Civil War - Review

[@gameskyjumper1721]

I know how the war started. One day, In-n-Out and Whataburger joined forces. They form the biggest fastfood franchise in the States. They eventually gain powers in military and politics.

[@lego4virgo]

This.

[@mitchbarber4748]

How do they train their forces? Animal style!

[@ebert311]

Oh my god!!!! That explains everything. Now, I know this could happen in real life!

[@stephenatwood241]

What side are the Shake Shack forces on?

[@JordanElliottMcClure]

Awesome!😂

[@haydenstuart1945]

I just saw it now. This movie had me sweating in my seat. Jesse Plemon's character was more scary than most horror movie have.

[@zacgale4231]

He was a menace

[@Murican-Faith]

So, what happens to the Florida alliance? Let me guess, they just bit** smack the South as insignificant, eh? Ha, what a croc

[@Sarcastic_redbeard34]

Lol it sucked! It was slow and boring and the dumb kid got two people killed

[@MiniLemmy]

Jesse Plemons was the real star in this despite his very short screen time - him in the trailer was what got me to watch the movie in the first place

[@Nejourney78]

​@@Murican-FaithWhat they said about the Carolinas was strange.

[@mark2graves-movies689]

We saw civil war last night. What a scary cautionary tale. Also personalizes other conflicts around the world: Those conflicts could be us. Reminds me to not let our political and social differences outweigh civility. Important movie

[@Taco1011]

Agreed 100%.

[@TheBerylknight]

Civility is only something spoiled rich people care about. Anyone who has real problems could give a crap about it, because it's useless. Equality, justice, freedom, quality of life... these are the building blocks of a strong society. To quote one of my favorite people, "civility is overrated".

[@TheBerylknight]

In my experience, "civility" is usually something only rich or spoiled people who don't have any real problems care about. Equality, freedom, justice, quality of life... these are the things that actually build a strong society. To quote one of my favorite people, "civility is overrated". And it is. It's also often used as a facade to mask some of the most oppressive and evil societies that have existed.

[@TheBerylknight]

In my experience, "civility" is usually something only rich or spoiled people who don't have any real problems obsess over. Equality, freedom, justice, quality of life... these are the things that actually build a strong society. To quote one of my favorite people, "civility is overrated". And it really is. It's also often used as a facade to mask some of the most oppressive and evil societies that have existed.

[@AnimationFanboy2k4]

yeah...

[@K0m30ng]

The fact that this movie huge ambitious movie cost less than $100 million is absolutely impressive. A24 and their filmmaking team really knew how to use their budget really well, good job for them 👍

[@MichaelWutsch]

A24 is a distributor

[@mrgiggles5555]

​​@@MichaelWutsch They produce and distribute films. Sometimes they only distribute, Like Priscilla. but lots of films in the library including Civil War were produced by A24.

[@jw7019]

It is very impressive. Now, if only people would lay aside their preconceived notions and just watch the damn thing, that would be great. So many “elite critics” all over twitter are basically complaining that the movie didn’t depict their side (the left) as “the good guys”.

[@prestonscott8214]

There really isn't that many set pieces outside the end

[@JoeJoe-lq6bd]

@@jw7019 I haven't seen that, and they never say who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. And you don't know which side most people are on at all. I think you're just pulling things out of your backside.

[@remixisthis]

Not having a side to root far turns a war movie into a horror movie

[@rataflechera]

Three are two sides: horror of war and humanity. And sometimes you even wonder if rooting for humanity here is the right call.

[@halinasarapata5611]

I am from Poland, so I'm completely detached from any possible political implication with this movie (I mean not really with a war between Russia and Ukraine just outside our borders); but I watched it yesterday and I don't remember seeing a movie like this in a looooong time. It was extremely tense, and I got so caught up in this that I broke down crying several times in this few slower moments when my adrenaline dropped. It was both incredibly satisfying and weird. I love this film.

[@tomdobrokhot7300]

That's what's beautiful about how it was set up. It was apolitical. There is nothing about which people or parties are good or bad.

[@swann433]

Exactly.

[@swann433]

Agree. You got it exactly.

[@questionmaker5666]

@@Minicoup58tv You obviously don't, it's apolitical not a political ad.

[@sullathehutt7720]

You sound like you need therapy tbh

[@realfitzmarker]

Jessie’s actions at the end of the film felt like something Nightcrawler’s Lou would do.

[@jonhenrychris6973]

Exactly

[@angelotrinidad6888]

“Good for her”

[@Y34RZ3R0iscoming]

“Where are you from” was an insane scene

[@JC19021]

Fuck who you know where you from?

[@Gentleman_And_Scholar]

I still cannot believe bro said Hong Kong. Such a clearly wrong answer in that situation 💀 bro coulda mentioned any us city

[@ernstthalmann4306]

I gasped, and I never do that when watching a movie. One guy at the end of the movie started screaming about trump and Biden and left before the ending. This was the most intense movie experience I've ever had.

[@rewdwarf123]

@@Gentleman_And_Scholar I suppose when you're under extreme duress it's not easy to think straight.

[@arun279]

it’s actually brilliant to have tx and ca allying for unspecified reasons in the story, stops any political side to try to own or denounce the movie

[@johnrivers9393]

Texas and California 2 largest economies and largest food producers in the US. 5 of the top 10 largest ports in the US. If the US was squeezing the states and its citizens for money then maybe they decided to bring that influence to bear and fight D.C. my $.02.

[@arun279]

@@johnrivers9393 in the movie, there are also references to a third term presidency and FBI getting dismantled. that could add to it as well

[@aaronadams4657]

@@johnrivers9393I’ve been trying to say this. Two massive economic powers that can join up and rival the rest of the country and cripple the United States dollar value

[@obara7366]

Tbh, it made a lot of sense to me when I thought about it, but maybe I'm dumb, LOL. I saw it as 2 sides on opposite ends that were EQUALLY displeased with the state of affairs. Probably started separately, then they linked up so that they would have a real shot at winning.

[@Zurround]

And despite what so many @$$H0L3$ have been saying to the contrary on these threads it is NOT unrealistic. I know our 2 states have their differences but enemies have to join forces to take on an even bigger and scarier enemy and if the federal government becomes oppressive it makes sense for the 2 biggest states to join forces. During the 2nd world war USA and USSR joined forces despite hating each other because not even Russia wanted the N@Z1$ to win.

[@NerdsTakeOnTheWorld]

Just got home from watching the film at an afternoon quiet theater in rural America. All I can say is Holy Shit. Without spoiling it, the first major scene had my blood pressure up and i felt as though I was about to puke. It reminded me of a day in Iraq in 2008. I was not prepared for this film. I think it's for sure one many need to see but the trailers and reviews so far do not prepare you for this.

