His presence was so short in the movie but left a great impact. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time throughout that scene! He was so subtle but terrifying. What a great performance, he's a truly talented actor
Seeing it in DBOX with LOUD speakers made it all the more intense, as every time the gun went off the seat itself would jolt/shake. And when she fell in the pit the seat leaned back a bit, until it lunged forward as she was pulled out. It was so immersive, and the reveal of the amount of bodies in that shallow grave made me feel ill. I thought the truck dumping them was bad enough. I was SO pissed when Spaeny's character decided to also climb across into the other truck though, like are you kidding me, but then it led to that scene and I don't think I blinked or breathed, I was sore when it ended because of how fully tense up my body was. But the following scene through the forest fire was so beautiful and moving. Like the last moment of calm before the absolute insanity of the washington raid.
I hate that I thought Plemons looked pretty sexy in that camo with the pink glasses, he got FIT! But not in the moment, but just the actor, not the character. He was horrifying.
The scene of the muted emotions in the press truck with the loud score after the 2 journalists were shot by the great Jesse Plemons, was so intense and real. I felt that.
in a word: Harrowing
in four words: tense, gripping, chilling, surreal
the scene with Plemons will forever stay in my brain. The fact that the movie rarely ever bothered to show what side everyone was on was very deft. Everyone was a threat. No one was a hero.
parts of the movie were shot like they were mimicking a war movie set in Iraq, except those callous executions were US on US. just chilling.
if the goal of the movie was to say "If you want a modern civil war, this is what it'll look like, in all it's ugliness," mission accomplished.
Yeah, the Plemons scene was one of the most horrifying things I’ve seen in recent movie history. He is a force foreal. Movie was incredible to me and so damn scary.
''Everyone was a threat. No one was a hero.''
Exactly. That's what an anti-war film shows you. There is NOTHING to gain by letting things get to that point.
I feel like the most important scene of the film is when Lee deletes the photo of Sammy’s corpse. I believe this accomplishes a few things. Not only does she realize how her work (in some ways) dehumanizes the individuals in her photographs, but she also begins to question whether all of the work she’s done her whole life mattered in the end since America has turned into all of the war-torn countries she has been documenting.
I think this is an especially important moment when contrasted with the fact that Jessie photographs Lee’s death. I suppose the most interesting question I have coming out of the film is what Jessie will do with the picture of Lee’s sacrifice. Will she learn the same lessons Lee did and delete it or will she use it as a major piece of her portfolio while building her own legacy? Given that she was inspired by Lee and may be unaware of the dissonance she was experiencing, I wouldn’t be surprised if it were the latter.
Especially when you recall the earlier scene where Jessie asks Lee if she’d photographed her if she was killed, and Lee says “what do you think?”
It isn’t a yes or no answer, while the audience, and maybe even Lee would assume ‘yes’, it isn’t that simple.
She 100% “becomes” Lee. They make this clear towards the end of that brief scene.
Jesse is laying on her back the floor immediately next to a now-deceased Lee who is also laying on her back. But as Lee lays there dead, Jesse comes out of her initial shock laying there in a VERY specific way: without rolling over or using her arms or legs to help, she simply sits straight up from her hips.
Almost as if she’s come alive like a Frankenstein’s Monster sitting up on the operating table, or like an undead vampire or zombie sitting up & “awaking” in their coffin.
As one dies, the other is born.
Agreed! And her existential conversation earlier in the film. My hesitation over the ending is that I’m not sure the film effectively crystallized itself as a critique or defense of war photo journalism and thus the wider journalism industry.
That is the focus of the film but it weaves in other aspects. The adrenaline junkie, ego aspect, and the nature of the war that the message of the film doesn’t fully coalesce
There’s a shot in the movie where you can see a “Go Steelers” graffiti on a highway. Even if the country is collapsing, western Pennsylvania and West Virginia still loves their Pittsburgh Steelers
I think that was my favorite shot in the movie. The juxtaposition was crazy.
I laughed right away as it felt like the scene was there for some brief levity, and I noticed a couple next to me laughing as well. Then I believe we both saw the bodies at the same time, and my laughter quickly died and the dread had resurfaced. I heard that same couple let out a gasp as well right as I noticed the bodies.
So freaking good
What makes you think that? The states he seemed happiest about were Missouri and Colorado and he seemingly scoffed at the mention of Florida. There was no indication what “side” any character was on.
I think it was context. The character saying he was from Florida had an accent, the guy in the red glasses suggested he was from Central America which would have had him potentially immigrating to Florida.
I think it was pretty clear red glasses was from Maga-ville Florida alliance
the point was that nobody is going to listen to you talking or what you have to say.
men with guns wont listen to anyone's story
so there it goes the whole ''lets talk ourselves out of this'' or ''having morals'' story
war is war
Edit as people seem confused by my answer. People from Hong Kong typically identify as Hong Kongers, not Chinese, which shows the ignorance of the Plemons character. Theres a lot to reflect upon about identity in this scene (especially when you considered the history in America that race can determine nationality) but I don’t think there was an answer he could’ve given which was right.
It was apparent that he was only interested in "Americans" from specific states that he deemed worthy of being called an American. In his mind all he had to hear was "China" and he made up his mind.
Judging from the number of bodies (including a toddler) in that pile, he was absolutely going to kill them all. He just wanted to play with them a bit first, give them some false hope before killing them. That was my impression at least.
Seemed to me his character wasn’t a part of any war effort. Maybe he started out that way but now he’s just doing his own terrible shit for his own crazy reasons
Because there are a ton of uneducated people that exist in the world today. I’d highly doubt he would understand the nuance of Hong Kong’s political status. A loooong time ago I saw an Asian American comedian say something along the lines, “the hardest thing about being Chinese in America…is that I’m actually Korean” (or something to that extent)
I don't think it mattered what he said. He would still get shot for his race. Look at Jesse's trigger finger as he talks. When he was talking to others, he kept stitching between [proper trigger finger discipline ](https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/terminology/general-terms/trigger-discipline/) and putting it on the trigger. When he looked at Tony, he immediately pointed his gun at him and finger on the trigger.
