“Civil War” stars Kirsten Dunst, Cailee Spaeny, Wagner Moura, Stephen McKinley Henderson, and Nick Offerman. Released on April 12, 2024, the film has a group of journalists caught in the middle of a second civil war. The film is written and directed by Alex Garland, who also directed “Ex Machina”, “Annihilation”, and “Men”. Many wars have decimated the world throughout history because we just don’t know how to get along. But despite all this senseless violence, we’re still able to see tomorrow. Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean the world is safe from more impending wars creeping around every corner, even in today’s society. This one, in particular, is anything but civil. No, I’m not talking about the one where Captain America and Iron Man beat the crap out of one another. This type of civil war is much more real and haunting than the one from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. However, both of them provoke the question: What the heck is wrong with using our words instead of our fists or guns? This latest dystopian film from Alex Garland seeks to warn us of our impending future and provide indie jewel A24 its first step into blockbuster territory regarding the studio’s expensive budget. Does it succeed on both fronts or does it make us prefer escapism over realistic agendas in filmmaking? Let’s find out. The story is set in the near future when the United States is engulfed by an escalating multiparty civil war. The country has become a dystopian dictatorship under its President (Offerman), currently in his third term. Among the population affected by the war is a team of journalists: war photojournalist Lee Smith (Dunst), young photographer Jessie (Spaeny), Lee’s colleague Joel (Moura), and veteran reporter Sammy (Henderson). Despite the dangers and violence coming from the war, Lee leads the team across the country to Washington, D.C. in an attempt to interview the President about the current situation. They encounter multiple perils in a race against the clock to arrive at their destination before the rebel factions get to the capital first. Not many films this year have garnered more attention and conversations than “Civil War”, and with good reason. The movie depicted the horrors of what could’ve been if society hadn’t changed its current behavior for the better. While it’s portrayed more as a fictional tale than a full-length documentary, it’s hard to ignore how it somehow resembles the recent acts of violence we got, including the January 6 incident. It’s one of the reasons I was looking forward to “Civil War”, with the other being Alex Garland’s involvement. While his movies after “Ex Machina” were more alienating than brilliant, I appreciated his bold attempts to provide complex conversations within the horror and thriller genres. However, I can also admit his execution of specific narrative elements was pretty iffy. “Civil War” looks to be another example of a conversation starter based on its marketing. However, the other challenge it needs to excel at is attracting audiences outside those preferring “thinking movies”. While “Civil War” may seem like an action-packed war movie from the marketing, there’s more to it than just another standard blockbuster. It’s more along the lines of a horror suspense drama that uses the war between different factions as a source of terror. It doesn’t explain what caused this war to occur or expand upon its political significance. Instead, it immediately puts the audience right into the chaos, with no idea how it happened other than divided factions killing each other. This lack of world-building may not work for those needing to know what the heck’s up with America, but based on what I saw, I found it effective in that it provides the fear of being in the dark about it. But does it make the movie a gripping experience? Yeah, it does. Packed with unsettling moments of violence and characters that are more humane than traditional, “Civil War” is a bold and visually stunning tale of modern warfare that benefited from Garland’s audacious vision. Regarding Garland’s direction and screenplay, the film faithfully depicts the horrors of war and the discomfort of imagining its possibility while avoiding its commercialized and political agendas. However, that’s not the only element that made “Civil War” a striking piece of war cinema. It’s also a realistic and haunting display of war journalism that doesn’t hold back on its dreadful merits. While it may be cool to see the action up close, it’s not something people should take as their first job because, as we said countless times, war is hell. Not only do they run the risk of getting caught in the crossfire if they are not careful, but they can also see things they might be unprepared to witness, such as the lifeless bodies left behind. The movie's decision to center its narrative solely around the journalists was an excellent choice, as it effectively captured the palpable tension that arose from their fears and defenselessness. Moreover, the characters Lee and Jessie added another layer of depth and complexity to the film's overall story. Lee is described as a famed yet hardened photojournalist who’s an expert at her job, but that doesn’t make her invincible regarding her past experiences. She’s focused on the task at hand, but there are also moments of her humanity that make Lee more than just a strict, cold-hearted person. Kirsten Dunst offered a highly compelling performance that balances Lee’s strictness with a subtle sense of worry and dread, making her one of the film’s highlights. Would I also say it’s one of Dunst’s best performances of her career outside of “Spider-Man”? Absolutely. She was riveting. Another highlight I think should get more attention was the young Cailee Spaeny, who also delivered one of the best performances I’ve seen. Of course, that’s only due to me not seeing “Priscilla”, but don’t worry. I’ll get to it eventually. Spaeny’s role as Jessie perfectly resembles the perception of those experiencing war firsthand, including an up-and-coming journalist. The complex emotions, including fear and dread, benefitted profoundly through Spaeny’s impressive acting, which is enough to get me intrigued about her future as an actress. Wagner Moura and Stephen McKinley Henderson also delivered strong performances as Joel and Sammy, respectively. There’s also Jesse Plemons as one of the soldiers you see in the trailers, and all I can say is that fans of the actor might be pleased with what he offered despite his short screen time. Of course, it’s not just the horror and violence that sells “Civil War”. The technical aspects made the film a highly captivating experience worth seeing on the big screen with the best sound system. Rob Hardy’s cinematography miraculously envisions the frightfulness of the film’s thrilling violence and unsettling imagery, including the finale. However, it also isn’t afraid to showcase the gorgeousness and immersion of its sceneries, which is enough to pull audiences into the action. This is an excellent-looking film that displays the efforts of Garland’s collaboration with Rob Hardy. I would also credit the sound team for creating a sense of realism in the gunfire and explosions and even editor Jake Roberts for the transitions between the pictures taken and the action unfolding. My only issue with the film was its soundtrack, mainly in the first 45 minutes. There was this one song I think felt misplaced for a scene that was supposed to be disturbingly dark, but that’s just me. The other song after that was fine, although the film might’ve worked better if the soundtrack was only for the end credits. Overall, “Civil War” is a gripping, disturbing, and thought-provoking portrayal of the horrors of war journalism that also works as a cautionary warning for our uncertain future. Through his remarkable vision and enticing script, Alex Garland effectively combines the film’s distressing themes with audacious storytelling to craft a brilliantly immersive and haunting experience from start to finish. Despite my take on the film’s soundtrack, this is a vast improvement over Garland’s previous two films as a director due to its cast, mainly Dunst and Spaeny, intense action, and technical achievements. This is not only Garland’s best directorial film since “Ex Machina”, but it’s also one of the year's best movies, war-related or otherwise. Its focus on drama over nonstop action and unnerving concept may not bode well for everyone, but I will still recommend it to those who enjoy war movies with substance. A-
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Home of the most friendly movie reviews on the planet.
Categories
All
Follow Me |