A Conversation with Civil War Filmmaker Alex Garland and Cast | SXSW 2024
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 06. 2024
- Portuguese and Spanish language translations for SXSW 2024 Keynotes and Featured Sessions presented by Itaú
On the heels of CIVIL WAR's world premiere at SXSW, Academy Award nominated filmmaker and genre master Alex Garland (EX MACHINA, ANNIHILATION, 28 DAYS LATER) will participate in an in-depth conversation about the making of his latest adrenaline-fueled thrill ride that takes us through a near-future fractured America balanced on the razor's edge. Cast members Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura, and Cailee Spaeny will also join.
About SXSW:
SXSW dedicates itself to helping creative people achieve their goals. Founded in 1987 in Austin, Texas, SXSW is best known for its conference and festivals that celebrate the convergence of the interactive, film, and music industries. An essential destination for global professionals, SXSW features sessions, showcases, screenings, exhibitions, professional development and a variety of networking opportunities. For more information, please visit sxsw.com.
Subscribe: czcams.com/users/sxsw?sub_...
Connect with SXSW:
Website: www.sxsw.com
Facebook: / sxswfestival
Twitter: / sxsw
Instagram: / sxsw
CZcams: / sxsw - Zábava
It’s been years since I had a theater experience like that.
The crying facial expression that Wagner makes in the car after a major incident is hands-down one of the best acting moments I have ever seen. Amazing.
Agreed, gave me chills.
such a strange, frightening, human, chilling moment. one of my favorites in the film (not to mention cailee's acting in that moment too)
No photojournalist would have that kind of breakdown in the middle of an assignment. It was a bit too much.
@@bngr_bngr have you ever seen an American photojournalist experience a civil war firsthand?
@@brittyn January 6th.
I enjoyed Moura's voice. It's so strong
He was great as the wolf in Puss in Boots!
he is gorgeous all the ways
Mais um brazuca com carencia de reconhecimento,
haahaaha dude, literally every single video of moura in this movie ive seen you are the top comment talking about Moura lOL, u gotta love the dude
His voice, his acting, the substance of what he said about Brasil, Bolsonaro and democracy are all top notch. His comment to Garland was a bit cringe but I don't hold that against him.
Wagner brings another level of reflection and discussion to the table every time he speaks. Amazing artist!
This film was absolutely incredible.. an experience for sure.
I love how he shoots. Says he doesn't pre block anything, he meets with the actors first and sees what they want to do then meets with the DP and figures out how to shoot it.
At the same time, I feel this is how every director should operate. He basically gets credits for normal behaviour.
@@TheSteelGeneraI There are many film professionals who would disagree with you. There are lots of drawbacks to this style of directing. Every minute spent on set is precious, so if you turn up without a shot list and can't work out a difficult scene, that's time and money that is being burned at a rate of knots, while your entire crew waits for you to figure it out.
He doesn’t even know that the background effects in the lake is called bokeh. It’s not a magical effect.
"I think Americans take democracy for granted" is such an excellent and important point
The United States isn't a democracy. It's a representative republic (or if you like, a democratic republic). It is still definitively not a democracy.
Are you kidding. We are fighting around the world to defend freedom.
@@bngr_bngr that doesn’t mean that everyday civilians don’t take for granted how easily democracy can evolve into fascism. Plenty of european and South American countries have already been through that, but we’re fairly new in the grand scheme of things, and when you talk to the average person, they don’t think about how easily a society can fall into fascism. Democracy isn’t guaranteed. That’s my point.
@@alexandrakopko if you look at American history there has been many wars on US soil not just the Civil War.
@@bngr_bngr … I know lol
Moura is so underrated
Wagner Moura? Sujeito prepotente que quando abre a boca deixa visivelmente os outros entrevistados entediados e constrangidos 🥱Tem um vontade incontrolável de lacrar e ter a palavra final, patético e por isso é "so underrated"..
Moura is trying so hard to sound intelligent.........and failing horribly.