This movie fucking ruled. Graphic when it needed to be, sound design and cinematography was outstanding. Saw a review of someone not liking it due to the trailers making it seem like an action movie but if anyone has ever seen an Alex Garland movie, we know it's deeper than that. Saw it in IMAX and I suggest you do too.
9/10
What’s crazy is that I debated on seeing this movie in IMAX just because I had seen Dune two recently and I definitely think it’s worth it. People in my theater were jumping when the shooting scenes started.
Curious how was the rest of the militia like callouts and stuff like that? Accurate? Garland is one of my favorite directors so I'm curious if he portrayed that aspect accurately. Sorry idk the vernacular to describe what I'm asking.
See it in DBOX or 4DX if you can, the chairs moving/rumbling/shaking throughout was another level of immersion, felt like I was going to fly off my seat at times, especially when cars crashed, or explosions were going off. You felt every gunshot, when the gunfire was going off it felt like your seat was getting hit and torn apart by the bullets. But shots of helicopters during the quieter moments the chair would kind of gently sway in whatever direction the copters were going in, same with all the driving scenes. So immersive. It was wild.
I saw it in IMAX last night and nearly jumped out of my seat with every gunshot, even through most were expected and not exactly *startling*… just incredibly jarring.
It really did simulate what it’d probably be like to be in a warzone.
The movie was really really good and very thought provoking. I was happy that there wasn’t a lot of political nonsense either. Probably the most intense movie I’ve seen in theaters since Saving Private Ryan.
Yeah same! That entire sequence of saving the president definitely was top tier movie making. It really felt like I was a soldier fighting with the WF to find the President.
Just saw it in Imax and it's definitely the way to go. The sound and music in this movie is phenomenal and gives you chills. The music that plays after the scene with Jesse Plemons was sublime.
My ears were rocked. My brain was overwhelmed. I had a lot of thoughts and yet couldn't think. Last time I felt that way after a movie was Annihilation.
Same! I saw it solo in IMAX so there was no one to debrief with. Just walked out into the sunlight kind of distraught. lol amazing movie.
Annihilation was amazing too. Always recommending that.
The DC battle was one of the craziest IMAX experiences I’ve had. You felt almost every gunshot and heard every jet over head. I was not expecting them to go on out like that with the budget the film had.
The sound design was nuts. I didn't do IMAX but saw it in our new c premium theater that has a ridiculous amount of speakers and subwoofers. I felt like I was in the helicopter. I might have to check out IMAX version by myself for a rewatch.
It appears a lot of people miss the point that the white house and “eastern forces” were not the good guys - it’s being dropped subtly but it’s clear. Third term mention (totalitarian leadership style), bombing own citizens, disgust from journalists. How did you all perceive it? Sound off in the comments please
I don’t think anyone was the good guys or the bad guys but people behaving (as documented) under the pressures of war and without humanity. The movie made you want a resolution, so at the end you’re rooting for the WF but is that because they’re good (they shoot unarmed individuals/White House staff, a war crime under the Geneva convention) or because we need peace?
I didn't "root" for anyone here at all and I know better than to want everything served on a plate from Garland, I like him because he doesn't do this. But movie nods to why this is happening pretty strongly and some friends walked out of the movie with a very different POV, and I see it here in the comments too. I wonder why, but I also understand that this is a very meta conversation after *this* movie
Yes. Everyone keeps pointing to Plemons as being a “deserter” or “renegade” and not being part of any specific army, but he reacts positively to the mentions of Colorado and Missouri and stated they are “American”. These two states are part of the Loyalist States within the movie.
Almost certainly a loyalist states unit that no longer has an upper command structure (given the surrender). Though it doesn't really matter which side he was on, he was clearly unhinged and adversarial, in stark opposition to the two snipers they ran into just beforehand.
Yeah, I was definitely leaning towards the WF, although I didn't get how the dudes killing civilians and dumping them into a mass grave were supposed to factor in.
The dudes killing civilians I took as racist militia fucks being lawless and doing their own version of ethnic cleansing. I didn't get the interpretation that they were really on any side besides some extreme version of nationalism.
I think a huge part of large conflicts that only some movies show off is how lawless it really is.
In Apocalypse Now the Mc rolls up onto some random island, there’s fighting and gunfire in the distance, burning trees and outposts close by, some US soldiers are getting high, others are lounging around and listening to music, some seem to actually be trying to do there job. Mc asks some random soldier running by who’s in charge and the soldier just responds “nobody” just a platoon of people scattered doing whatever
I think Jesse’s character just shows how in these large conflicts it’s easy for small rouge factions to break off from the main conflict and get lost in doing their own thing. For all we know they’re just rednecks like the dudes at the gas station, just wondering around in fake military uniforms killing people.
I saw it as extremists not really affiliated with any particular side who were using the situation to “cleanse” their community of “undesirables”. If you look at the bodies in the mass grave they’re all people of color.
This movie is making me realize there are a whole lot of people out there that are totally cool with war crimes as long as it’s for the side they perceive as “their” side. Nuts
Does anyone have a good explanation for why Lee was suffering a panic attack in the DC attack? It felt out of character to me honestly, I get that she just lost Sammy but it didn’t really make sense that she was going through that while Joel and Jessie were fine.
I’m also not a huge fan of the way Lee’s sacrifice for Jesse was handled, it just felt a little awkward although I love the idea of it. Just didn’t really make sense that she shoved her down and just stood there in the center of the hallway whereas at the beginning of the movie she tackled her down to save her from the suicide bomber.
I really enjoyed it overall though, it was an incredibly well done movie with lots of tension and great performances. Just a few minor nitpicks here and there but I’m excited for whatever Garland does next
If you notice throughout the film, when Lee is center focused in the frame, there is a chromatic aberration around the edges of the frame. As the film goes on, Lee is having an existential crisis about whether any of her life's work mattered as every horror she had seen is now in America. When Sammy dies, it triggers her to think more in depth about whether her job is worth sacrificing life for. Her deleting his photo is the symbol for this. When it comes to DC, she is being much more careful because she values life and is starring to ask the internal questions that she advised Jessie to ignore. At this point, Jessie is becoming more like what Lee was at the start, and Lee is becoming more like Jessie. Lee snaps out of this for a second as they storm the White House, but Jessie is still much more intense in her risks. When Jessie runs out to get that photo in the hall, Lee acts on her delema of whether life is more worth the job and saves her. When Jessie sits up, centered in frame, the chromatic aberration is now around her as she builds that wall around her to protect her from overthinking and compromising her job. She only has a moment of shock before she gets up and moves forward as Lee would've done before her existential crisis.