[@dwk70075]

That first 5 minutes you couldnt even hear anyone breathe in the theater when my son and I went.

[@MiZZVMN]

My husband and I watched it last night. The theater was completely silent after that first scene.

[@LemonCherryGelatoBiscotti]

@@dwk70075 why in the world would you be able to hear anyone breathe in a movie theater 😂😂😂

[@dwk70075]

@@LemonCherryGelatoBiscotti Its a figure of speech lmfao

[@LemonCherryGelatoBiscotti]

@@dwk70075 its almost the opposite. “You could hear a pin drop” maybe

[@K0m30ng]

It's a movie titled "Civil War" but somehow there's no superheroes fighting at an international airport?? That's it, i'm giving this a "Stay Away" score 🙃

[@EzeICE]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@andrewroberts7428]

not enough beards either

[@antennaist]

OK , I'll stay away . previews looked too Hollywood , too cheezy.

[@robertmartinovics9270]

I was going to complain if Sam Wilson's Captain America and War Machine started fighting but was pleasantly surprised by a road movie.

[@warriormanmaxx8991]

@@EzeICE - what are you finding SO funny?!?

[@MrModel--CAPTURED-ON-FILM]

I've seen this film. Having experienced the riots of 'the 60s' and the US govt's use of its military against its citizens, I find this film believable. This film felt like a marriage between 1987's "Wings Of Desire" where the press in this film are the detached angels in that film, and, 1968's "Wild In The Streets" in which the youth (anyone under 30 - the 'good guys') take over the United States and lock up everyone who is older - the 'bad guys'. I did like this film, Civil War. I believe you presented a very fair and in depth professional review of an extremely tense and triggering subject.

[@FromtheEasternLands]

Saw it last night. I really, really enjoyed this film. My favorite scene was the Winter Wonderland scene with the snipers, because, to me, it most overtly expressed exactly the idea that there are no good guys or bad guys. The spotter said is best and most eloquently- there’s a guy in that house who’s trying to kill us and we’re trying to kill him. I left the theater haunted and impressed. There’d be no super heroes or big triumphant parade. There’d be death, destruction, sadness, and an immeasurable degree of violence. I hope with all that I have in me this goes down as an interesting thought piece and not a twisted harbinger of times to come.

[@Taco1011]

Regarding your last thought, I believe wholeheartedly that's all it will be. A harrowing cautionary tale. It's possible, but in spite of all our political differences, extremely unlikely. I also think it's meant to be seen as a warning, and a reminder, to all those opining for it that it's not all good guys and bad guys. It would be brutal unnecessary slaughter. Community vs Community. Neighbour vs Neighbour.

[@ntfoperative9432]

@@Taco1011yeah I really hope this makes all those people begging for a war to think

[@johnrivers9393]

@@Taco1011who knows people now a days are more desensitized and apathetic it makes this somewhat plausible.

[@johnrivers9393]

“I’ve got some good news.” From that sniper scene brilliant.

[@brianhotaling5849]

Like The Siege?

[@WeylandLabs]

Top 5 most competent and intellectual human review on YT currently ! Impressive use of analogy's and language, very well said Dan. 👍

[@maxflares8888]

The convo with the sniper with the dyed hair made everyone laugh in the theater

[@JustinCage56]

"I got good news..."

[@locke8881]

The red and blue camo on his face was something else.

[@bbbylw]

Sammy does suggest at one point that the Texas/California alliance is a pragmatic, strategic one that will collapse the second Washington DC falls. He says it's 'the Race to Berlin', alluding to the U.S.-Soviet Alliance of 1941-45, ie: the short-term alliance of ideologically opposed forces against a common enemy, which promptly dissolved into the Cold War once Germany was defeated.

[@goataghut5066]

The “relationship” between the USA and the Soviets only dissolved superficially after the war. Both openly and actively collaborated in dissolving the last remnants of the European colonial empires in Africa and Asia. The Cold War never happened.

[@bbbylw]

@@goataghut5066 Sure dude, 100%

[@goataghut5066]

@@bbbylw your ignorance of history is astounding.

[@bbbylw]

@@goataghut5066 I'm not interested in what you have to say. Thanks for sharing though.

[@goataghut5066]

@@bbbylw then why are you responding?

[@vaporwave4880]

Totally agree with Dan’s review. I’m a Brit, so a countryman of Alex Garland. so I think it’s completely appropriate that he didn’t take sides or even present sides. He’s saying America, we love you. Don’t let this happen.

[@patrickt6642]

I don't think you have to worry the left doesn't like to fight they are more worried about pronouns.they don't like macho straight men but like them to defend their asses.

[@kevenmcginn5406]

As an American, I was horrified by the movie, and thought it awful. But your comment about it is the best I have seen to date- and drives home the reason I hated it! God prevent such an event. Thank you.

[@KC-2049]

Canadian and I agree. I think it's a lot easier to watch this movie as it was intended to be watched if you're not American.

[@boxtears]

It's funny how people were getting so riled up over this movie because they thought it would take a real world political stance while at the same time getting mad it was presenting a political scenario that made zero sense in the current political climate (Cali and TX linking up), not realizing that was deliberate to present a modern American civil war scenario in an ALTERNATE timeline to explore how a conflict like that might play out, rather than try to make it about Republicans vs Democrats or Liberals vs Conservatives or Right vs Left or what have you.

[@sk8mafia214]

Yup! Folks went in with the wrong mind set. It’s best to not go in to the movie with any mind set imo but, to see what kind of story the filmmaker is trying to make and form one’s own opinion from there. Of course this wouldn’t happen in real life and the only time something like this happened was during the American Civil War to protect the institution of slavery.

[@suckerborneveryday1815]

More like the guy writing it doesn't know anything about America.

[@boxtears]

@@suckerborneveryday1815 What a dimwitted take. Sounds like you're the sucker born yesterday.

[@yasielromero8236]

Well said. The movie is not the least interested in telling you how we got there or who is right or wrong, you have no clue throughout the whole movie Is all about the horrible consequences that such a conflict would bring regardless of "fault"

[@josephfisher426]

@@yasielromero8236 It is a high degree of difficulty choice to write that story that way, as opposed to using a historical basis like the Spanish Civil War.

