Directed by:
Alex GarlandScreenplay:
Alex GarlandCinematography:
Rob HardyCast:
Kirsten Dunst, Cailee Spaeny, Wagner Moura, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Nick Offerman, Jesse Plemons, Nelson Lee, Sonoya Mizuno, Jefferson White (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
An adrenaline-fueled thrill ride through a near-future fractured America balanced on the razors edge. (A24)
Reviews (13)
Recall the three year old event when the Trump mob stormed the Capitol. Alex Garland sensitively and thoughtfully directs this theme, this societal schism, into disconnected mini-stories, with just these aforementioned protagonists (and they don't need a buffalo head to do it) killing because "real fucking America", all of which the protagonists, journalists, follow on their way to Washington. As long it stays in the road movie waters, with lots of iconic scenes, it's great. Unfortunately, Garland flips the switch at the end, and with the arrival in D.C., it becomes a regular war movie that felt like a mannerism in its denouement and showdown. Not only did it leave me cold at the end, but I actually thought "and that's it, Alex?". Too bad, we had the build-up to the movie event of the year, and well, it's not. But still an honest 4 stars (no stripes) for the impressive heaviness and disillusionment with humanity in the first two thirds.
()
It was clear that Garland wasn’t going to make a blockbuster out of this. However, it wasn’t clear what his masterful balancing between reality and dimensions beyond human perception would bring to a film that is supposed to stand solely on raw realism. Civil War contains grand scenes with tanks and helicopters, but without a cinematographic concept of the kind that Alfonso Cuarón employed in Children of Men and which would be needed here. At its core, Civil War is merely an intimate road movie spanning a broken America as it follows a team of three seasoned journalists and their novice colleague, whose innocence stands in contrast to their experience and professional detachment. Our question of why such a young girl would be doing such work is immediately answered for us: “I’ve never been so scared in my entire life. And I've never felt more alive.” ___ Civil War avoids sentiment and the dark tone of the story is lightened by the use of American pop oldies, but it lacks the artistic optics that we like Garland for in the first place. The film should me made up entirely of terrifying scenes, but it contains only one, which reflects the one-dimensional thinking of America’s redneck population and features a standout performance by Jesse Plemons. The director amplifies the rawness not with dark instrumental music, but with the intense sound of gunfire. And even though the film is compelling and engaging thanks to its characters, it lacks refined and unexpected conflicts, as well as an intellectual reach that would go beyond warning us about Donald Trump. And the climax is literally ridiculous.
()
Olympic level in the discipline of "inducing a feeling of deep inner turmoil". I haven't seen something so often beautiful, yet repulsive and disturbing in a long time. And my apologies to A24 for wrongly suspecting it of producing a straightforward war blockbuster. It's, of course, another auteur film, just the way we like it.
()
A violent nightmare that I dreamed for some unknown reason. Kind of like Children of Men from Wish. Garland somewhat mechanically adorns his shady road movie with random images of a broken America. A number of them are impressive, with powerful visuals and staging (mainly the scene with Jesse Plemons). The film manages to induce anxiety to the point of nausea from a cruel world that is not so far from The Walking Dead in its absence of morality and prevalence of brutality. But…the whole thing seems terribly gratuitous; for all of the questions that the film wants to raise, Garland’s work just shrugs its shoulders and wagers on another spectacular composition. The characters are flat and the ethics and psychology of the war reporters come across as very superficial research. There is little in the way of Nietzschean gazing into the abyss in this film, which paradoxically comes across as terribly thesis-based and illustrative, but it isn’t at all clear what its thesis is or what it actually illustrates. An impressive exercise in unclearly straddling the line between a skilfully made spectacle and a not so skilfully rendered metaphor of a divided country. It’s actually a reiteration of my problem with Garland, a maker of spectacular movies that are dull at their core.
