Civil War

There is a good movie to be made about the polarisation and aggression of US politics leading to civil war. This was not it. Uses a grossly undeveloped political scenario as an excuse to show us routine, gratuitous violence and contrived relationships. Casting an actress who looks 14 as a 23 year old was a big mistake and pushing her from wide eyed innocence through a ridiculous, unbelievable journey to awakening ambition via horror was crudely handled. Taking photos of people while they suffer and die is obscene and the pain and gore of violence was trivialised, not dignified by this sad movie.

Civil War isn't science fiction-it's speculative reality drawn from the headlines we scroll past every day. Alex Garland has crafted something rare: a war film without glorification, a dystopia without excess. What unfolds is a portrait of America not as it might be, but as it nearly is-fractured by polarization, eroded by propaganda, and abandoned by leadership more concerned with loyalty than legitimacy.

Through the lens of war journalists (played with haunting restraint by Kirsten Dunst and Cailee Spaeny), we traverse a country in pieces-some cities crumbling, others clinging to an eerie normalcy. The genius lies in the nuance: this isn't red vs. Blue, good vs. Evil. It's chaos as governance, ideology as identity, and cruelty as currency.

For those watching recent history with a furrowed brow, Civil War lands like a flare in the darkness. It doesn't tell us what to think-it forces us to ask how close we already are. And in doing so, it becomes not just a film, but a quiet, urgent warning.

Watch it while it's still fiction.

B. Mitchell / J. Vail.

I've watched this Film four times and every time I seem to like it more. Most everyone I know felt let down with It and I almost skipped it. But I am so glad I didn't because I find more of the message each time I do. The soundtrack for me sets the mood with not being mainstream and actually creates an unfamiliar terrifying world. The dark shadows in the photography also set the tone of what the Country is experiencing. Is there action? Sure there is and I feel too much would have ruined the message and the mission of the characters. The action and violence is unsettling, but appropriately placed. I don't think the filmmaker intended to make an action film. Forget what others have said and give it a watch.

The title is "Civil War" but that's the closest you're gonna get to an actual Civil War during this movie.

This is sort of a low rent version of Apocalypse Now. The characters are going on a mission to reach the White House. And along the way they wind up in several violent misadventures.

But Apocalypse Now fleshed out the target - Colonel Kurtz. In this story, we have no idea who the President is psychologically and why others want to kill him. So the underlying motivation driving the protagonist is completely lacking.

Moreover, during the course of what is supposedly a war, some of the characters engage in teenage antics that undermine the seriousness of their plight.

As many other commentators have stated - this movie is disjointed. If you're expecting to see a Civil War, DON'T watch this movie. There ain't one in there.

I had high hopes for this movie as Alex Garland rarely disappoints,. But its a very shallow script like a six part mini series where the action scenes have been edited into a movie. There is no explanation of why there is a civil war, who is fighting who, what the outcome is or anything else that might cast some light on the situation. We just follow some unimportant characters through some hairy experiences. The movie should have been a mini series with a credible story line and a lot more characters elucidating the factions and their motivations. A week after watching it I had forgotten it! Don't waste your time.