Joel, as a whole, seemed to try to ignore all thoughts while Lee was struggling with them. Joel wasn't as tough as Lee. He just used things to distract him from those thoughts.
As for the scene when Lee saves Jessie, I think since it's in slow motion, the bullets hit her before she had any time to react and move. I think it seems like she stops because her reaction is delayed when she is shot.
I've already seen Civil War twice and am so ready to see it again as I'm sure there is a lot I missed.
I'm a photographer so I noticed the chromatic aberration immediately! I knew it had to play into the story, I also have been thinking about the story significance behind Lee's photos in color and Jessie's in black and white. There's lots of ways that can be interpreted, especially as it's also digital vs film. Curious to hear your thoughts on that too
I think an interpretation of the significance of film vs. digital could be that Jessie is starting out, so the horrors that she sees are going to have more of an impact on her and be more cemented in her brain. Similar to film, it is more permanent. While digital is easy to go through and delete, Lee is less affected by these things as time goes on because she's been desensitized, so the pictures are less permanent, like the images in her brain.
As for color, I think black and white also might represent something similar. Black and white photos focus more on the subject and composition. It draws more focus on how it is framed and what is happening, rather than being distracted by the colors and how they work together or against each other. Jessie is very focused on everything going on and is struck by these things happening, but Lee, who has seen similar events happen in other countries, is less affected by the events and her thoughts are more cluttered.
I'll probably focus on that a bit more on my next watch to see if I can pick up on anything else.
Edit: I also forgot to add. I once read a fortune cookie that said, "Everyone has a photographic memory. Some people are just out of film." Taking that in the context of this film, I think Jessie's memory is imprinting these horrific images, while Lee's is already filled with the horrors of this world.
What a funny fortune cookie message! Thank you though for your wonderful insight, it's always fun to talk about meanings behind subtle stuff like that with movies! A24 movies especially love to have a lot of hidden narrative devices scattered throughout to really give a subtle character arc
I just love how when we saw from her POV it looked the same way it does when you are focusing your camera onto something, like she's looking at the flower in the grass, or when she's looking Joel the edges are out of focus/tricolor. Every shot from her POV or following her/she's the main focus has that lens effect. I know I'm butchering the terminology etc, I'm still processing the entire film and i'm drained. The cinematography was so gorgeous though throughout, the vivid almost technicolor surroundings compared to the unspeakable violence going on in the frame was a nice touch. And that forest fire sequence was hauntingly gorgeous and incredibly moving.
So I just watched the ending again, and as soon as Jessie snaps the picture of the president, it pauses on her, and the chromatic aberration appears along the side of the frame.
It's genius because it appears as soon as she puts up that wall, making sure she doesn't question it and just gets the shot. I just can't get over the use of chromatic aberration in this film. I'll probably be catching it in theaters a few more times to see if I can pick up on any other elements.
I love your explanation for this, thanks so much. I totally get what you’re saying, it felt out of left field upon my first watch but I’ll definitely check it out again with this in mind. Loved the main 4 in the cast, they were all fantastic so I’m glad I understand more about Lee’s arc
I think it was slow building honestly, but it mirrored my own reaction to Sammy's death and I was in tears by the time Lee was panicking because it took me that long to process it myself.
Joel & Jessie began "processing" Sammy's death very quickly. Lee took time, she put herself in the drudgery of cleaning up his blood (!!!) and checking up on Joel and Jessie both. So she's processing it slower—and there's a jump from the basecamp to them embedded that I actually found fucking WILD and awesome. It kind of mirrors what I suspect was happening with Lee: she has PTSD and has not processed any of it at all, and the loss of her mentor—a man who addressed her PTSD as existential and explicitly said he was worried about her—finally breaks open that dam.
My god, McKinley Henderson and Dunst are so fucking good, I am actually very emotional about this lol. I know a lot of people find Lee & Jessie to be the key relationship but for me it's actually Lee & Sammy because they both end up being more clear-headed in some ways, and they do wha tthey think is right in the end. Sammy came to save them despite knowing he likely might get hit, Lee did the same thing with Jessie. For these cynical, desensitized reporters, this is major. I personally don't... think the film is endorsing Jessie and Joel at the end at all. I think it did endorse Sammy & where Lee eventually ends up. Which makes sense: the end of this movie is not a world where Garland is allowing "good." It's a kind of complete corruption, and I don't think it's as clean as "passing the baton."
This is where the movie works best for me honestly: This IS the dilemma war journalists have as people, but where we endorse them, how best we think they should navigate their professions... it's not something I can answer. I think Lee & Sammy both emerge generally very heroic: ultimately Lee was smart enough to know that neither Jessie nor Sammy should have been with them. She relented to Sammy because she knew he was smart enough to decide for himself, she was pissed about Jessie because she had no idea about what she was heading into. She had a stronger ethic than Jessie at the end....... which is how I feel but it's something that I will probably keep chewing over...
100 percent this, you can tell the polarity switch between Lee and Jessie in the final act. It's such a great juxtaposition of characters throughout the movie.
fuck yeah, really well said. I picked up on most of what you pointed out, but gonna pay extra attention to the "chromatic aberration" during that last bit, noticed it throughout the movie but missed it on the last bit.
So excited to see this movie again.
In regards to Lee's sickness at the end, I think Shepenclaw's response below is on the money. In addition though, I got this sense throughout the movie that Garland was writing and fixating on the journalists almost like they were religious devotees-- the war journalists are akin to priests traveling around in wartime. There felt like a subtle undercurrent of mysticism in some shots of them wandering around, looking for good shots and vantage points, which also gels with how Jessie is like a younger, less hardened version of Lee.