@@jimgregory6185 He crosses his legs to castrate his balls so he looks like a sensitive man. So annoying!
He really brought good points…I don’t know if he’s brilliant in other aspects but he said the basics and said them well
@@jimgregory6185 he is not trying anything. he *IS* brilliant and successful in everything he does. sorry.
It kept me locked in, wanting to know what was going happen next. Very intense movie
Wagner Moura is 10/10. Como artista eu quero muito estar em cena com ele, e trocar ideia.
Can’t wait to watch this film in the UK 🇬🇧 this morning booked my ticket to watch it in a IMAX cinema
These are all smart ppl who have insightful responses to every question.
Wagner Moura is amazing
I can't believe Bring It On was over 20 years ago! 🤯
That voice is so husky.
Glad I'm going to see this for the second time to see the image that a member of the audience referred to. I was surprised to find myself in the camp that found it was absolutely ok not to be spoon fed more about the context. Kudos to Wagner for acknowleding Stephen.
Great Discussion! I would have loved to hear what Stepen Henderson had to say as well. Great performance as Sammy!
Thank you for posting this!!!
Great movie saw it today
Jesus Christ, Wagner’s voice really catches your attention
I'm surprised the movie is less than 2 hours long!
The director was clearly trying to avoid making any political stances one way or the other on gun control, left/right politics, etc. despite the interviewer's questions. Once you watch the film, you see that this movie has zero ties to current US politics. It's a story about war journalists and the lengths they go through to get the "truth".
Alex kinda told Richard to stfu with his response. The gun question jumped the shark.
@@bluesquidny Well it's a legitimate journalistic question.
@@ChrisPage68 ok
Yeah, that moderator/interviewer is what you would expect from the Austin (far left) Chronically Obsessed with Politics Paper of some kind. Yeah SXSW has been ruined by the woke like everything else! Why are they always British or Aussies, these "moderators" ever notice that? Garland was trying to steer the conversation away from politics. These hacks like Limey Austin Boy, no disrespect to Garland who is also British, were most likely told by their boss; ask how it relates to Gun Control and work in January 6. So Garland had some, great responses to some annoying questions judging from his body language and facial expressions. I've noticed in most of the interviews he is noblely trying to divert attention away from the partisan issues which could have made the movie very polarizing. Believe me I'm sure Garland is Liberal and not exactly in a classical sense but he sounds very open minded at least Talking about how great it was to work with people of different backgrouds and opinions. In a time when actors and even directors have the unmitigated gall to call out haters of certain movies as "toxic fans". Or idiot director peers of Garland's like Jonathon Glazer who felt a need to express his support for Palestine and thoughts towards the supposed Isreali genocide towards them at the oscars. It's refreshing to see someone who is going against the grain in a time where Hollywood seems to be imploding. So he'll continue to be a director whose new projects I'll be looking forward to and I was a fan of most of his work already.
In other interviews (eg with BFI in the UK) Alex Garland , says that the politics of the film is about centrism vs extremism, there is a relationship to this and US politics, but also UK, Turkish, Indian, Hungarian, Dutch, etc, etc. His replies have been that this is beyond party politics, - it's a bigger canvas.
He's right, we do take Democracy for granted. Thats why this is Must-See movie for everyone. It reminds me of another Must-See is the movie "Valkyerie" it shows us what it's like when you go to work and your Boss is taking one side and his Boss is taking the opposite, and you have to decide almost that same day which side to go with. You only get one shot. This is Roulette but its your life. When truth and trust are gone you better be in the correct spot.
I saw it yesterday. It certainly left an impression on me. Very powerful indeed.
incredible movie
The last 20 minutes are brilliant
20:00 The long lasting impression of a still photo has been undervalued in the camera-phone era.
Think of 1972 Napalm Girl. Just a black and white photo.