[@jokersson21]

I think the fact the main ppl you follow are journalists should indicate that it’s meant to be view on a neutral stance. While I know journalist can play into biases, that’s not what they’re supposed to do. I agree that making this apolitical is better than choosing a side and outwardly blaming one or the other. I think the omitting the cause of the war and focusing on the horrors of it is better as it speaks to the ones who are calling for a civil war, who are actively supporting one. A ‘this is what you’re asking for’ type of attitude. I’m much more interested in seeing it than before as I thought it would try and be a cautionary tale of the future based on current events.

[@victorglaviano]

When in the past 20 years when have most journalists been neutral? That's their duties in a democratic society, unfortunately many haven't gotten the memo!

[@lloydlego6088]

Two things that are unrealistic to me. Ca and Texas being allies, and journalists being an unbiased impartial point of view. I am sure the media would like us to think they are impartial, but that is not the case.

[@AllInTheGame01]

Given the subject matter, the intention to stay as 'apolitical' as possible & well utilised $50m production budget & $20m marketing budget, I thought all its audience score metrics esp CinemaScore would be interesting to track especially as Alex Garland's movies typically don't have high audience scores with Ex Machina being the only one of the 4 movies he's both written & directed that both critics & audiences have loved! Currently has a B- CinemaScore, 77% RT (3.9/5), 76% PostTrak, 6.3/10 Metacritic & 7.6/10 IMDB audience ratings, so looks ok but not great overall in terms of its box office legs.

[@Ductos]

"Apocalypse Now for Centrists" indeed.

[@aldoalto4087]

You literally don't know what the politics are so you cannot be a centrist... this movie is almost literally absent of politics. Not taking a side is not centrism when neither side is defined.

[@CesarFerraro2]

@@aldoalto4087 Right, and I don't think that's an argument in the film's favor. If they wanted to make a film with just the message that war is bad, which is a very old message, then they should have set it in a conflict that existed, like the war in Iraq, or the height of the civil conflict in Colombia, etc. This would have made the film sound more substantive.

[@mikeflanary642]

War is hell, the movie

[@CargoSlim]

Centrism is incredibly stupid in this day and age

[@toryworldmusic]

@@CargoSlim Centrism implies passivity. To that you'd be wrong.

[@rajnikanth1776]

Im so glad i didnt watch any of the trailers and only knew the logline going in. Ever since I walked out of the theater Ive heard so many reviewers and found whatever criticisms interesting to hear, but Dans view on the film was pretty much how i felt. Considering how easy it would be to pick a side narratively in order to flesh out the conflict more, I feel its specifically designed to be in the periphery, distant enough to keep you focusing on the effects of a civil war rather than why it came to be. It allows the viewer to attach whatever political narrative they want, personal or otherwise, to what's happening around the characters. By doing that, It reinforces the ultimate cautionary tale and message on a different level that it doesnt matter whose side your on, that we should all aim to work together peacefully, cuz even if you think you want this, you dont.

[@realworkoutsforrealpeople5041]

It's a brutal movie. But it should be required viewing for each and every American.

[@theycallmeebola]

couldn’t disagree more with the director’s intent and Dan’s review and perspective on the film, but admire the review nevertheless! apolitical violence and warfare removed from its context is meaningless to me. never fully felt for the characters as i never got a sense for the reasons behind their actions. since i felt the apathy from the characters, i never fully locked in to this theme of dehumanization that Dan spoke of during the movie. I can see, retrospectively, how one could read this film in that way but didn’t come through for me. Pretty well shot film though.

[@siriusgray]

Another great review Dan. You’re one of the best movie critics in the game imo

[@jonnyutah.308]

Saw it last night in the theater. It sucked plain and simple🤷🏻‍♂️. Super slow at times and made no explanation to who anyone in the movie even was. Just a bunch of people in store bought multi cam uniforms fighting each other. The boog boy scene was the most entertaining.

[@DaddyFutbol]

Seriously this movie was : 💩

[@cwega2463]

bro liked their own comment

[@raymondmartin6737]

Being 80, born in London, UK in 1944 during WWII, coming to US in 1949 on the Queen Mary. Then 15 years later in the Vietnam War Era, being a 100% Disabled American Veteran of over 50 years ago, now sick with Diabetes and other ailments, fearing life today. God Save America, not again 😢

[@AZRockslide42]

Thank you. I felt exactly the same when I came out of the theater. Neither side is presented as "The Good Guys,” and the entire movie was made to be as unsettling as possible. The entire point is summed up by Dunst's character when she comments that she thought sending pictures of war home was a warning not to do this.

[@irtnyc]

There literally isn't an "either side" in the film. It's the end of a war between four or more different militaries. You're perhaps projecting a domestic political POV from the present onto a fictional universe. Try watching Starship Troopers instead. That film does that on purpose to make you think. This one doesn't. To make you think.

[@GeoHvl]

What a huge load of crap. I had the distinct misfortune of watching this last night. All the reviews say it's not political. My shiny tuchus but it is.

[@DanMurrellMovies]

In what way?

[@Mike_L.]

I saw it last night and it definitely felt like a hollow experience. Sure, there are some well-shot sequences that have deeply disturbing imagery, and has some good acting (with some clunky dialog), but it has very little perspective. It feels like a cautionary tale without any meaningful analysis.

[@motherplayer]

Funny enough, wouldn't mind that normally either, but the idea and even how it's all set up feels like it can't really afford to be that distant from the concept.

[@davehenderson7846]

It is well done but there are obvious biases in the movie that are trying to hide the fact that it is portraying Trump as a power crazed president, when it's complete opposite in real life, most movie companies have to be liberal to get support and not unlike The Hunt these plots underestimate the American citizen that will at some point defend itself from these type of power crazed politicians and deep state running the government. However I think don't think this type of conflict would happen but instead be more like the "Leaving the World behind" type of scenario where the deep state is cornered and pull the plug so it become a kill or be killed scenario where they can hid in bunkers and wait for everyone to kill each other before coming up and saving the day...

[@RuSlavik]

It's about the man behind the camera that risks their live and about getting traumatized and desensitized by violence in the process. It's about hearing stuff like "It's happening over there, I don't care" and trying to take a photo that would make people care. Lee and Jessie are the core of the story, the actual conflict is the perophery. The movie shpuld've had a defferent title probably. Civil War is kind of misleading, and I can see why some people are upset.

[@wlot28]

The problem is that in his effort to stay apolitical, Garland didn’t flesh out any of the characters beliefs or motivations and thus they only become a vehicle for the film to be experienced from

[@alexmaverick6647]

@@wlot28You found the point of the movie lol congrats.

[@julesauburn8713]

I think I’ll go to the theatre based on what you said about the sound mixing. I expect that I’ll feel the way I did when I left the theatre after Winter’s Bone. Not good, but I knew I saw a movie that I’d think about for a long time.