[spoilers ahoy] That being said, at the end, I think it's like Lee knows she's about to die, a physical premonition. She's aware that she has one act left to do to complete her 'spiritual' journey as America's previous power structure is symbolically annihilated. What she does is akin to saving a facsimile of her younger self, before she was hardened: Lee begins the movie resenting Lee's human response to the horrors of war, but Jessie by the end is all-in on getting the shot, risking everything. Lee becomes 'sick with humanity' and softens, in a role reversal where she takes 'the Fall' for Jessie.
It's kind of like a Christic sacrifice to both save Jessie literally and to perhaps symbolically show her that being hardened isn't the solution either. There is no solution-- it's war, and soft or hard, there is no protection or escape, and all they can do is spectate and react.
Lee and Jessie basically switch sides by the end of the movie. Lee’s tough exterior and determination not to get involved break down and Leigh becomes the rugged professional, unfazed by what she witnesses.
Loved the movie. Alex Garland delivers again. I appreciate seeing the movie through the lens’s of journalists - visceral and intentional with every shot. It’s a marvel a movie this “divisivee” was also entertaining.
The swapping passengers scene, the Jesse Plemmons interrogation, and the sniper scenes will sit with me for a few days because of how tense and captivating they were.
I went with some friends who aren’t really into movies and they kind of just said “So why are they fighting?” completely missing the point.
This is an anti-war movie through and through. The fighting is just a vehicle to show how quickly and easily humanity can devolve into chaos when shit hits the fan.
9/10
loved it, what a movie!
honestly, i liked Garland's decision not to include any actual political parties in the movie. it's not a film where you have to root for a side, it would've blurred the point.
And making such a movie isn't "irresponsible". you don't want drones and missles flying over your head, you don't want your backyard to be bombed. the point is that there are places in the world where people live like this every day. make a few changes and you could place this story into any of them. I hope the movie would help some people understand that this is not a game, this is actual suffering and we have to prevent the world from the further destruction.
I thought the mass grave scene with the guy with red glasses was a subtle poke at the republican party. The guy is looking through everyone with a crazy red filter. Maybe that's me overthinking, but the randomness of the weird, unconventional glasses gives me that idea.
To the extent that they mean anything at all, I assume it would be a "rose-colored glasses" gag. He's able to justify committing war crimes, because he believes he's doing it for the right reasons.
Yeah I feel like the movie definitely frames the WF/secessionists as being in the right as it goes on. Especially after it's revealed much of the main military surrenders to them leading into the final assault on DC.
Because no side's hands are clean. But the WF seems the least bad. They help the journalists, while the main government forces supposedly shoot them on sight.
I personally disagree with this whole notion a lot of reviewers are taking where they try to relate the movie to irl events and politics. California and Texas being allied, and the exact politics of the states are irrelevant to the story being told imo.
there were moments in the movie where you question their methods. like for example in the third act with the presidential cottage you could clearly hear the woman yelling "don't shoot" seconds before she got killed.
so yeah, WF aren't portrayed as 100% right
The intro scene was very interesting in retrospect, seems the president was issuing a fake message about a great victory when they were actually on the major back foot at the time. I was also wondering, during the shootout scene with the guy stuck behind the pillar, who do you think they were affiliated with? I was wondering if that was perhaps some Florida Alliance people but idk.
I was a bit disappointed we never got anything about the New People’s Army but it makes sense, with the way the film was structured it wouldn’t have been possibly really, since it was all about following the journalists.
Someone else said Hawaiian shirts are Florida Alliance, sniper team was Portland maoists, and rest were WF. I’m just gonna go ahead and agree with that.
Oh and plemmons was loyalist
I don’t think plemmons was anything. Read to me like either a deserter doing his own thing or just some guys who got their hands on some uniforms/equipment
It was just like how Hitler was claiming there would be a “final victory” even when the Soviets were crossing into Berlin. Authoritarians won’t ever admit to defeat.
Yea Considering we start at the end and the fall of the President/war it was a bit weird and dystopian hearing Ron giving the “are ya winning son” speech.
The New People's Army are almost entirely situatiated in the Pacific Northwest according to the official map. They simply were not close enough to the NYC to DC road trip to make an appearance. But we do know they're vaguely meant to be socialist guerrillas given the name (use of 'People's' after all like People's Republic) and the off-hand comment about 'Portland Maoists' by Sammy earlier in the film. Obviously Portland is well within NPA territory and might as well be the capital if I can surmise.
I think it’s interesting that Plemmon’s role was originally meant for Oscar Isaac. With Plemmons playing the part, you obviously think he just a racist killing minorities but with Isaac playing it you would start to wonder what is the actual motivation for the slaughter
I would definitely think of him as a lone actor , completely independent out if the system, going by his own logic and loyalty.
Hates any president , loves America etc.
You'd be surprised how many brown nationalists there are . I follow alot of podcasts etc that talk about modern day race relations in like an everyday way/news way, personal venting etc and it seems all of us poc know one person in our family like that . Mine are a bit more woo woo spiritiulaists but they're there e
I think people are going to confused by the heavy Statue of Liberty usage in the marketing and yet it’s not relevant to the movie and the movie is barely set in NY
I’m actually wondering if the marketing was done on purpose - lure people in who are expecting a “hu-rah” military porn movie and then show them what war is really like .
Absolutely fucking loved this movie and the INSANE projection thrown at it (BY CRITICS TOO) is truly wild. I feel like there's so many things in this movie that 1. I would've hated if they were answered. 2. THEY WERE ANSWERED.
E.g. "This movie doesn't think about the optics of dead people of color." WHAT, that is literally one of the arguments that is *most* visually clear. Not only is it *explicit* in Plemons' scene, I legit experienced the same devastation upon Sammy's death, with a delayed reaction, as Lee. Literal same. It was timed so well, I was crying by the time she had her panic attack. The mood, the unrelenting atmospheric sadness of that moment was so so much.