11:46 what movie did Alex say trusts the audience here? I couldn't understand
Anatomy of a Fall 😊
Finally after having missed a lot of quality conversational content due to technical inaptitudes from SCSW staff/personnel in regard to this specific post of audio mismatch with advertisers on CZcams, I was able to obtain and take a peace of mind within film and filmography, generally speaking. I look forward to continue catching up with my studies of viewership of Alex Alex Garland’s most rest work; alongside Kirsten Dunst’s, Wagner Moura’s, Callee Spaeny’s, and Stephen McKinley Henderson’s as mentioned within the cast and crew here on this public SXSW interview and open conversation.
I saw it.
Watched this movie in the theater.
i did not know that Alex was such a genius curmudgeon (in the best way)
God how can you not love Wagner 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
I could listen to Alex Garland speak every week.
Why? Do you enjoy listening to morons?
@@jimgregory6185 Why is he a moron?
Powerful movie. The themes are super important...but it's also just an excellent _MOVIE_ on a purely entertainment level.
I really like how they captured what a modern American civil war would actually _be_ like. It wouldn't be 2 armies facing off in a field. It would be rogue militias, heavy fighting concentrated in small areas, vigilante justice, armed checkpoints, entire towns pretending everything is normal, etc. I find it unnerving how by FAR the most common theme in modern film, tv, and novels is some form of post-apocalypse...a complete collapse of society for one reason or another. THE hero's journey of our age is the lone stoic survivor....leading his small group through the trials and tribulations of a charred world.
The biggest TV shows, movies, novels, and especially young adult novels....are ALL about this. It's _so_ ingrained in the zeitgeist that I sometimes wonder if it's an explicit expression of our collective subconscious....that we all somehow _know_ what's coming, what's just around the corner...and we're "rehearsing" for that through the art we create and consume. That feels true to me. But if so....man, things are about to get BLEAK. I'm not so sure I'm ready for that...
the guy said Uagner Mora wtf its Wagner Moura with Vagner sound
Kirsten Dunst is a Legend 🎬
Kirst Dunst is an overrated hack.
"Civil war can happen whether guns are floating around the country or not. Machetes have been used in civil war... and eventually cut their neighbors heads off". GREAT POINT. Clearly, the moderator is politically biased and is not happy with the director's response. The director is not there to target anybody's political beliefs, that is how you continue to steer a country down the path of civil war and this moderator just doesn't get it.
Not sure where you're getting "moderator is not happy with the director's response" from. Feels like you're projecting based on YOUR reaction to his question. Also, to pretend that easy access to military weaponry wouldn't make it easier and faster to kill is wilfully ignorant.
@@Micktrex LMAO clearly you liked your own comment because this video has no traction and the comment posted like minutes ago LOL, and the lack of traction for this video is probably because of ALL the complaints about the moderator in this comment section, not just mine. But you had to comment here because you missed the entire point that the director was making because you're so anti-gun that you just ignore all of world history. How do you not know that many underdeveloped countries did not readily have access to firearms and yet they still managed to massacre and even genoc*de others in their own country. Read a history book sometime before you get all in your feelings over a comment on the Internet. The ignorance of world history just makes you sound like a professional Redditor 🤣
In the prelude to Rwanda, a large amount of machetes were imported from China. That said, we all produce urea nitrate on a daily basis.
I mean its a relevant question, especially since two of the most harrowing scenes in the film involve being shot at by an unseen attacker. Can't snipe with machetes. You can spend time with the nuance of that. Asking about that is not how you "steer a country down the path of civil war". Not unless people are willing to kill someone for questioning the accessibility to firearms, and if they feel that way, that HAS to be talked about.
@@alexandrakopko You should really listen the other commenter and understand what happened in Rwanda if you don't understand how effective a simple machete can be. There's also mass stabbings all the time but those are not politically convenient for media organizations to broadcast nationally so it never gets the same attention.
And yes, using politically divisive language IS how you continue dividing people. Haven't there been plenty of people who say the same thing about Trump's commentary? But it's not politically divisive when it suits your own personal interests apparently. Hypocrite.
One of the most realistic movies I ever saw. Just wish the ending developed our new photo journalist a lot more. After all she became the new greatest.