[@ebert311]

Dan is not wrong about the sound mixing. I flinched nearly a dozen times from the gunfire.

[@chitown2354341]

​@@ebert311 especially in imax it sounds so real it's scary

[@irtnyc]

Winters Bone is an amazing film. Good allusion. I found the sound at times overwhelming. I'm half deaf and still had to cover my ears twice. Regarding the music, the contemporary soundtrack felt jarring and inappropriate. It was the one major choice that felt totally out of place to me. I suppose that is because the creative team made this movie for the younger generations that they're presumably hoping will avoid the civil war, or learn from it... rather than the older generations seem to be recklessly tempting or actively trying to cause. Dunno.

[@Davida21]

The very first thing I said when standing up after the movie was "wow.. that sound design was fantastic!" Highly recommend a theater experience, even just to be so fully engrossed in the choice to use silence.

[@loststoryproductions]

Yeah was not really impressed. I’m a how and why guy but I can see why others like it in some ways.

[@TiagoNomad]

As Wagner Moura’s countryman, I’d just like to say that his name is pronounced “Vagner” and not “Uagner”. 🙂

[@WanderlustZero]

So like it would be in German :) Is it a common name in Brazil?

[@TiagoNomad]

@@WanderlustZero it’s not uncommon, but I’d say it’s becoming less common with the newer generations.

[@LivinNexus]

My wife and I had a really good time with this movie last night. We were sort of confused at the end but after talking it out we realized that it's supposed to be ambiguous and it made us love the film even more!

[@jamaican8767]

The photographer gave the young photographer her huge shot. Of her getting shot. They talked about it in the beginning

[@irtnyc]

Err, there is absolutely nothing ambiguous about the end of the film. What movie did you guys watch?

[@LivinNexus]

@@irtnyc The entire conflict is ambiguous. What are you talking about? Lmfao 😂

[@LivinNexus]

@@jamaican8767 They sorta swapped roles and became who they were in the beginning of the movie. That's definitely obvious

[@carydabbs6562]

This is a bot or you and your wife are bonkers, because I have heard zero people describe this movie as “a good time.” Intense, scary, harrowing, surreal, important. In this very review he says this is not a fun time at the theater. So this is fake or you have terrible phrasing.

[@shiftymcgee9359]

This is America. People will judge the movie off title and premise alone. There will be no review over content and context by general audiences.

[@mrgiggles5555]

This. Reading some comments (which get harder and harder for me to tell if they're even from real people) claiming they won't even watch because they thinks it's propaganda for one side or the other... I had the pleasure of seeing last in IMAX last night and I would say it's one of the strongest films so far this year. No perfect, struggles with plausibility in the Sniper Scene and the final battle, but still very strong.

[@yazr1712]

To be fair, it was being promoted in a way that was quite different from what it ended up being.

[@iamfiefo]

I don't think it doesn't matter how the civil war started because, when you're embroiled in a war, you don't care. You just want to survive the civil war no matter what.

[@visiontowerproductions]

The gunshots point you made was spot on!! Every single bullet had weight

[@ebert311]

Dan, I really didn't like the ending. I agree with everything you said except for the ending. It was really rushed and the characters stopped reacting like they did in the beginning/middle of the movie. It was shot great and it is super intense. I don't think I can watch it again. A24 really knows how to pick their movies.

[@johnnypopstar]

> and the characters stopped reacting like they did in the beginning/middle of the movie So you mean, they... developed? Admittedly yes they were pretty sudden developments, but that's what those were. Events change people.

[@joshwilner5622]

​@johnnypopstar no literally there characters all completely flip after a single scenes character development is a gradual process

[@johnnypopstar]

@@joshwilner5622 and yet, shell shock *does* just happen out of the blue suddenly. It's not that unrealistic

[@Peachgorillafit]

Ive listened to 3 different reviews of this film so far and theyve benn wildly different. this one is going to be interesting!

[@JS-lv5pn]

I thought the movie was terrible honestly.

[@timcloe]

This is not a good time for a movie called Civil War. At all

[@jesusisunstoppable4438]

Stop crying, tell your mommy you need a diaper.

[@tomleonard830]

Do we need a movie telling us that civil war is bad when everyone is all kum-bi-yah? No, the movie is needed when for many it is a plausible future.

[@maximumoccupancy]

How come?

[@ZO6Buccaneer]

Sure, it’s a cautionary tale about the horrors of war that villainizes both sides. But then it treats those who abstain from picking a side as ignorant. The journalists are also depicted negatively as bloodthirsty competitors trying to get the scoop first. After watching it, I honestly have zero clue what point Garland is trying to convey here besides “war is bad.” Garland cites “Come and See” as a major inspiration, but Klimov doesn’t avoid the fact that Hitler was the ultimate bad guy there. Making a movie about a second US civil war but then not actually saying anything besides “war is bad” is just a spineless tactic to rile people up and sell tickets without alienating half the country. All wars are political. Pretending otherwise is just nonsense. Plenty of anti-war movies villainize both sides without completely ignoring all real world context.

[@tomleonard830]

I think the point is that people are already riled up and this is a cautionary tale about what happens if this division continues.

[@ZO6Buccaneer]

@@tomleonard830 so then why does Garland negatively portray the parents and small town folk who don’t choose a side? Shouldn’t they be positively (or neutrally) shown as people trying to focus on their own lives and immediate surroundings rather than being obsessed with the news? IMO the story would have been much more interesting if the protagonists showed some struggle with the negative role that the media may have played in dividing the country, rather than holding up journalists as arbiters of truth that only publish unbiased facts and photos for others to interpret. They act as though the photos are unbiased documents of the war, when the framing and other choices that go into every single photograph contain bias of the photographer (whether conscious or not). The final photograph shot of the film is clearly staged to show bias. Why pretend throughout the film that the protagonists are impartial?

[@tomleonard830]

@@ZO6Buccaneer He portrays them as naive, but not necessarily negative.

[@DaniFromNowOn]

Being disconnected from your country and the deaths of your fellow citizens is not necessarily a "positive" trait. I'm not saying they should be villainized, but keeping your head down and staying out of it is not inherently good. Nobody is good in war. That's why "war is bad". That's the whole reason we need "war is bad" movies. I also did not get that Hitler was the "ultimate bad guy" in Come and See. That might be your interpretation, but that's hardly everyone's interpretation. It would be extremely reductive to pretend that the world consists of only good guys and bad guys and if they aren't praising someone, they must be demonizing them.

