-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Reviews for Civil War directed by Alex Garland, starring Kirsten Dunst
- Thread starter RastaMentality
- Start date
The movie is pretty middling, without examining the cause the message is basically just division is bad. But people in here wishing for a civil war are not jobs. The "Pure and righteous" vs the bad guys. You are the worst types of zealot. Everyone loses in civil war, it's one of the few points even this mid movie made.
I thought not, but there are definite parallels people were making between Offerman and Trump
Oh yes, the "good" people who value all individuals . I too am one of the good people who wish for the deaths of millions.
The people dying in such a war won't be the business magnates or robber barons. If you actually believe that's the big problem your much better of trying to instill a class consciousness in ALL people and reforming things that way.
Clearly a movie with no clear message allows such people to project themselves into it as the good guys. Dude probably unironically roots for peacemaker when he says he'll achieve peace no matter how many men women and children must die for it.
Last edited:
im not gonna dog pile that poster but I laughed for a few minutes after reading their post 🤣
Anyway. Saw the movie yesterday and loved it. Went in pretty blind and enjoyed the journey. I thought they explained enough stuff that I didn't have too many questions.
Will definitely buy this on UHD
Anyway. Saw the movie yesterday and loved it. Went in pretty blind and enjoyed the journey. I thought they explained enough stuff that I didn't have too many questions.
Will definitely buy this on UHD
No but I have seen people suggest if Trump wins, there will be no more elections. lol
Nah, and all the people who got convicted because of Jan6 already showed its effect to people considering going all in for Trump.
Btw. the last shot before the credits was powerful.
The Second Civil War
What an absolutely wild movie to watch in 2024, wasn't expecting that at all.
Did ya like it? I think it is surprisingly topical to modern US in a lot of ways.
The movie can't be bothered to make any real commentary on that but the president character is pretty clearly supposed to be a Trump analogue, it literally opens with him doing a speech along the lines of "we're going to have the best victory, the most beautiful victory, nobody's ever seen a victory like this".
Well it was just a made for TV movie on HBO.
I'm More surprises isn't lost media. For the longest time the only way I could watch it was on a VHS tape that I recorded off of HBO when it first went live.
300 cad. Real money, fuck the dirty cheap feeling freedom dollars.
This was completely shallow.
I know it's not supposed to reflect modern politics, but some actual story would be nice. It doesn't have any. I felt like I was watching a match of Counter-Strike.
Most stuff felt not organic and just there for shock value. Why are people fighting behind the frontlines?
The premise ultimatetly would have made more sense if it was the country disintegrating into multiple groups fighting for control. Didn't fit into 3 big armies fighting at all.
I know it's not supposed to reflect modern politics, but some actual story would be nice. It doesn't have any. I felt like I was watching a match of Counter-Strike.
Most stuff felt not organic and just there for shock value. Why are people fighting behind the frontlines?
The premise ultimatetly would have made more sense if it was the country disintegrating into multiple groups fighting for control. Didn't fit into 3 big armies fighting at all.
As someone whose parents grew up in a military dictatorship, I'm always amazed at how much Americans take their country's relative stability for granted.
There's dozens of articles by political scientists, historians, and other experts arguing why the idea of not having free elections in the future is possible given what we've heard from the right in the US.
Seeing as how I live here, I'd rather not take the chance at losing democracy. Or letting others in marginalized groups in the US come to harm.
Actually I think he is perfectly proving Garland's point!
Saw it tonight and while I thought it was a well done cautionary tale and appreciated the subjectivity versus objectivity of war via experiences, thought the film really had nothing to say.
My point about Americans taking their country's stability for granted still stands. It's mind boggling.
Saying Trump winning isn't the end of democracy isn't taking it for granted. It's just common sense born of decades of being an American.
Looked on Wikipedia and found this map of the different factions in this movie
Apparently the yellow part is the "New People's Army". Now, am I crazy or were these never even mentioned in the movie? Lol
Also, kinda funny how all the factions are connected territories and fairly large except the main one in the movie (Western Forces) which is literally only California and Texas.
Apparently the yellow part is the "New People's Army". Now, am I crazy or were these never even mentioned in the movie? Lol
Also, kinda funny how all the factions are connected territories and fairly large except the main one in the movie (Western Forces) which is literally only California and Texas.
Last edited:
Yeah tbh it feels that the idea that Trump will successfully suspend elections/rule in a dictatorship is just the photo negative version of the idea that there will be a general strike/rebellion and we will have real freedom in America from leftists.
It's accelerationist dreaming, come back to reality. The harm Trump would do would be incalculable , and also not that. Stakes should be established and focused on regarding what the very real threats he represents
Loved it. Ending shook me to my core.
Hope Garland takes the rest he's earned.
Men > Annihilation > Civil War >> Ex Machina
Hope Garland takes the rest he's earned.
Men > Annihilation > Civil War >> Ex Machina
At least 9 million are speculated to have died during the Bolshevik Revolution, so you're not far off there.
I felt the shallowness is there to represent how the War is seen from the viewpoint of the Journalists, like it doesn't really matter "why" it's happening, or who's right or wrong, it's just happening and they need to cover it, which I found refreshing.
Competely agree, I just watched it before and I found it very bland and pointless. Zero backstory for the main characters, Why are they fighting each other? Only movies I've liked that was he was involved with was Dredd and Ex Machina.
Sure. But how does that make for a refreshing or interesting movie? What does that say about journalists? That they're bad? That they just care about the story? How could such a broad statement possibly be universally true?