She should have taken her camera or at least come back for the memory cards. I wonder of a scene was cut out.
when Wagner talked about how brazil had it's own Janurary 6th incident, I realized how universal that event is... My country has one too, and it's February 25. It's not as ambiguous or as polarizing as any of their examples were, but it's still a turning point in my country's history, and probably the closest we've come from having an all-out civil war.
Where are you from?
Where are you from?
@@serknurram Probably the Phillippines
probably the best movie of the year!!!!
Kirsten seems like she smokes lol. Her voice deep
19:00 Joe Galloway was a famous Vietnam era journalist. Something in the telling of this story gains it's authenticity by matching the harrowing stories of Joe Galloway.
You shouldn’t let anyone “make you” do anything, including walking on egg shells. Everyone should be able to speak their minds, yet still be treated with respect.
Yeah, try speaking your mind in America (in 2024) if you disagree with leftists. Already in Canada and Scotland they imprison people who don’t agree with leftist ideology.
That's the idea except when it gets you killed in many places.
Except liberals (in Canada, Scotland, and trying in the U.S.) will put someone in prison for not speaking the way liberals want.
In an ideal world, yes, whereas in the real world where the same people that call for free speech don't respect those who don't agree with them, it's something deemed impossible.
You can't even determine which side is the the aggressor, since the actions get lost between mindless reactions, up to a point in which it doesn't matter anymore, you just have to accept it and keep it to yourself, otherwise... Otherwise you'll be tagged by every side that you try to speak against, only to realise that deep down they don't really hate each other, they just hate those who disagree with them.
SXSW, my complaint and frustration is that you are based in the capital of Texas and can’t get the audio levels balanced out with CZcams commercial volume ratios? ! ! ! SXSW is looking for their own wars within media channels.
Alex Garland does not want to be there. 100%. Either he is tired or he hates doing these interviews.
I kinda suspect all of them have a hangover 😀 It was shot the next morning after the premier of the movie
@@maximrukinov3101 Fair enough. I like his earlier films.
@@Filmmaker809 What the guy above said....they were all probably just a bit tuckered out lol.
But also....Alex is kinda always like this. He's a bit of a prickly curmudgeon. I like it though. Everyone on TV is always so damn bright and sunny and smiley, like they're running for office, and frankly I find that void of authenticity pretty exhausting. The world needs people like Alex to balance things out a bit. :)
@@avedic I'm not a fan of Cival War, I prefer is older work.
Nobody thinks war journalism or war journalists are bad, err what's the film about? But I liked the film, found it effective, even if I find that critique is a misunderstanding.
Love Kirsten Dunst
I certainly don’t think I’d that this is “exactly what we’re living through right now”.
Can't wait to watch this movie! Can't wait! We need a warning and a push for communicating!
Just saw the film!! Loved it!! but if the president is supposed to be trump, why does he look like Gavin Newsom ???
Alex seemed kinda really uncomfortable 😭
I think he hates doing these things.
29:45 yikes
He's just British
@@JoshuaBates117I'm British too mate. There's a difference between not being arsed and him seemingly feeling unable to engage with the whole thing.
Poor guy, having to talk for a bit about his own movie. What a chore.
War is hell; No one should experience it. You need to know, the pot is hot and how it burns. So, you will be careful.
Wagner doesn't get that each side's supporters' vehemently opposes anti democracy. Both sides want to protect democracy. The truth is likely inaccessible to supporters of either side.
The host is a dick. He keeps trying to get Alex to take a political position when Alex clearly doesn’t want to or need to to get his point across. I doubt I share the same political views as Alex but from what I’ve seen of him, so far, I have a lot of respect for him since he takes a logical approach. Same thing for Wagner.
Caillee has a lot of Holly Hunter in her
Point-of-View... the movie shows a Civil War scenario, from the POV of the Bad guys
who are the bad guys? the photographers?
-I listened to this without looking, and Dunst (42) looks young, but her voice is quite old, so low, almost masculine.
-What Wagner said about their trump, Bolsonaro, is true. He's already indicted for insurrection. also, very true that Americans take democracy for granted.