[@mrgiggles5555]

​@@DaniFromNowOnI would say Come and See more portrays Nazi's as ultimate bad. All of the sequences in that films are directly based on the Writers's with Bellarussian's survivors of that conflict. Hitler just gets the brunt of the blame of that film because of the final scene and well... he's Hitler...

[@PatrickFawley09]

Going to see it for the second time tonight! I loved this film and I want to support A24 as much as I can to keep projects like this possible in the theater.

[@timothywilliams2252]

I've noticed the biggest criticism of this film is the California / Texas alignment. Really? Obviously, those who criticize this are deeply invested in surface politics, and have no historical reference to reality. Actually, I would argue that Texas & Cali are natural allies. Both states have the largest populations & economies west of the Mississippi River. Moreover, both states are heavily invested in technology and agriculture. So, "left" v. "right" ideology is incidental at best. One of the great measuring-sticks for what makes allies & enemies is the 30-Years War. If most of my fellow Americans had any idea of this period in history, they might just see the very likely alliance of these two very powerful states

[@valmid5069]

*Plot:* after events of Captain America Civil War; California and Texas declare war on President Ron Swanson after raiding Bunker Hill, the Alamo, and Harpers Ferry causing Finno Korean Hyperwar veterans Uncle Sam and Lady Liberty to serve in Second, Third, and Fourth American Civil Wars with awarded valor and perspectives ever since serving in WW3 and WW4

[@samb8744]

Civil war was well directed. , but it felt toothless. The president was clearly a trump stand-in, but Florida and Texas are the main states trying to force him out? It felt so centrist. A civil war in USA would be rife with racism and bigotry, but there’s literally like 2 throwaway lines in the whole movie of one character being bigoted. It’s both-sidesism. Whats crazy is that it seem like a studio note to play it safe and not offend conservatives, but Garland in interviews said “if there was a fascist in the White House, I think these states would drop their petty differences and fight against fascism”, which is wildly naive to say in this climate. Trump literally said he’d be a dictator “on day one”, is a known rapist, known con-man, undermines election results, extreme xenophobe and calling the press “the enemy of the people”; not to mention he literally said he wants to stay in for more than 2 terms, and 30% of voters STILL stick with him and praise him. Sorry, if you think a president massacring antifa members and staying in for a third term would make US conservatives turn against a republican president, then you’re just bafflingly ignorant to what’s happening in the US right now

[@Wizardsleave69]

I think the bias is obvious, if you're paying attention.

[@CaptainFADC]

No... it's not.

[@brianmichaels8093]

Respectfully disagree on this one. I was excited to see this, but left very disappointed.

[@zlobna_bulka]

extremely weak film. Director has nothing to say on the subject at all. Is war bad? Oh really? professional journalists behaving stupidly unprofessionally, it pissed me off the whole movie.

[@DanMurrellMovies]

Part of the point is that the journalists aren't acting professionally. It's part of the dehumanization that's happening to them and everyone else.

[@joshwilner5622]

​@DanMurrellMovies what does that even mean?

[@zlobna_bulka]

I also do not understand what dehumanization prevented them from wearing a helmet

[@yabbadabbindude]

This movie sounds toothless and cowardly. War is bad is not a revolutionary new stance

[@DanMurrellMovies]

But war is bad. And this is a very visceral depiction of that. I don't think it's either of the things you've labeled it as. And by saying 'sounds,' it seems you're judging it without even having seen it.

[@defur45]

Americans have been apathetic to their fellow citizen for decades.

[@kydbuu]

Said from a person making a sweeping generalization about millions of different people. I work with many empathetic people who are Americans.

[@defur45]

@@kydbuu ok? Have you not paid attention to how apathetic millions of Americans are to so many problems in our country? How our government can be indifferent to millions of sufferings as well?

[@Fistfullofpizza]

Slow paced, unlikable characters. Save your time and money.

[@Vaajraath]

As someone who's been increasingly feeling politically homeless in our country's current political landscape this movie definitely stuck a powerful chord with me. I can understand why others would be upset though, especially those so blindly committed to "their side" and to othering "the other side" that they openly refuse to acknowledge their own participation in the rise of division and political extremism.🤷

[@greggibson33]

But as Dan said, some high profile people are openly supporting the concept of a civil war. The people on the other side are not.

[@Vaajraath]

@@greggibson33 I lived through the summer of 2020 in Minneapolis -St. Paul. I know full and well that there are plenty on both ends of the spectrum who gladly wish violence upon the other. Trying to paint it as a one sided issue is simply incorrect.

[@MonsterKidCory]

@@greggibson33 One side is openly supporting the concept of a civil war. The other side is openly calling for the abolition of the United States.

[@johnnypopstar]

@@Vaajraath Right, but, get off that fence and take a look at _which "side" started wanting to do violence first apropos of nothing_ and which "side" is only talking about "violence" _in a preventative and/or retaliatory_ sense. There is still a material difference here. Only one "side" in this has ever chanted "blood and soil" with their tiki torches out. Do come along. Join us at the adults' table.

[@Vaajraath]

@@johnnypopstar And join the side that proudly chants "Death to America"? Pass, but thanks for the offer.

[@universalsoldier2293]

I agree that the movie is about the dehumanization within war, but disagree that it's not political. If you're heavily into politics like I am, then it was very clear what it was trying to convey. The president is clearly meant to represent a specific candidate, and they even get to play out their dream in the end. That last photo is chilling, as is the fact that the journalists think of themselves as the good guys just telling a story but they're getting off on capturing the best shot, they're getting off on the carnage. As a journalist myself, it represents all that is wrong with modern-day, sensation-seeking journalism, not through the fog of war but in the social media space for clicks.

[@bohemiangroovey4094]

explain who the pres is and what happens

[@alexmaverick6647]

I mean you’re definitely right about the journalists getting off on the carnage. But it’s not like it was a subtle thing. Dude literally says that the sound of gunfire is making him hard lol.

[@Irish_Soc]

How about the most realistic scene where Jesse Plemons plays a MAGA type executing people for not being true Americans, ie snow white?

[@boitmecklyn4995]

I always wonder why the term "civil war" exists. it's quite oxymoronic as there's nothing really "civil" about war.

[@AEmceeMuzikForever]

True, War is not "civil" in the "polite" sense but Civil War has more to do with the "ordinary citizens" definition

[@boitmecklyn4995]

@@AEmceeMuzikForever i've never see opponents go "oh how do you do on this fine day? are you ready to kill now?" 🤣

[@rewdwarf123]

Maybe 'intranational war' would be more accurate?