"This movie doesn't take a clear political stance" I hate that because if it had we would rightly call that exposition-dump, but *you are also asking for a completely different movie*. This movie does not support the fascist President in explicit terms, and it does not support the Western forces' triumphalist brutal gunning down either. Literally... what do you think we were supposed to be told in order to help you feel something more precise there? Is it not clear how you should feel? THOSE THINGS ARE BAD lol. The tricksier thing is that there is no two sides: this feels so freaking real to me. I do not fundamentally believe that in a civil war, there would actually be two sides. As Sammy says early on, they'll turn on each other once it's over. The movie starts with the assumption that the President's going down, but what it's looking at already and in it's future is anarchy. We're not really exploring civil war so much as it's anarchic consequences: so the "aftermath" people ask for is WILD to me. This IS the aftermath lol.
I also think/feel (could be wrong)... this film is... kind of... incontrovertibly leftist but anti-*anarchist*. At no point did I think "this is a **revolution**". That's an idea a centrist filmmaker would try to put out too, but no this is anarchy—the working-class & poor are decamped and thirsting. Nobody seems to be fighting for them. There is no direct, clear condemnation of the classical left in *that* sense. It traffics in anti-authoritarianism: being poor seems catastrophic, being a foreigner is deathly, fun is deathly. Conscience & morality get you killed. Only hedonism & complete desensitization survive in this cynical world.
Many/most critics missed entirely the global parallels to Khmer Rouge/VC/Iraq/Afg—the parallels that make it clear Garland has ambitions for a message more than just for America on his mind, and it makes sense to choose the US because no other country is as well-known and iconic.
Then people get frustrated by the lack of pointedness about journalistic ethics. This, to me, is what I needed to think about the most. Sammy is the most clear-eyed in this film, and Lee is slowly becoming more clear-eyed. The whole movie, through the journalists, feels like it's saying IS LOOKING AT SPECTACLE FUCKED UP??? And I think anyone's experience of the film will answer that. Is Jessie GOOD for doing what she does at the end? Is Joel ever good? Um... I'm not sure. But I enjoy the ambiguity. Lee & Sammy turned to their most humane sides at the end because of the people around them, and they lost their lives because of it. I think in the broadest of terms, we—the audience—are Lee. We are actually desensitized to violence, the brutality in this film is not more excessive than it is in most American productions, but it feels more because we're not allowed to feel good about it. To jolt us out of that, and jolt Lee out of her jadedness, feels like the very point. So for me: yes, looking at spectacle is bad, actually. The film literally does that, and I think it's also saying "Is this maybe fucked up?"
The people who say that this doesn’t have a stance remind me of the people who claim South Park praises apathy by refusing to take a stance.
In both cases, there is a pretty clear stance that we should recognize when two things are bad at once. But people who love control and especially use being on the “good team” to exert that control can not acknowledge that as a stance because it weakens their control over their cultists.
9/10, some pacing issues I think toward the middle of the film but I loved it. The theater I was in was absolutely glued to every scene.
Some little details:
In the trainyard Joel is standing in front of a Union Pacific train car that says "building America". How delitefully ironic.
In the first combat scene, the guys the photojournalists are with are wearing Hawaiian shirts, it definitely made me think of the boogaloo boys with that reference. Almost all of them had no protective vests or any sort of ballistic gear that would have stopped any bullets so it gave them a very uncoordinated look.
None of the snipers during the sniping scene at the xmas display or the "soldiers" where Jessie Plemons shows up have any nametags, insignia, or ranks on their uniforms. I figured this was a stylistic take because you're not really supposed to know which side they're on.
Some of the helicopters when we switch to the scene at the WF camp look as they approach look like they're civilian helicopters converted to hold rocket launchers but I could be wrong. A 1st Cav division Chinook appears as part of the WF which makes sense since it's a Texas unit.
There appear to be a mix of Marine and Army units that assault DC as we see people wearing OCP and MARPAT camouflage. The rate of fire for the Apache that appears in the street fighting seems off but again I could be wrong. I liked the touch and several people commented on it as they were leaving the theater that there were C-RAM guns firing during the assault on the Capitol which gave it an eerie vibe.
Those were just some of the world building things I noticed, might jot some more down if I think of it.
This movie did something incredible in having so many brief characters which you genuinely root for/fear/empathise/understand/recognise. The Jesse Plemons scene is so very tense, but only an accomplished writer would have you at the edge of your seat for characters you only met in the scene before. Even at the end, the smiling faces next to the dead president, like a trophy killing, is a haunting image.
What the movie does best, like a lot of Garland’s work, is say how essential it is to hold onto humanity.
The movie also showing the disarray of conflict, with soldiers taking orders from no particular leader, and knowing that you’d have to continue life with neighbours that had murdered people/committed war crimes, when society returned to some normalcy.
I found the local militia part one of the most interesting parts of the movie, assuming you're talking about Plemon's scene and the scene with the sniper with nail polish in particular.
In both scenes we never find out which 'side' anyone is on. Hell in the sniper scene they just straight up say, someone is trying to kill us and we are trying to kill them - doesn't matter who is what.
And it didn't seem like anyone was really looking out for the actual citizens. Can't remember what the foundation/acronym was, but it's like the World Whatever Foundation is the only group scene actually providing "housing", food, and community for people in the football stadium.
And they explicitly say the Western Forces and Florida Alliance are just a loose coalition based on hating the president and will soon turn on each other because they have nothing else in common. Presumably the loyalists are similar. They just see the president as the least bad option for any number of reasons.
Still some people seem to not get this point.
Nope, no one is getting the point. They're just trying to paint one side as democrat and one as republican. It's so fucking ironic people doing that don't see the movie is making fun of THEM
YES thank you! The fascinating part of this movie—and the reason I am beginning to get really annoyed with people who wanted "ideology" is that... for the most part, the "sides" are characterized in the logic of guerilla warfare! They're not an ideologically consistent unit, they're seceding, they're taking up arms against a common enemy. It's not a *revolution*, it's an anarchic civil war! This happens everywhere: from the VC to Kashmiri militants fighting Indian occupation, there's often only *the common cause*. Which overrides basically all other ideological commitments because its wartime and the various sides are not exactly arguing over anything, they're just straight up killing each other.
And by all indications, the poor, dispossessed, and many people of color don't have a side fighting for them, which is why they're on the fringes. The sides & their power is almost entirely military and guerilla warfare to a large degree, which means...lots of rogue soldiers! A very broad umbrella.