-This moderator is VERY bad, he declares and gives CONCLUSIVE analysis, Dunst is kinda fed up with this, when she ask "what's the question?
-Garland says the shoot was 80-ish days. IMDb lists it as 96 days (15 Mar-19 Jun)
-Oh Wagner! If you're gonna say embarrassing things like "he/s the most brilliant person I've ever met" you should ALWAYS precede that with "I don't meet a lot of people" ....
He's Brazilian. We say that all the time
@@fabianacecin7026 Okay, that may be so, what do i know bout the way Brasilians talk? But given Garlands reaction, it came across as major cock sucking. Cringe! Don't get me wrong, the moderator (English!) did the same to Garland and the two women were also a tat too happy with each other, doing a whole mother-daughter bit. WTF!?! It was cringe.
Casting Creators?
Please never have this moderator back. He was laughably awful and there were a number of people in the crowd around me that were just visibly and audibly dumbfounded at his incompetence. He barely asked questions. He mostly made statements and left the director and the cast to figure out how to respond to his statements. It was like he was just trying to express his point of view to them about the movie and the context surrounding it instead of being a good interviewer and asking compelling questions that were clear and easy for the director and cast to pick up and answer. It was really disappointing and honestly a bit embarrassing to witness. It could’ve delivered far more value to the audience and it missed the mark solely due to the moderator. When the audience questions were far more compelling and easy to understand than the moderator’s talking points, you know there’s a real problem. And he did so poorly at time management that there was barely any audience Q&A and they went several minutes overtime.
I have no reason to stump for this guy lol, I don't know him from adam. But I mean... yes. Rookie mistake to not attach a question at the end of a series of statements. But I do think he was trying to actually engage with the film on a broader level and he does it through the technical aspects as well as the large ideological aspects. Alex Garland didn't seem to want to talk about some of those things per se but he did absolutely understand where the conversation was being driven-because imo the best interviews are not Q&As, they spark a train of thought.
Personally, I always think about it as the job of asking something that makes the person go "huh. I hadn't thought of it that way." He was not aiming for that level of interviewing, that would require a more intellectual questioner. But he wasn't too bad. I think what I find dissatisfying is the missed opportunities: Dunst should've been asked that question about Lee's taciturn nature. After Garland said what he did about commonalities to other countries, Moura should've been asked specifically about Brazil. After Garland talked about the world looking at America, he should definitely have been asked about how that POV informed his approach to keep things out because this film feels a LOT like it's anti-American exceptionalism-the criticism it's getting about being "apolitical" are, imo, silly because we see movies that elide "sides" about wars in other countries-but to put it on near-future American soil is pretty radical. Definite missed opportunities there & the guy seems capable enough of doing that: he brings up pretty good examples, like Basrah & the Gulf War. I also think his provocation on guns was obvious and smart... I do not think Garland's response was good there tbh. Loved the film, but c'mon Alex Garland, you set a film in a country with ubiquitous guns and yes, if you're admitting that civil war can be more "efficient" because of it, you're agreeing that it's a related not separate issue lol.
I love Dunst's quick response about being wary of talking from the POV of a war journalist. It was a quick privilege check done very well.
Just like Vlad😄
Hollywood full Democrat shills and fanboys/girls
The moderator was doing what American "journalists" do nowadays, which is make a series of politically charged statements and not ask a clear question so that they can simply insert their own politics into the interview and hope they get a reaction and a chance to clip the interviewee's response for views. It's super common in leftist circles especially.
The interviewer was likely aiming for more of an exchange rather than a standard Q&A film promo interview. Just a different style-perfectly acceptable in my book. The cast seemed quite disengaged and a bit of an inarticulate bunch, though (except for Wagner Moura ).
poor wagner
At 24:45 ish, The moderator was clearly disappointed when he was looking for a politically one sided answer condemning the people who were at Jan 6, but instead he got told, that many other countries are having the same civil issues, even Jan 6 situations like the Brazilian actor said. He does not seem happy that other countries are having sympathy for the amount of distrust in their leadership as America has.