[@meganhartmann180]

Maybe domestic war might be a better word? Either way, it's not a conflict fought between opposing foreign powers, it's fought amongst the elements of "civil" society in a governmental sense. And, actually, Shakespeare made a similar comment about the nature of wars/conflict fought at home. In the opening monologue to Romeo & Juliet, the narrator talks about how "from ancient grudge break to new mutiny, where civil blood makes civil hands unclean...." It's a completely ironic use of the word civil.

[@michaelmounts1269]

saw it last night…great action scenes..but really empty..just glorifying journalists and written from the journalist POV. No backstory, no rationale…very disappointing

[@DanMurrellMovies]

I really struggle with the idea of coming out of the movie thinking it was empty, but everyone has their own perspective

[@kingcrim]

Dan, who's calling and hoping for a civil war?

[@Thomas15]

This is a brilliant, astute review. Civil War is one of my favourite films of the year so far. I’m amazed some people didn’t comprehend what the film was trying to do.

[@Revealingstorm.]

People on KZbin at least are like that. Actual critics seem to love the movie

[@justinslogar5770]

It’s not about comprehension the movie was straight up boring. The whole plot is just following 4 photographers driving to Washington DC to interview the president, which they didn’t even do. Felt like a long filler episode of the walking dead with no zombies and bad characters

[@avidediter66]

I didn’t like this movie, I didn’t like any of the characters or believe the story in any way other than how a societal breakdown may look

[@Wigglewonks]

Apparently you get endless cigarettes, food and your shirts never get dirty when the supply chain goes down. And no one has a cell phone camera. Complete nonsense

[@wlot28]

It’s a strange decision to make a movie about an American civil war, an inherently politically charged subject only to shy away from the details of that premise and make a vague precautionary tale about the horrors and desensitization of war, something that could be depicted in literally any conflict

[@TarboxArt]

Saw it today and loved it. Appreciate your review

[@lowkeyhim556]

Not enough action. Literally following a group. They should of had a 10 min lead up and gone straight to meeting the military and then the movie should of went from there.

[@oneopinion6806]

I have watched other reviews that danced close to the point that Dan is making about this movie and I am glad to see Dan making the point. The closest I think was Christy of Christy and Alonzo over at Breakfast All Day. It makes sense to me what the director is going for, As I think many peoples idea of war on our soil falls back to action spectacle like Red Dawn. As to whether I would go and see the movie itself I put this movie into the same group as movies like Brokeback Mountain and Twelve Years a Slave-- Movies with an important message that hasn't been told enough but that I am hesitant to see because I can tell what the message is going to be and I don't know if I want to put myself through it if I already understand it. I saw the former and it was heartbreaking and beautiful and I never wanna see it again. The latter I didn't watch because I knew it would be heartbreaking and I would have a tough time watching it. I know this makes me a cinematic coward but we have to be honest with ourselves. I do believe that unfortunately I will put Civil War into that latter category. My main hope is that those people in our current political environment that heat up their rhetoric enough to sometimes talk about secession, or taking matters into their own hands with our second amendment see the fact that Texas is fighting against the federal government and think that they're going to see the tyrant toppling movie they hope for. I hope they end up learning something deeper about what the horrors of war would be on our soil and why we need to avoid such a dark future at all costs. For me, I'm good. I get it.

[@Vulcanerd]

I saw Alonso and Christy's review and I get what each was going for, but I felt Alonso's point more. There is always context in war. You may not like the context of the why's or the who's or what started it, why each side is fighting, etc, but no war happens in a vacuum even if the stated (or unstated reasons) seem petty, trivial, unfathomable, whatever. Many people could probably tell me why WW2 started, who the participants were, what were each of the participants goals, who won, who lost, what the aftermath was. That exists for all wars. Rwandan Civil Wars? Yup. Internal strife in Colombia in the first half of the 20th century? Most definitely. US Civil War? Yup. The expansion of the Roman Empire? Again, yes. We might argue about whether the wars were justified or if various sides were using propaganda to justify invading another, the ideology or thinking that lead to that point. Maybe two or more people discussing it agree or disagree, maybe they think the factors involved are weighted differently in how much of an influence they had, but again, they are there. To do away with it entirely to focus on the horrors of war just waters it down. I can watch any number of movies/series, fictional or documental, that lay bare man's inhumanity to man; that's nothing new. Check out 20 Days to Mariupol, Restrepo, any number of Ken Burns documentaries he's done or, shit, read Hiroshima. If, at the end of the day, this is a movie that's telling us about the horrors of war through journalists' eyes and that's all it is, there are plenty of examples to choose from that have done it before. Films about it, real or fictional, have been created for decades through various points of view and even longer when it comes to text. I am still curious and maybe it's unfair to heap this much criticism before I watch it, but I don't think anything I say will change if I were catch (hopefully sooner rather than later) b/c what I'm writing here is independent of Garland's choices in his latest. Maybe I'll change my mind once I see, I don't/can't deny the possibility, but I've seen plenty of movies that depict the folly and terrible nature of war, just that most (all?) provide the context in which those conflicts happen.

[@julesauburn8713]

I always think there’s something special about Dan’s reviews. I always respect his opinion. I’ll check out the others you mentioned too. You obviously have a deep caring about cinema ☺️

[@oneopinion6806]

@@Vulcanerd I understand what you are saying and I think it is a valid point. But I also agree with Christy and what Dan are saying that if any form of justification for one side versus the other were put into the movie it will allow people to decide whether or not this fictional future Civil War was "worth it." In our current environment and especially in America it is the very fact that we have not seen battle or war on our soil in so very long that I think allows people to Hypothetically justify in their minds what would be worth it for something like that to happen. Garland is not allowing that by keeping it as vague as possible. I think Ken Burns has done wonderful things but history from long ago is easy to disassociate from. And atrocities of war that happen somewhere else, the same thing. I think the popularity of zombie apocalypse movies for the last decade or more was the fact that it allowed Americans to get as close as possible to what would happen to society in the case of a war while giving them the distance of knowing that such a thing couldn't actually happen. It allowed them to play the what if of what they would do from the safety of that impossibility. The argument it seems to be made in this movie potentially would be that essentially nothing should be worth civil war. Or at least that it should be avoided at all costs. I can look at the more ridiculous of those that say Texas should secede, and even silently agree with those that say "oh yeah? The Federal Government would crush them anyway." and think that because it's from the safety of what I hope is a hypothetical impossibility. Because if it happened in reality I'm not in Texas and while it wouldn't directly affect me it would still be a horrifying reality that should be avoided at all costs. Yes I obviously understand that civil war has happened here before, a long time ago, but it irrevocably altered the face of our nation, and the extreme circumstances that generated it have not been equalled in our modern time. Garland, it seems, is intent on casting civil war as a terrible outcome, regardless of sides. I fully understand that is an argument that can be disagreed with. I happen to agree with it and hope that for those that watch the movie they come out thinking the same way.