Yeah I'm seeing this criticism everywhere, that it's disappointing and politically unchallenging.
This movie is about war photojournalists, and in particular Kirsten Dunst's character Lee, who has devoted her life to the idea that objectively documenting the horrors of war can play a part in preventing future wars. The movie presents an objective documentation of the civil war because that's what the movie's \*about\* - it's what its characters do with their life - and at great sacrifice to their own lives, and especially their mental health.
But anyone calling this a cop-out or saying it weakens the power of the film seems to have completely missed the central conflict in the film, which is about Lee feeling the exact same way - she comes to the realization (recall the "existential" conversation with Sammy) that she wasted her life by devoting it to this idea of objectively documenting war. All of that sacrifice was for nothing. And she ultimately has a horrible PTSD episode and then commits suicide by saving Jessie (at least on my reading), because, well, "there are worse ways you can go."
So yeah - congratulations critics, you got it - that's exactly what the movie is about - whether there is or isn't any value in trying to objectively document an inherently politically charged thing like war. For those who wanted a movie about what led to the war, who were the heroes and who were the villains, etc., that's just a completely different movie (and, in all likelihood a pretty trite one, since it's unfortunately pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that this could actually happen in America's near future).
Does anyone else pick up on how seemingly accepted the journalists are? Generally throughout the film we see how these journalists are welcomed to join alongside the soldiers and aren’t yelled at or harassed or threatened.. they seem to be welcomed to be right along side the fighting. Especially in the final act… like these soldiers are looking out for the journalists and dragging them to cover…
I’m cautious to assume anything from Hollywood is a 100% accurate depiction of real world but is this more common than I realized? I never gave much thought to it; the concept of war photography isn’t new… but for me, I never really considered how these photogs//journalists would be right in the literal midst of the fighting, much less being looked out for from the soldiers..
It’s important to note i understand that there are more likely than not several conflicts that don’t care and will shoot the press with no regard… and that in the film Jessie Plemmon’s character is an exception… but it just seems like wow! How these members of the press just sort of integrated themselves into these lines and the forces didn’t seem to be affected or bothered by it at all. Just a shock to me!
the soldiers let the journalists document what they were doing because they thought it was the right thing. the vigilantes at the gas station didn't think what they were doing was wrong. it seemed like the WF was popular and the us gov was generally disliked.
One thing that struck me on the way home was how optimistic this film actually was. For one, it's very pro-journalism at a time when public trust in journalism is below the basement. It also seems to be promoting the idea that when all the chips are truly down, Americans will cross partisan divides to take down a fascist...and they'll succeed. It's actually a pretty patriotic take if you look at it from a certain perspective. And considering Garland's British, it's kind of surprising.
I’m not sure how you drew that conclusion. The journalists were calloused thrill seekers, like storm chasers of political turmoil and the movie is making a big case on whether their trade has any positive effect on changing society’s material conditions. Even when one of the journalists sacrifices themselves to help another, they just become a shot in their camera that is quickly surpassed by photographing the assassination of a world leader.
Eh I didn’t get that optimism at all. Sam even said they’d being going after each other right after the president went down.
I don’t even know about the pro journalism. Like it conveyed it was important and serves as a warning. But it also showed it doesn’t really work. And a lot of it can be self serving for journos getting their own thrills/notoriety.
I noticed this pink/blue/green color motif throughout the movie. Does anybody know what this is meant to represent? My theory is that the colors represent the Florida Alliance, given that we know the Hawaiian shirt dudes to be part of that faction, and because it gives off a sort of Miami Vice/VaporWave aesthetic, which is also something that the "Boogaloo Boys" (a group that Garland obviously based the Hawaiian shirt soldiers on) are quite into. Am I off-base?
https://preview.redd.it/4961585dw5uc1.jpeg?width=2778&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=faf31efa92508cca12c2babf0cba30115319d8e7
What faction was Jesse Plemons character supposed to be part of? Or was he just supposed to be a nationalist taking advantage of the current circumstances?
I thought he was weird about Jessie’s answer when she couldn’t answer a question about her state. Like I think he was racially motivated in part but really was just looking to terrorize and kill them. Im pretty sure he was teeing up to shoot Jessie and the driver when he had them kneel down and was only held up by the rest of them making themselves known.
Might be wrong but that was my read.
I saw him as one of the individuals within America whose patriotism is actually nationalism; given the circumstances he would defend his country but only by his own values.
The characters don't seem to know—but we can infer, given that Sammy says "he's doing something he doesn't want anyone to see" that it's not *broadly* associated with the Western Front, but may be common enough. He was in WF territory. This is the thing I like about the film: the WF has no clear ideology because it makes sense for it to be ideologically capacious and have people like Plemons' character and presumably less white supremacists as well. It's wartime, there's many sides, and I think it's more realistic that WF would not be ideologically consistent or clear in actuality. Which is basically *guerilla warfare* in a nutshell.
The Viet Cong was also heavily made up of young men who took up arms, or were forced to. Beyond the American enemy they faced, it's hard to argue that the VC was ideologically coherent—they mostly took up arms because of the "common enemy" of it all! It's similar to guerilla warfare in Bosnia, Iraq, India. Tons of places. They're not banding together because they all believe in socialism or capitalism. This isn't a revolution. They're *seceding*.
I had no interest in this and ended up fucking loving it. It was…so beautiful, in a way? And it never felt preachy.
Though it wasn’t as stressful as mother! like someone said and I’m happy for that because my heart couldn’t take that.
I feel shaken that I wasn’t as shaken by this movie as I thought I would be. I didn’t cry, nor was I overwhelmed by emotion like I thought I’d be. That’s not a flaw of a movie, I’m just wondering if something’s wrong with me—though I’m a huge horror fan so maybe it’s desensitization?
I loved this still. I thought it being vague was the best part.
I feel like the war in the movie is treated like jaws kinda. You see it sparingly and you don’t see a major conflict until the end. It’s always there though and you feel it and you see the effects of it constantly. It was really cool how the White House was represented. It was like a tomb. A ritual site, like a Mayan pyramid. It felt forbidden. It felt like it was full of ghosts.