I don't know what the point of the movie was. But if it's a statement about journalism? I don't think it was effective.
Not sure about elsewhere, but the two people sitting next to me looked at each other and said, "That's it?"
Because War films are normally about bad v good, this wasn't like that because it focused on the journalists mission, which is unique and interesting in my opinion.
hmmm, pretty good movie. i'd give it an 8/10, third or fourth best thing Garland has made. Annihilation and Devs being my definite favorites.
i especially liked how the Trump-like President was a loser coward at the end, just begging for mercy. didn't even have a proper escape plan. what an idiot, hah.
and did Garland get the idea for this while playing The Last of Us, or what..? can't be a coincidence that it's also a dangerous roadtrip through America with a witty young lady tagging along and a dude who looks like Joel from the HBO show, and is also named Joel.
i really disliked all the sanitized deaths though, so many get shot in the torso/gut and just fall to sleep immediately, eyes closed and calm. i mean.. thats not how it works. if you get shot in the gut you WILL writhe and howl in absolute pain on the ground, it's not pretty.
also the journos aren't even wearing ear protection from what i could tell, even when the loudest goddamn guns in existence are going off right next to their heads. and no one gets any hearing damage, just wtf. i think it would have been quite effective and dramatic if maybe one of them completely lost their hearing during some of the most intense action..
IMO it seriously needed to be more gritty and realistic to really drive home the brutality of war, the action and deaths mostly just made me yawn (with a couple exceptions). the best and most exciting parts were all the quiet moments, when they were arriving in new places and you had no idea what was gonna happen.. was legit scary at times.
i especially liked how the Trump-like President was a loser coward at the end, just begging for mercy. didn't even have a proper escape plan. what an idiot, hah.
and did Garland get the idea for this while playing The Last of Us, or what..? can't be a coincidence that it's also a dangerous roadtrip through America with a witty young lady tagging along and a dude who looks like Joel from the HBO show, and is also named Joel.
i really disliked all the sanitized deaths though, so many get shot in the torso/gut and just fall to sleep immediately, eyes closed and calm. i mean.. thats not how it works. if you get shot in the gut you WILL writhe and howl in absolute pain on the ground, it's not pretty.
also the journos aren't even wearing ear protection from what i could tell, even when the loudest goddamn guns in existence are going off right next to their heads. and no one gets any hearing damage, just wtf. i think it would have been quite effective and dramatic if maybe one of them completely lost their hearing during some of the most intense action..
IMO it seriously needed to be more gritty and realistic to really drive home the brutality of war, the action and deaths mostly just made me yawn (with a couple exceptions). the best and most exciting parts were all the quiet moments, when they were arriving in new places and you had no idea what was gonna happen.. was legit scary at times.
Totally missed the other factions, thought it was only the US vs WF. Was Meth Damon with the reds?Looked on Wikipedia and found this map of the different factions in this movie
Apparently the yellow part is the "New People's Army". Now, am I crazy or were these never even mentioned in the movie? Lol
Also, kinda funny how all the factions are connected territories and fairly large except the main one in the movie (Western Forces) which is literally only California and Texas.
Also kinda unbelievable that two states could overpower the rest.
I bet Garland wanted to be almost totally vague and there's intentionally no answer to who most of the people they bump into are fighting for, but A24 heard the grumbles of people needing the world fleshed out and threw that together.
This is actually not correct. The movie explicitly states that there is a kill on sight order for journalists around Washington i.e. the US military. The premise of their journey is an assumption that they will likely die trying.
I think the Florida Alliance is mentioned once, in the opening scene, but yeah otherwise they are not actually part of the movie.
I think it's fair to say that most war movies are about the horrors of war, or the individual experience of soldiers, not "good vs bad".
It's strained since California and Texas were chosen as allies mostly just to avoid real-world politics. Regardless of how much practical sense it makes. Likewise other states that definitely would not go along with a fascist Trump-like administration are for it here just to, I guess, avoid actual current politics in the US.
CA and TX are large with a lot of resources, of course. But there are all sorts of complications that don't factor in the movie, like exactly how the distributed home bases of the US military decide to fall, what happens to existing national guard forces and supplies in each state, etc. We could imagine scenarios like mass-desertions of the guard in some states towards the western force states.
Is it ever actually stated who the forces they follow in the middle of the movie are? They could have been Florida Alliance for all we know.
In my experience, the majority of war movies are not about bad v good, at least the well-known ones.
The troops we see in the movie are the Western Forces (Cali + Texas), this is clearly stated. The Florida Alliance and whoever the New People's Army are are not in the movie.
We didn't wear ear protection in Afghanistan and we had 49 straight days of fighting. My hearing is fine and I had a MK 48.
I saw it last night with my cousin who isn't the biggest Garland fan. We both liked it. He liked that it was about journalists instead of a family trying to survive, which we have seen a million times. It kinda reminded me of Nightcrawler with a photo journalist trying to get that perfect shot of people dying.
Meth Damon with with the Blue group, USA classic.
He asks where each person is from and is happy to hear Missouri and Colorado. IDK about the accuracy of the map but the Western Forces were Texas and California with Florida as its own thing was mentioned. So you can infer Colorado and Missouri were still loyal to Washington.
CA and Texas have food, energy and people. It is not that unbelievable.
Yeah, small arms aren't generally so loud that would cause hearing loss outdoors, right? You have to wear ear protection in-doors specifically because the small, enclosed space causes the noise to echo around the room and is more likely to damage your ears from my understanding.