()
I like Alex Garland's work and even though he makes films that aren't exactly audience friendly, he hasn't stepped on my toes once so far, so I was curious to see how he'd handle a slightly different material, more audience friendly, with a blockbuster format and on a very topical subject, and it's great, though not without its faults. It's a war road movie set in a war-ravaged America with an apocalyptic tinge that has a very slow pace most of the time, but thankfully it works thanks to convincing actors, decent dialogue and an uncomfortable atmosphere. I was a bit bothered that we don't see the birth of the conflict but are thrown somewhere in the middle, and also that the whole film is from a journalists point of view, I would have liked to see what's going on in other parts of America or some behind the scenes from the government on what the president is currently dealing with/planning, but never mind. The highlights are two scenes: the confrontation with Jesse Plemons, which has a very chilling atmosphere and a great build up, and then the finale – I was worried Garland would give us a three-minute shootout but he surprised us. We actually get more than twenty minutes of military action! A massive attack on the White House and it has it all: amazing sound of weapons, perfect cinematography, gripping atmosphere, in short it looks really dense and authentic, a perfect dreamlike action war finale. Of course, the few naturalistic shots are nice, but there could have been more of them. 80%
()
Alex Garland's awkward Salvador. In it there was a sentence that you have to get closer to get to the truth, or if you want reality, then fidelity. If you get too close, you die. Here, the distance wasn’t ideal, whether due to poorly written and cast characters, or the vagueness of initially heroizing the impartiality of a war journalist’s badge, only to later point out the dangers of national polarization (as someone humorously remarked, putting together California and Texas is like a coalition between Sweetgreen and KFC). If the peak of the intense episodes was to be Plemons’ lime-like quality, then the connections between them, meant to profile and develop characters, didn’t set the bar very high. The final militant pornography from D.C. was just missing Gerard Butler, on the right side, of course.
()
Texas' revolt has done Civil War some fine advertising and A24 can celebrate. Alex Garland is keeping his head down with the script and direction. The artistic arrangement is there, but he still focuses on the rawness, underscored by black-and-white photography by up-and-comer Cailee Spaena (the kid from DEVS), and serves up a classic road movie through the disunited states of America. The scariest stop along the way is the one at Jesse Plemons, and it towers over the entire film like the top of the Everest. I understand why Garland doesn't explicitly state the reason for the conflict, though it is implied, but I missed that very conversation whose absence Wagner Moura laments. The excellent Wagner Moura, by the way, easily nudges the brooding Kirsten Dunst. The finale is predictable but formally breathtaking. Great soundtrack.
()
A film that offers some impressive moments, but as a whole it mostly skims the surface. It deals with a few key themes, but it is mostly too thesis-like and one-dimensional. A raging America where we get no introduction and a miserable, rushed conclusion. Jesse Plemons steals for himself what is undoubtedly the film's best scene, and the final wartime inferno, while beautifully fluid and robust in sound, lacks technical skill and sophistication. It's not bad, Alex Garland is a capable and distinctive director, but Civil War is perhaps too ambitious a theme that deserved more than a journalistic road-movie with a wartime finale.
()
For Alex Garland, Civil War is a return to the tried-and-tested formula of a group of characters wandering through an "inhuman" landscape in pursuit of a vague goal, but compared to 28 Days Later, Annihilation and Sunshine, the British filmmaker is now dealing with a rather down-to-earth and quite realistic scenario. I've always seen him as a very capable genre filmmaker and I also got what I expected from his latest effort: a solid simple genre film; don't expect anything complicated or deep. The relative straightforwardness actually suits Garland far more than the artsy symbolism of his previous two efforts, which is also not to say that Civil War completely resigns itself to it. If I have one criticism, it's some all-too-obvious visual choices, in a film that, given the premise, would be best served by a straightforward and almost documentary-like approach, the director too often tries to frame the characters in all symmetry in the middle of the frame, as if they were in a Wes Anderson film, and it doesn't quite fit the concept. On the other hand, I appreciate that Garland didn't reach for some low-hanging fruit in the script and somehow politicised the film in a one-sided way at its core, so we get a story that is balanced and, most importantly, not black-and-white.