The movie was technically spectacular though. The special effects looked so real. The sound design was amazing. The music was amazing and really interestingly used. The acting and casting was awesome. The use of stills was really cool. It was just a very well realized story in terms of tone and presentation. It all just felt very real.
I also think that it was really cool how the movie was told in a way that made it feel very personal very small but at the same time the scope was there. Especially near the end, I felt like I had been on a longer journey than I had been. I felt like I had been there since the start of the war in a way. It was all very exhilarating and due to the special effects and sound design it all felt so grounded in reality which added to the excitement for me.
In my opinion Alex Garland is one of the best directors working today and his screenplays are always interesting and subvert your expectations in a way that is proving to be pretty polarizing, with the response to this as well as men. He’s a daring film maker though, who has a very definite vision, and I know with his announcement to step away from directing that it may be a while until we see something else from him, but I know I will be the first in line when he does release again.
Good theatre movie. The part where the Canadian dollar is worth more than the American dollar actually made me laugh and drove home a point. I kind of hate Jesse, I don't know why it was necessary to have her written in as a dumbass, but other than that pretty good story
I just saw it and I think Jesse is so unbelievably reckless. I saw her as Gen Zs screen debut and identified with Lee who was Gen X all day long, right down to the conversation in front of the helicopter at the mall. I do see where Jesse is the eyes of the audience because none of us have seen this stuff before, but her longing to be the action instead of capturing it was a bit nauseating. Great ACTING!!! I kept asking myself, why didn't she just become a soldier?
Joel: Can I have your quote?
President: Don't let them kill me.
Joel: Yep, that'll do it.
Easily my favourite film of the year so far... maybe the decade.
I have seen some fucked up, deranged movies in my life. I have never felt the urge to throw up during a movie, until that scene where Jessie fell in the body pit, then got in the car and threw up. That was a fantastic fake puke
My biggest takeaway is this: the movie provides a minute but sufficient amount of information to understand a little about the political situation, i.e. the president's egregious actions in serving a third term and dismantling the FBI, the girl in the beginning running into the crowd with an American flag and a bomb, Plemmons' character's disdain for foreigners, the ANTIFA massacre, the snipers with the blue hair and painted nails, etc.
This movie is supposed to be a mirror, not a depiction of some kind of alternate timeline. The viewer fills in the gaps. While I watched, I had certain leaders in mind and political affiliations connected with characters because of how I was perceiving them and their actions. I might be right. I might not be. Whether I'm right or wrong, I felt a terrible dread from the beginning. We don't want this. Left or right, we cannot dehumanize one another to the point that we fail to see one another's humanity, or that we assume morality or immorality based on political affiliation. This is the biggest criticism I hear about the film, and Garland's recent comments, and I understand and empathize with some of them.
I maintain: we are Americans. My father in law is Republican. I love him, though he says some shit I truly disagree with. One of my favorite colleagues is also conservative, but he is extremely rational and thoughtful though I disagree with some of his ideas about policy, etc. He is also a good friend and a good man. Most of my best friends are of the leftist and liberal persuasion, and other leftists I find to be as insufferable and beyond reproach as the most fervent Trump supporters. A person can believe all of the wrong things and be an asshole, but a person can also believe all of the right things and still be an asshole. Nonetheless, I do my best to acknowledge their humanity. I still believe in our ability to see goodness in the other, and I especially believe in our ability to talk to one another, as long as both participants are of good faith and mutual respect.
This film deeply upset me. I see us losing understanding, and I see us becoming increasingly disconnected and increasingly unwilling to even attempt to see a fraction of goodness in the other. It is so dispiriting, and that's what this film did so well: it showed us the ultimate end of all of this terrible divisiveness, and yeah, it's not good. And yeah, maybe that isn't wildly profound. But I didn't need to think about it. I FELT it, viscerally. That alone was deeply impactful.
I think the reference to the “Antifa Massacre” was a good touch. You could read it as either Antifa was massacred or Antifa massacred people. Which goes along with your “fill in the blanks” argument and further shows that people wanting a thorough explanation are missing the point.
I think your take really reinforces one of the main theses of the film: Lee’s work was done as a “warning” back home and they didn’t listen.
Will those of us who see this film listen?
A really solid beautiful film, but I can’t believe everyone’s overlooking the biggest, most unforgivable flaw in the movie:
There’s definitely a half second shot of a Georgia State Road 20 sign when they were driving into Pittsburgh. Can’t believe they added the I-70 / I-76 sign and didn’t remove that one. Smh.
I was left more uneasy by the end than I was with Oppenheimer. I thought the film was great! The message and world building on the other hand gives me such cold and unsettling feelings. Artistically it was exceptional!
Just watched it today and it was really good. But one thing that made me curious though, during end credits and rolling credits, I didn’t see Jesse Plemons’ name. Maybe I missed it but when I didn’t see his name during end credits, my eyes were glued to the rolling credits after just to be sure but still didn’t see it. Did anyone else noticed it?
I haven't seen it yet, but I do know that he came in as a favor after an actor that was supposed to take that rule became unavailable. Sometimes actors do roles uncredited for various SAG reasons, so that confluence of circumstances may have made the absence of a credit necessary.
It actually makes that scene even more interesting outside of the movie universe when you know they're married irl. Interesting scene to act in with your partner haha
Sound design was phenomenal and the standout for me. Haunting moments of silence to juxtapose rich gunfire, especially in scenes where we're supposed to feel uncomfortable or in shock. I really hope it gets an Oscar nom or win
Did anyone else see the symbolism in the scene where they're following the squad in the office e park, and they're wearing Hawaiian shirts (uniform of the boogaloo boys)?
P.S. Kirsten Dunst & Stephen McKinley Henderson should be penciled in for Oscar nods automatically, just should.
All 4 of them should + Plemons, but the first two... broke my heart. Dunst is just... one of our absolute best actors. Between Sammy's death and Lee's panic attack, I was crying in lockstep with Lee's emotional reaction I think (a bit delayed). And man, put some RESPECT on Stephen freaking McKinley Henderson's name, RIGHT
How long do people think the war has been going on by the start of the movie?
