Civil War (the Movie)

A movie review

At its core, the film Civil War, is a passing of the baton movie featuring Kirsten Dunst as the only real name actor aside from a cameo from Jesse Plemmons known best by his supporting role in Breaking Bad.

Focusing on the role of the press in a battle zone, writer/director Alex Garland brings forth a surprisingly apolitical film. While the liberal themes remain, they are not overbearing or thrust down one’s throat. Coming from a person of my political views, that’s saying a lot for this film.

The criticisms are few. Most casual viewers will easily overlook the flaws that I both saw and heard. The most profound error in the film was the sound of it. Understanding that the greater share of rounds being fired would typically be the 5.56 from the barrels of the M4. The sound produced from all of those rounds being fired reflected something more akin to the 50 caliber, which I found distracting. It’s a loud movie anyway, but that was just incongruous with what I was watching.

The other aspect of the film that I found disappointing was the irrational military actions being taken. A small squad, perhaps five individuals, spent a good part of the beginning of the film clearing a building in the center of a city after a sustained firefight. Nothing explained why the squad would bother clearing the building once resistance was negated. Shouldn’t their focus be on advancing? Especially with the idea that a greater force was coming along behind? Was the building significant? Did they intend to capture the few left alive and interrogate them? The viewer is left to wonder.

Eventually, they do bring out a few combatants with bags over their heads and one thinks, “okay, they’re going to interrogate them to obtain some important information.” No, they take them out front and execute them. If they were going to execute them, why did they need bags over their heads? Illogical aspects like that plague the majority of the action scenes.

Another criticism was the lack of understanding of who was battling who, aside from the Western Forces battling the U.S. Military. Uniforms were almost identical, except for the WF militia that typically wore camouflaged gear over T-shirts. But there was still no overall understanding of fronts and recent battles, or anything strategic, it was almost all tactical and one had to decipher those objectives on their own.

Having said that, this was a well-acted film. The cinematography was stunning and realistic and all of that leads one to have an admiration for writer/director Alex Garland, at least as a film maker. The purpose of the film appeared to be one of preparation for some coming conflagration.

Civil War followed the superb acting of Kirsten Dunst as the lead in a group of photojournalists and war reporters, originally only Dunst (Lee) and Wagner Moura (Joel) with tagalongs Cailee Spaeny (Jessie) and Stephen McKinley Harrison (Sammy).

They start out in New York, intent on interviewing the president, even though that seems unlikely as the war rages, but it’s their intent. They take a circuitous route to Washington D.C. that reveals the horrors of a civil war waged in America. Dunst plays a beleaguered photojournalist, angry and depressed, but serves as a mentor to Spaeny, who grows up and blossoms in the role.

Wagner Moura’s character Joel, is as undefined and vague as the odd action scenes, often with no purpose at all other than a sounding board for Lee. There was so much more Garland could have done with this character. Nonetheless, it was well-acted by Moura when he was allowed to act. He could have stolen the show and probably should have.

I have to rate the film a 7 out of 10. I give it a 10 for acting and cinematography, but only a 4 for storyline. It had all the elements: a well-defined goal, character development (all but Joel) and impeccable dialog. What it lacked was direction, purpose of those other than the main characters and logical understanding of the war itself, who started it and why. Those are left to the audience to figure out and it should not have been.

It is a marvelous spectacle. As a warning or a prognostication, it’s perfect. One should see this film, if, at least, to get that preparatory vision of war in the United States. One is left to wonder which side won, not on the screen, but which side they represented. The president clinging to power while all hell is set upon the nation might be recognized as a leftist view of Trump, or it could be a more accurate portrayal of Joe Biden, or actually Barack Obama. It was about a president in his third term, so possibly Obama. That we have to wonder speaks volumes for the film. We’re not the only ones who see it coming.

Visit us at twelveround.com for contemporary novels of freedom Rebel and Rogue (links to electronic versions in the description) Literary Westerns (like those done by Cormac McCarthy and Larry McMurtry) Shadow Soldier, Home to Texas and Deputized. Also, the film Lies of Omission can be purchased as a DVD or a there’s a link to a free version on Tubi TV.