Biden wouldn't it past him to ríg 2020 and 2024.
Well, disinformation is a global issue. When the president weaponizes his highly malleable cult, and goads them into believing that their vote doesn't count, the results are kind of predictable.
RobertK1993 • Just like your bozo Trump
Better than Dune part two
Impossible
It is actually
@@joseluissanchezjr Tell me more. Why? Does it change the landscape of cinema or a genre like Dune 2 has?
@razzram1629 dune 2 didn't change anything guy. I love dune but dune 2 didn't change anything. Still great movie!
@@joseluissanchezjr I think it has just by reading many of the reviews. It has changed the landscape of sci fi forever. Deal with it.
This movie suggests there are ethical reporters? That's a bridge too far. The main conceit of the film violates the first rule of filmmaking: Suspension of disbelief.
Backstory isn't "spoonfeeding", Alex. Context is part of storytelling.
depends on the story
Using your imagination isn’t a bad thing. Try.
For this story being told though it would be spoonfeeding as it is unecessary to what the point of the film is , and plus you can piece it together yourself from just actually watching the film
he was kinda shitty to the interviewer....just sayin'
You can't leave it up to the audience, where and how you were raised gives it a spin. Look at what's going on in the middle east. Both sides always believe they are right.
Anyone whom violates the Constitution is wrong period. All public officials take an oath to protect the Constitution. God bless America and keeps us free.
Your Constitution needs updating.
God isnt' real. If he were, like George Carlin said, he wouldn't have a favourite country - and if he did it sure as shit wouldn't be 'murica.
Richard. Richard. You kept feeding Alex and the cast softballs of liberal delight, but to no avail.
The movie didn't take sides. Alex didn't take sides. Alex basically called you "ideologically unsound" in a manner. Richard.
If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
@ChrisPage68 if you spent 5 minutes with me you'd realize you stand for far less than I do.
It just occurred to me: how would Mr. Garland feel if an American filmmaker made a movie called Civil War that took place in Ireland, but makes no mention of Catholics, Protestants or loyalty or lack thereof towards Britain and instead makes up some vague convoluted scenario that deliberately ignores existing regional affiliations? How would the Irish feel about an American director telling a story that implies that Ireland’s actual history and contentious issues don’t matter and the real problem is simply that people disagree on things and war is bad?
@jdj830 He'd probably be pleased that someone used their artistic freedom and not get butthurt by it.
If you made it would suck! 😅
It's not amazing. Just okay. Lots of effective, strong and disturbing scenes. But lots of sub-par acting and hokey scenes. Ultimately not very realistic, i didn’t think. If the US descended to the point depicted in this film...you really think we wouldn't have been invaded by Russia, China, North Korea, Iran etc. And, by the time the WF had reached the capital...do you really think the US wouldn't have been nuked, even or especially by its own hand...?
I agree 100%. It would be so much worse. Probably EMPs would also result from the nukes that would inevitably be used. Whole power grids would fail. Most towns would run out of fuel, food and ammo within months. 90% would starve in the first year, and the survivors would kill each other over a moldy load of bread. I mean .. if it was actually a full scale military conflict within the most powerful military in the history of mankind
Could not agree more. Why are the bloody scenes in this film - no worse than hundreds of recent bloody film scenes - held up to be so earth shaking in this firm? The dialogue is so predictable you could expect cue cards - especially the ending. And a more incompetent group of 3 experienced war journalists would be hard to find. A totally mediocre fantasy that seems to serve as a Left horror film indulgence.
Napoleon said: "Don't interrupt your enemies while they're making mistakes". America is dismantling itself. Why bother invading?
I didn’t like it.
Would you elaborate?
@@andrewgonzalez5232 I personally felt it was viscerally unexciting compared even to recent non-war movies and thought it was a pathetic waste of a good idea. Did an injustice to the reality of war and handled its premise in the safest and lamest way imaginable. The only way it could have been worse is if they were all stuck in a single house the whole time watching the “war” on tv.