[@oneopinion6806]

@@julesauburn8713 To be clear while 12 years of slave is in theory about Civil War or at least what precipitated it, Brokeback Mountain has nothing to do with that (it is about being gay in a part of American culture--rural/cowboy--that especially didn't have the ability to accept.) I was just going for movies that toed a line of important messages not told as often that are heartbreaking and beautiful and whether or not I could pony up the courage to watch them.

[@MrInstag8tor]

I'll save everybody the time. This movie blows

[@vincentvega22]

The stupidest thing about the movie is that none of the "journalists" thought to film the historical moments they were witnessing, they didn't even record audio.

[@DanMurrellMovies]

They were photojournalists. Other journalists are shown recording video.

[@Xrey-tw4sv]

Save your money people movie was boring until the last 15 minutes.

[@actrambley21]

I found the film to be underdeveloped and lacking in character arcs. The last 15 mins completely ruined the film for me, as the entire sequence in setup and execution was largely nonsensical.

[@welliminitnowso]

Just saw it such a good movie! 10/10 .

[@MrKangorilla]

Whilst it was a little clunky and expositon heavy with it's early dialogue and some of the vignettes like sniper battle were a little on the nose, it was a truly callous feeling experience in a good way. Like national geographic but for human self destruction. The harsh and juxtaposed needle drops help to drive home the detachment from the atrocities going on just out of frame, and the burgeoning detachment of Jessie contrasted with the accumulated toll of detachment, catching up with Lee was great to watch.

[@johnnypopstar]

One needle drop in particular was magnificently inappropriate. An amazingly bold choice that really doesn't jive with the visuals of that moment at all, and _in not working at all_ makes you feel exactly how Garland wants you to feel. It's sublime. I've seen other reviewers completely miss the point of this.

[@MrKangorilla]

@@johnnypopstar Exactly. With someone less deliberate that Garland maybe I'd be tempted to ask "why is that playing here", but after even just the opening scene of the film it seems obvious. To do the job they do, the mundane and normal has to live alongside the absolutely depraved for you to get by. And then later in the film, driving through the burning forest, the music matched perfectly, showing that everyone was actually feeling affected at that point.

[@stephennootens916]

I think the needle drop worked better in Full Metal Jacket.

[@bryan81584]

If this movie depicts how an irresponsible dishonest media and politicians working in cahootz drove this country to civil war in modern times, it will have made a relevant point.

[@tomleonard830]

It completely ignores how we got to this point. So based on your metrics does it get a Fail or N/A?

[@JoeJoe-lq6bd]

It doesn't. That isn't even close to touched-upon.

[@vikthorcafe7]

Civil War at the 2025 Oscars Best script Best sound Best photography Best actress Best Supporting Actor Best edition Best direction

[@lego4virgo]

Hmm...we'll see.

[@joshwilner5622]

Unlikely

[@bravexheart7]

I agree

[@aliali-ce3yf]

It just seems too far fetched. Dune seems more realistic

[@funkrobot9762]

you can’t be serious.

[@funkrobot9762]

Giant sand worms that grant mystical powers on a desert planet thousands of years in the future is more believable than civil war?

[@UltimateKyuubiFox]

@@funkrobot9762Settler-colonialist ideologues manipulating a native population to follow a religion then that religion being used by one of the colonists to enact his political will is genuinely more likely than Texas and California allying in a Civil War, I will emphatically say.

[@travissmith6380]

Saw this last night and it was great. Dont think its gonna make much. Not exactly what you call a crowd pleaser

[@johnnypopstar]

I dunno it made my crown shine like it's never shone before

[@joshbieker7388]

I thought it was a good film. I don’t ever need to see it again that’s for sure.

[@Hideotronic]

We probably need more anti-war films in this country anyway

[@bluecollarmenproductions]

Forrr sure

[@MrModerate_kane]

just back from watching it. It was interesting but in no way the Star rating and comments from the rags, The young girl pissed me off, even the finish my wife looked at me and was like, is that it? This to me was very much like "zone of interest", its the implication of the horror, making you think. i wont watch it again, it did its job, its was a nice night out.

[@rileymcphee9429]

Give us the Stephen McKinley Henderson cut!

[@JohnnyKahn]

i think people were expecting a movie like leave the world behind. thats why so many dont like it. it doesnt glamorize the violence or make it seem "cool" like white house down. this has more a style like oliver stones "salvador" the civil war is kind of a back drop with the main characters at the forefront. i would say its more like a apocalypse now journey down the river kinda flick and see how fucked up things eventually get.i like it.

[@rationalraven8956]

I was kind of on the fence initially but with a glowing review like that, I'll head out and see it this weekend.

[@heathert.4727]

I’m a leftist, but I believe we must find a way to work with the right to unite the American people against our common struggles and do everything we can to avoid violence. And prepare all we can to reduce damage if violence becomes inevitable. The only way to do all we can to not kill our people, our community, the people we love dearly, is to unite together for the common goal of protecting our loved ones and to leave a country for our posterity rather than a wasteland of tragedy and evil. We must work relentlessly towards a PEACEFUL revolution against those who seek to separate us. And only then can we find common ground and create a nation or nations in a peaceful manner that coexist with each other and protect each other for the common goal of protecting the people we love so dearly.

[@travismoore7849]

Fallout did it better.

[@vagandoporelmundo]

this film was dumb af bro cmon

[@johnpotts8308]

Loved Ex Machina when I saw it at home, so I'm inclined to watch this at my local cinema.

[@TrekBeatTK]

Nothing about the plot makes any sense. It’s completely illogical nonsense that is just regurgitating stock imagery from decades of Eurasian warfare grafted onto American iconography but without any actual thought to how that would play out. This is a tone deaf movie about how the real heroes of war are journalists. Screw that. A d fir the record, I don’t need it to have any connection to modern day politics, but ai want SOME idea of the situation in the movie. Even a neutral one. Instead it’s just a lot of indiscriminate gunfire in a big stupid game of capture the flag where everyone behaves like an idiot. Why didn’t the hero journalists charge into DC wearing their helmets, Dan? Or wear thrir kevlar vests all the time? Because Garland needed to dramatically endanger them at specific moments for movie drama. It’s a BAD MOVIE.

