning
This movie is a cautionary tale of what can happen in the United States if fascism is allowed to take hold.
One fascist does another takes its place
Civil War gave too much information. Audiences are wondering more about why things are that way then the movie's message. Annihilation gave less info and let people come to their own conclusions about what it all means. People are talking more about why California and Texas join forces than about the meaning of the movie. (And why is it called the Western Forces when Texas isn't a Western state?)
The presentation felt strange to me. I was acutely aware the whole time that I was a tourist in an alternate timeline.
Annihilation was weird and pretentious tripe.
So Joel continued in the Last of Us, while Jessie on Fallout.
Don’t waste your money!
The point of the movie to me was to be well prepared to take care of yourself and your community in case of inevitable governmental breakdown or corruption.
Civil war is a well made movie, the last 25 minutes is breathe taking
yeah but......out of all the states you pair up Texas and California ?
Really? Did she say the journalists are there to tell the truth? Oh, maybe it's a 1st WW1 movie.
💯%.
You could either have done this without the spoilers or provided a warning that there were spoilers.
Why would you watch a "Movie explained" video before actually watching the movie🤦🤦
3:20-3:30. These lines are from the Division 1 trailer 😉
Someone here mentioned that the story about the war itself is vague so that it prevents people from bringing in bias and their own beliefs. I think that is true, because someone else also pointed out that even though the WF technically won, America is in pieces, like how do you move on without any grudges or rebellion?
My take on this film is that in a war, being right does not matter because the cost that it comes with is huge. In this case it came with a torn country.
The movie is an anti-war satire. It is also very dark and very haunting.
It’s not hard to figure out confused why people couldn’t get the point
Because they can’t see past their own bias’s
Feel like a hbo series would of been better, they would of set and explain the narrative a bit better
Na they didn’t want to explain the narrative they put it perfectly while in the car “ we don’t ask questions we capture events so others ask questions thought in the beginning they lowkey say what caused the war you just need to pay attention
@@wolf2966 I see but still think the story is good, it would of been nice to sit down and explain it a bit better, I feel like we was thrown in the middle of the cluster f, would of been nice to see what happened for it to lead up to the civil war
Excellent presentation
Thumbs up
Thoightful ideaa
I hate the ending of this movie, where the 2 journalist completely ignore their collague who has been shot. It tarnishes the entire storyline and feels unrealistic to me.
Saw the movie. But sad to say, for all the advertisement, the movie did not have the development it needed to maintain the films hipe!! I found it vague and empty. It seemed like showing violence just foe the sake of violence. Sorry, but although understanding where the film tried to go, it did not get there. I got the political reference to the current political situation, but this film never got to that level...😒😪😴🤕🤒🥴😵💫
Just a word of advice...when trying to explain things don't make it more confusing....thanks
You need things dumbed down for you, got it
@@greywolf845 Well that's why ppl are here... it's a "EXPLAINED VIDEO" dumbass....lol
Revelation 17-18
Woe! Woe to you, great city,
where all who had ships on the sea
became rich through her wealth!
In one hour she has been brought to ruin!’
It shows our bias- everyone here is fixating on the why and how did this conflict happen; none of us had the same fixation on why/how for Haiti, Palestine or Ukraine…
Why would the Pres leave his Impenetrable bunker? Why not just push her out the way, they were driving too fast for them to stop and basically get shot, too vague for me. Cali and Texas mmmmh I kinda understand that but I’m sure Arizona and Nevada would be in that alliance too
100%.
I really wanted to enjoy Civil War. It was one of the dumbest, most pointless movies I've seen in a long time.
Yea its subtext was basically just “war bad” and like…yea,obviously
I have a question: Do you think this movie inspired the recently president assassination event ??
“LIkE rAci$m & ClImATE chAnGe”
That’s what they tell you to be angry & fight about. It really means zero.
Racism is definitely something to fight about, enjoy your privilege.
For real. This liberal society is so broken. We are at a Civil War with ideas and reality. The left distorts reality like a kaleidoscope.
I keep telling people, it doesn’t matter how we got here, it matters that we’re here.
This movie should have been called Race War.
Conservatives and republicans don’t want a race war. Ideological war…..hmmm.
Conservative people don’t want a race war. We don’t have a problem with race. An ideological war…hmmm.
Thats what will happen when the collapse comes......
Two states winning against united states are complete fallacy.Imagine strategic military locations which are preposition already and DC losing in a quicker rate.Fantasy 😂
But the real meaning of the movie is about the deep meaning of journalism.
TX and CA joining forces. It would never happen in real life.
This is what they are showing the American people what is coming.
There may be details that are vague but two things are very clear and they show the side Alex Garland is on.
The President in this movie is an analog for Donald Trump. No other President in American History is as authoritarian as Trump and the President in this movie. Not a coincidence. At the end, the movie relishes and celebrates his undignified murder. He is made to be embarrassingly pathetic as he pleads for his life.
The movie's most terrifying character is Jessie Plemon's White Nationalist. The movie is very clear that he is a bad guy. He is a monster. Zero ambiguity with him. He's clearly an analog for The Proud Boys and other MAGA militias.
Now, in the press junket Alex can't say he and the movie picks a side because that would launch a million MAGA trolls and Right wing influencers on him. He's betting on the fact that most of the MAGA are idiots and all this will fly over their heads. So far, so good.
And for the rest of us, well that ending was delicious fan service.
Man, DJT lives rent free in your head, doesn't he?😂
REFERENCIA A CHILE 🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱
While I liked the movie. I can speak for everyone when I say we wanted to know what the war was about.
This movie is lame. It's just a movie about some insufferable, entitled brats who are totally unlikable, with a war in the background that we don't care a bit about.
Just a waste in every way.
This movie is like watching “ The 5 Day War” ( real life incident) in the USA. Maybe then; War Crimes, Genocide and war atrocities will be taken notice instead of intermission of the football game or reality stupidity show
The Ambiguity was clever. You could not find a side to sympathize with for most of the film. which reflects real life, society is experiencing and existential crisis through a loss of trust in all factions of the American politic.
Also the effect is to remain somewhat neutral as a viewer, until there is a clear goal directed at the removal of the dictator President...until that climax you travel along feeling lost and uncomfortable about who are the good guys, which is kind of the point.
If America does reelect a dictator the scale of any civil war scenario will be very different to the movie.
Missiles and such would be the order of the day, not so much this conventional ground war in the film, if the military divides then much more devastating weapons and destruction will result.
Spielberg did this in 1998 with saving private Ryan and black hawk down came out like 1 year later.
Those were much better films,
GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE, the movie was total mid. Get your views tho I gues…..
Texas and California together??!!😂😂😂😂😂
What the hell was the war even about
The President was serving a 3rd term, launching drone attacks on civilians, disbanded the FBI, and allowed the killing of Journalists. In short, they made him out to be a dictator that refused to leave.
Taxes
They never tell the best indications came from the scene when Joe is talking with the older journalist. They coment that the president was on a 3rd term, he dissolved congress, the FBI and was bombing US cities. We also hear in a talk between Lyn and the young girl that Lyn became a legend for shooting the "Antifa masscer" when she was in college which is probably at least 15 years before the film's events. My take is that polirazation in the US was leading to this carnage between civilian events (like if Charlottsville irl scalated more and was frequent) and probably a civil war was brewing. Then, president Nick Offerman probably used it as scuse to declare martial law and take dictatorial powers which was the tipping point for several states rebelling against the federal govt.