()
After Ex Machina and Annihilation, this is my third encounter with Alex Garland's directorial work, which, as with the aforementioned films, tells a story from the more or less near future - but this time in a more contemporary and realistic vein, which makes you shiver all the more. The plot is a simple road movie with action interludes where the main characters are confronted with disturbing scenes from "everyday life in the USA". I liked the audiovisual execution, with photographs of the journalists inserted into the picture, and the background music, which seemed to soften the horrors depicted with its friendly country overtones. The most uncomfortable sequence for me was undoubtedly the confrontation with Jesse Plemons. Visually, I was most impressed by the passage through the burning forest; and in terms of action, I liked the thrilling finale the most. A solid four stars!
()
This is an incredibly intense cinematic experience. Alex Garland is amazing, he can make things from sci-fi robots, to Annihilation, to the mind-fuck Men, to the post-apocalyptic Civil War, and I have to say that even such a "mundane" subject can bust your balls. The story focuses on a bunch of journalists on a trip to Washington with the desire to be the first to interview the President and reap the credit, and so we embark on a journey across America through several pitfalls. The biggest draw are the absolutely amazing visuals, which are colorful, beautiful to look at and realistic all at the same time, and I also have to point out the sort of detached nature of the whole film, which doesn't focus on all the characters that appear in the film, but rather just as one of many characters in that world, bringing to the fore not the actors and characters themselves, but rather the whole lot around them, so that the viewer can enjoy the story to the full and wonder "what on earth happened". I liked the variety of everything around, where we get a basic outline of the main characters and then we go straight into a journey where we are surprised by several situations, from a sniper, looting or a scene with soldiers, and once Jesse Plemons comes on the scene you better believe some hell is going to happen – here I have to admit that at this point I didn't breathe for five minutes, and after the whole situation was over I was internally anxious and nauseous like I haven't been in a really long time. There's an action packed finale filled with a fight in the city, so the film can cross that off the list too. But the biggest strength is the sound design, because it is absolutely flawlessly; the contrasts between utter silence, strange music and then the extremely loud gunshots make the film a complete assault on all the viewer's senses. For me, this is one of the best sounding films of our time and I will remember Civil War for this factor. Interestingly, then, all the shots were done with "real blanks", something not normally used in movies, instead of the much less sonorous blanks, which Garland rationalized by wanting to have the actors in action and at attention. Unreal. To be fair, I'd would love to see the serial form, as we don't really get a reason at all for why this is happening, how long it's been going on, and actually who's up against who, which would normally bother me a lot, but since this film completely captured my attention with everything around it, I didn't even feel the need to address that and just sat there, curled up in my seat, devouring this audio-visual masterpiece spiced up with a breathtaking finale and the scene with Plemons that nearly made my heart stop. AWESOME.
()
After the first trailer, my expectations skyrocketed. The combination of the renowned and seasoned Alex Garland and A24? That gave me a sense that success was imminent... And fortunately, I can say with a clear conscience after watching it that Civil War belongs to the crème de la crème of this year's films. The premise itself is captivating. There are very few films where war journalists play the lead role. I also appreciate that Garland opted for a more dramatic rather than purely war-centric approach, focusing on depicting the absurdity and horrors of conflicts in general. He nailed it. The film excels in its sound design. I haven't seen a film handled better in this aspect for a long time. The transitions between the perfectly loud sound of firearms and subsequent silence are a stroke of genius. A few scenes are unforgettable (a prime example being Jesse Plemons' minor role... during this several-minute sequence, I forgot to breathe). And the ending with the attack on the White House had me thrilled. Yes, this film undoubtedly deserves to be seen in a movie theater. It's an audiovisual masterpiece. I might rate it even higher in the future, as I need to think it over. For now, I give it 8.5/10.
()
Alex Garland has a tremendous talent for making movies that are sexy on paper, even in trailers most of the time, but the final material never matches it. And he couldn't do it this time either. How could he, when the characters here are anemic to the point of woe despite quality actors, and their behavioral changes often make no sense at all. Any coherent development of the plot and even the work with atmosphere is quite minimal. One strong scene with a highly stereotyped (but at least well-acted) redneck doesn't really save the day. Likewise, anyone expecting more background to this war will be sorely disappointed and won't get anything thought-provoking or unpleasant. Go play the “The Last of Us 2” instead, or at least watch Children of Men for the fiftieth time. Believe me, it will still be more revelatory than this.
()