@@micahtewersofficial
The sound design was excellent, but I felt that a good bit of the cgi was very obvious. Too small scale. Sure there are small scale battles in even the largest wars, but at least show one of the large ones- or show the battlefield remains. Thousands of tanks and artillery vehicles would be mobilized in a full scale civil war here. I think they were trying to show that a lot of it would be small fought arms, since America has SO many guns. (Neighbor s fighting neighbors ). But the destruction from even just the conventional weapons the untied states possesses would be unimaginable. The bridges and train tracks would be taken out by one side or the other, and then a Lot of people would starve. I think facing defeat one side or the other would even resort to tactical nukes, if even just aimed at military targets. And so on and etc. surely some other countries would be involved in one way or another as well.
I didn’t want a Michael bay fest, but a bit more at least
"We record so others can ask". But that hasn't been the case for a long time in journalism. That statement is a joke when in regard to modern day journalism.
When I see the other question in the previews, "What kind of American are you?" Is a much better question. Are you the type of American who will allow free speech, freedom of religion, assembly, etc or will you be the type of American who makes everyone else walk on eggshells around you because your fragile emotions propel you to believe censorship is best?
Or are you the type of American who will say whatever the hell you want to anyone because you don't give two shits about other people's feelings because you are probably a sociopath (undiagnosed) and have convinced yourself that your opinions are the only ones that matter?
I agree with all your comments here. We need journalists and Americans that think like you
lol I love how they say American people take Democracy for Granted 😂😂. Look at DC over the passed 30 years lol . Does that look like the Democracy the fathers worked for 😂
No and allowing it to become what it’s become is the point; that’s proving how Americans take it for granted.
Honestly, this film lacked in all departments. Good cast, not great nor spellbinding, but I’m disappointed that Garland, an absolute veteran of a screenwriter, delivered a script without a message which gave them nothing to work with. He’s got a chip on his shoulder this time around from the get go, at this point the film wasn’t even actually out, but where’s the enthusiasm? Garland was one of my favourites, but the run he’s been on is poor form and a steep decline… You have to earn our respect, attention, ultimately our hard earned money to buy tickets to your film. Civil War was an amalgamation of a chip on his shoulder. Nolan doesn’t do this, turn up without any energy and expect everyone to make their own assumptions, the guy writes and directs like it’s his first time, every time, and if anything, his passion is clear for each story he delivers. I’m glad Garland’s retiring as a director; in a way he got off easy!
Second American Civil War I wonder who the rebels are woke leftys 😂
Woke leftists will take huge losses in Civil War 2.0. Then go into hiding and reemerge in a few decades. Typical Bolsheviks.
You can't even spell lefties correctly. Small wonder Trump said he 'loves the uneducated'.
A film from a self-identified Brit Leftie, that has captivated the Left-leaning, as reassuring them in their belief that America is riven with divide, and drifting to some nebulous "civil war". Its a Left preoccupation, voiced in all the usual Atlantic Monthly, New Yorker thought pieces. Oddly, the Right fails to share this fervid prognostication. As an aside, its a weakly structured film, with glaringly predictable plot development, and faux-profundities such as a life spent filming violence corrodes the soul. Duh.
America IS riven by divides. The Far Right like it that way.
This dude is so used to jumping through so many woke hoops and walking on eggshells that now everything he says souds equivocal, legalistic, fake.
Texas and California fighting together? Maybe if Texas liberated California from the authoritarians who rule it now and restored it to a free state. Otherwise, that's an absurd notion, but I'm sure that was the point as to not take political sides.
Will never know until he doesn’t prequel
It was to ensure that this didn't seem like an anti-right or anti-left diatribe. He made it about the characters instead.
The president in the film seems craven. There is also terrorism in the city he controls. He might be a dictator himself, violating some core values of federalism and vexing both States.
Texas needs liberating.
@markburk6842 Nah, Texas needs liberating from the creationist, sexist, bigoted religious fundamentalism of the American right.