Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Saw it last night on a whim because the schedule lined up perfectly; had no expectations whatsoever and really enjoyed it. Definitely see this in a theater if you can because the sound editing is amazing.
Very intense, hard to take your eyes off the screen for the duration and some moments of sheer terror that reminded me of The Road. The urban warfare in DC was unsettling. And some really good needle drops.
I checked out a few of the review sites, reading at least 24 individual reviews, and generally speaking, leftists like it and righties don't.
It doesn't sound as if that was Garland's intention.
“There’s a lot of films that tell everything to everyone and make everything completely digestible. I’m not particularly interested in doing it because it feels oppositional to engagement. ‘Left vs. right’ closes down the conversation. That is the problem with polarization.”
I don’t usually go to watch movies, but I happened to have free time and was nearby the theater, and the timing was right.
I wouldn’t say this movie was good or bad. 5 out of 10 is about right.
Is this movie worth your time? Not really, unless you have some time to kill.
But after watching it, I was left with this main thought:
What was the point of it all?
If I was to write a statement on what this movie is about, here is what I would write:
There is a Civil War going on in the US. Period. End of discussion.
Again, I don’t see the point of this movie at all.
But I guess if they did an actual movie that really tackled the issues, right vs left, that might incite real violence.
This is probably a topic to tread lightly on, because even though the establishment wants us divided, they definitely don’t want us fighting each other.
So we are left with this movie that doesn’t really even get into the why.
If I was to write a statement on what this movie is about, here is what I would write:
There is a Civil War going on in the US. Period. End of discussion.
A comment I read elsewhere made a good point: In addition to showing the realities of what a civil war in the US would really look like, the movie is about the ethics of photojournalism (particularly whether it's truly right to just observe as opposed to trying to intervene), and what decades of doing that job does to a person's soul.
This movie is not that great. Not because they don't fill us in on the causes of the war. The zombie apocalypse genre is notorious for not giving much backstory yet it still has some semi-decent movies and TV shows. The problem with CIVIL WAR is a thin plot. It's a story of four well-known archetypes in cinema--the old fount of wisdom, the fun guy, the cynical veteran and the bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young gunner--taking a cross-Mid Atlantic journey to interview the President. In between skirmishes here and there, and a very predictable dangerous encounter along the way, there are more quiet stretches full of dialogue that don't provide us much information about the characters or the United States of America they inhabit. That's the movie in a nutshell.
The ending almost made me burst out laughing. It was so cheesy and predictable.
The sound engineering, as noted already, is incredible.
It's also weird to see some of these Millennials like Kirsten Dunst and Amanda Seyfried morph into middle aged-actresses taking on roles with more gravitas. That's life, I suppose.
Yea. the person who wrote/directed the movie explained why he had California and Texas team up. He said they are the 2 largest and most independent states by overall infrastructure. Both could have ideological differences with the federal government and still be ok. And that both could have those differences and still think the president killing Americans is wrong and team up .
And I guess we have to ride with that explanation even though that scenario is 10,000,000% implausible.
I don't think true ideological differences would ever be a cause of a second American Civil War because people simply don't care that much. So, you have a problem with federal government overreach, eh? Okay, so are you willing to forego vacations, college football, summer BBQs, have your house blown up, have your kids miss 3 years of school, etc.? Americans are way too selfish and way too comfortable for something like this to happen despite some of the big talk on the internet. When people start thinking about the costs in a very real way, virtually no one would be willing to go through with it.
Now if you made a movie about our current political climate coupled with a much deeper and prolonged Great Recession 2.0 and vast infrastructure failure (going 2 weeks at a time without electricity), then that might be somewhat believable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