[@AnyRoadRichard]

"There ain't no good guys. There ain't no bad guys. There's only you and me. And we just disagree." - Dave Mason

[@Sugarfreeredbull]

If the movie is supposed to be told from the view of a war photo journalist then wouldn’t it make sense that the movie doesn’t have to be”choose a side “ or have a message for the viewer. It shouldn’t hold your hand it should leave the viewer to decide what they think. Just because the movie doesn’t tell you what side is bad or what side to pick doesn’t mean it’s poorly made

[@devoff7014]

They only show the right in a bad light.

[@johnnypopstar]

@@devoff7014 That's the light they choose.

[@rumrain838]

​@devoff7014 no they dont!!! The milita that wears Hawaiin shirts that was fighting the government soldiers is a Right wing group. There is only ONE Miltia in America that sports Hawaiin shirts and they are the main enemy of Antifa Communist!

[@rumrain838]

​@@devoff7014stop being brainwashed and watch the movie!

[@JoeJoe-lq6bd]

@@devoff7014 The movie doesn't say who is on the right or left at any point.

[@stevekatona5527]

Probably the most intense movie experience I have ever had.

[@thedarkemissary]

After Dredd, I'll always give Garland a chance. Seeing it today.

[@DoritoWorldOrder]

I thought it was among Garland's weakest films. Big pacing issues, disjointed and clunky musical scoring - and being that any real plot around the actual war unfolding is largely neglected, leaving not much else in focus besides the characters, the lack of any real character arcs paired with fairly bland writing and performances are rendered all the more unfortunate. The best performance comes from Jesse Plemons, who is sadly only on screen for maybe 5 minutes. For all the concerted effort to purposefully avoid any political themes or even include any explication of factional motivations in the fictional conflict in hopes of keeping the film approachable for a variety of audiences, it seems to have earned him no more good will from the left, as evidenced by David Gilbert's review in Wired, which basically accuses Garland of stoking right-wing extremism for failing to write the movie as the thinly veiled indictment of Trump and MAGA "insurrectionists" that he and his ilk would've salivated over. For fear of crossing people like this who will never be happy with anything that doesn't reproduce their own myopic and self-serving political theology to the last letter, Garland missed a great opportunity to spotlight a clear and timeless moral insight which transcends partisan lines - that being the danger of escalating political polarization ultimately leading to violence as both opposing sides collude to further that escalation until their self-serving rhetoric finally reaches a boiling point. While this theme is vaguely implied by the film's title and setting, and by the few random, unexplained rifle skirmishes it depicts between unknown combattants with unknown motivations and unknown stakes, the exclusion of the "civil war" from the movie's plot and it's relegation to a mere backdrop leaves such a message lost and out of focus while all we have squarely in frame to look at for the length of its runtime is a band of hollow and scarcely believable characters devoid of any political or regional sympathies or vendettas of their own, operating in apparently perfect dispassion (within a horrifying war zone tearing their own country apart, which surely would've claimed friends and loved ones) with their sole motivation being the pursuit of their journalistic scoop and the vague notion that photographing war violence convinces people that war is bad.

[@BatAmerica]

I'm glad to see positive reviews on the channel. While it is essential to warn audiences of lackluster storytelling it is equally important to point praise toward films that deserve it.

[@DanMurrellMovies]

There are lots of positive reviews here!

[@11MV]

Geez I watched it in imax and it was so loud, every gun shot was a damn jumpscare lol but I liked the film, the action at the end was great

[@AlanGamblePhotography]

Disclaimer, movie will get bonus points if you are or have been a photographer lol. "This might be dangerous but it will be a great shot" is relatable to most photographers.

[@cameraz99]

I'm a photojournalist and you are so right.

[@Mightyjordy]

Just saw it expecting basically the purge. That was definitely not what it was. Fantastic movie

[@JROTCBALL]

I don’t see why so many folks are fixated on knowing about the TX and Cali, I’ll admit I deff raised my eyebrows when I first about it in trailer 1.. but political differences aside, Texas and California are two of the biggest states, with some of the largest economies n resources.. so it’s not too surprising to see them partnering up.

[@alexcabal8037]

When I get asked about the CA/TX thing (saw the early screenings), I basically said the same thing. It actually makes sense for them to team up given their resources -- against an apparent dictator.

[@pokes404]

I know. It's such a weird detail for people to get stuck on. Especially now that we're learning that the circumstances leading up to the war don't really matter to the story being told in the movie. Maybe California and Texas want to become their own independent countries that don't have to share their wealth or listen to any other national authority when it comes to laws/politics inside their borders. Neither state could beat rest of the nation by themselves, so they teamed up together to take down the only other force that could oppose them, and then they'll go their separate ways once the war is over. There ... in less than 10 seconds I came up with a plausible enough reason for the situation presented in the film that I can just enjoy the story the movie wants to tell, whenever I get around to watching it.

[@maxtm3000]

I mean, there are still plenty of "Real Americans" that wouldn't stand for a dictator taking over, just because Cali and Tx disagree in todays politics doesn't mean that everyone from either state wouldn't team up in the name of defending the US as a whole

[@mathewerenberger7275]

It was terrible that cgi and lack of common sense. You wouldnt be flying a helicopter between buildings street level to shoot at a parking garage, when you literally have tanks looking at that same parking garage. The CGI of the Humvees getting moved with the helicopters seemed pretty terrible. Basically anything that had a helicopter in the scene looked terrible.

[@williamlam1415]

To the people saying that a California and Texas alliance is impossible bc of the polarizing politics today, remember the west also thought that a Nazi and Soviet alliance would be impossible, until it happened…

[@asrajune2709]

"alliance" is an ahistorical way to describe what was at most a short-lived non-agression pact.

[@williamlam1415]

@@asrajune2709 true, but again history happens in weird ways, my guess is that after the war was over cali and texas turned against each other but who knows not the point of the film to polarize a side

[@timoleary9336]

I saw the movie and I give it a splat. While it tries to remain politically neutral, the swipes at Trump and his supporters reveal the typical Hollywood Left bias. In a well made movie you're rooting for the main characters, but I really didn't connect with them. Technical scenes of war were realistic andvwell done. The main takeaway for me was that, if this nation blows up, it will be bad

[@EzeICE]

The scene with Jesse Plemmons was intense 😎 its because i actually know maniacs like that. Meaning that if the shit were ever hit the fan i can see them doing stuff like that. To me that's the scary part 😮😮😮

[@rickbase833]

Agree. There will always be characters in our society that will use an emergency, natural disaster, war......as an opportunity to go lawless or create their own "society" where they can do and get away with things that are illegal during normal situations.

[@EzeICE]

@@rickbase833 Perfectly said 👍🏾 that's so true

[@iamatexan4334]

Texas would never be part of the California agenda - that is the 1st reason I’m skipping this move..Hollywood fail again