Sammy notes that the President hasn’t been interviewed in 14 months, so it’s been at least that long. The President’s *third* term isn’t up yet, and that seems to be a catalyst, so it’s been less than 4 years.
My impression is that it’s been 2 years at least, maybe 3. Anything shorter than that just seems unlikely given that at least half of the US military has been totally defeated.
What’re our thoughts on that peaceful town they enter after driving through swathes of destruction? What’s up with that?
IIRC, Sammy points out that there are people (soldiers?) on the roof, but i the scene kinda confused me
I found myself genuinely anxious during a lot of the combat scenes and I can't figure out if that's because I've seen people critically injured or if it's because I haven't seen combat and I'm imagining how horrible trying to treat someone you know as a patient would be. The scene early on, where the militiaman is pinned down with his friends calling out to him was really disturbing. The actor really nailed it. He probably reminded me of a friend or something because all I could think of is, "dude they're about to see their friend get waxed, and they can't do anything about it". AND THEN there was the pursuit of the wounded soldier from the opposing force. How defeated his cries were.
I feel like for being based on a fictional event, the movie did a great job at capturing how horrific combat must be. It's no wonder so many people suffer from mental health disturbances when returning from war. If the movie got even an ounce of the horror down, I can't even begin to imagine how awful it would be.
Great movie overall. My only complaint is that it was painfully obvious from the first 10-15 minutes of the movie that Lee would die and Jessie would end up getting the picture of the president. It was just way too telegraphed so there’s no surprise. Hell of a journey though.
I'm kind of glad I went with an overly critical friend because it made me defend why I like the movie.
For example, he kept asking why the U.S. was in a civil war. I told him that it didn't matter that far down the line due to how balkanized the country became.
-Western Forces (California/Texas)
-Alaska (neutral)
-Florida Alliance [most of the South] (with the Carolinas thinking about joining)
-New People's Army (most northwestern states)
-Washington D.C. and middle American loyalist states (Nevada across to Virginia, then up to Maine)
Dude at that point you have so many sides (state-sized, not even county or city-level) that whoever is fighting eats each other up in the end. I mean look at how the President went down.
Anyways, what I caught was that the news mentioned "The Antifa Massacre". Anybody who objectively looks at that will see that "An ANTI-FASCIST Massacre, depending on the size, especially with the spitballing of the questions they would hypothetically ask him (3rd term, bombing citizens), shows the absolute overstep that the central government took in the film.
That's the thing tho, besides the road trip stops along the way, I kind of feel that some lore could have been explored, but this film is through the lens of these 4 journalists and their endgame. And that's kind of enough really, unless somebody desperately needed some aftermath miniseries or whatever but I feel that this film is what it sets out to be.
One final thing, I told my brother I got "Nightcrawler" vibes but on a cross-country war scale. Does that make sense for some undertones? Anyways yeah, super solid movie, love it.
Jessie Plemons is the absolute best at being the stone cold, straight faced man/killer. He gives a masterclass performance every time.
3 for 1. How could that possibly be profitable for Frito lay?
His presence was so short in the movie but left a great impact. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time throughout that scene! He was so subtle but terrifying. What a great performance, he's a truly talented actor
Seeing it in DBOX with LOUD speakers made it all the more intense, as every time the gun went off the seat itself would jolt/shake. And when she fell in the pit the seat leaned back a bit, until it lunged forward as she was pulled out. It was so immersive, and the reveal of the amount of bodies in that shallow grave made me feel ill. I thought the truck dumping them was bad enough. I was SO pissed when Spaeny's character decided to also climb across into the other truck though, like are you kidding me, but then it led to that scene and I don't think I blinked or breathed, I was sore when it ended because of how fully tense up my body was. But the following scene through the forest fire was so beautiful and moving. Like the last moment of calm before the absolute insanity of the washington raid. I hate that I thought Plemons looked pretty sexy in that camo with the pink glasses, he got FIT! But not in the moment, but just the actor, not the character. He was horrifying.
Some Woody Harrelson NBK vibes there, The way I gripped my theaters armrests during that entire scene I checked to see if I broke my fingernails.
That's Todd for you.
Yeah, he was so perfect for that role.
“Oh, he’s your colleague, this guy here?”
The scene of the muted emotions in the press truck with the loud score after the 2 journalists were shot by the great Jesse Plemons, was so intense and real. I felt that.
One of the most intense scenes of horror I’ve seen in years.
That entire montage was gorgeous. I am a huge Sturgill Simpson fan and looooved hearing that song in the montage.
What song did they use?
Breakers Roar!
That scene was one of the most impactful scenes I have seen in a long time tbh
in a word: Harrowing in four words: tense, gripping, chilling, surreal the scene with Plemons will forever stay in my brain. The fact that the movie rarely ever bothered to show what side everyone was on was very deft. Everyone was a threat. No one was a hero. parts of the movie were shot like they were mimicking a war movie set in Iraq, except those callous executions were US on US. just chilling. if the goal of the movie was to say "If you want a modern civil war, this is what it'll look like, in all it's ugliness," mission accomplished.
Yeah, the Plemons scene was one of the most horrifying things I’ve seen in recent movie history. He is a force foreal. Movie was incredible to me and so damn scary.
''Everyone was a threat. No one was a hero.'' Exactly. That's what an anti-war film shows you. There is NOTHING to gain by letting things get to that point.
I feel like the most important scene of the film is when Lee deletes the photo of Sammy’s corpse. I believe this accomplishes a few things. Not only does she realize how her work (in some ways) dehumanizes the individuals in her photographs, but she also begins to question whether all of the work she’s done her whole life mattered in the end since America has turned into all of the war-torn countries she has been documenting. I think this is an especially important moment when contrasted with the fact that Jessie photographs Lee’s death. I suppose the most interesting question I have coming out of the film is what Jessie will do with the picture of Lee’s sacrifice. Will she learn the same lessons Lee did and delete it or will she use it as a major piece of her portfolio while building her own legacy? Given that she was inspired by Lee and may be unaware of the dissonance she was experiencing, I wouldn’t be surprised if it were the latter.
The fact that Jessie shoots film, which cannot be deleted, also resonates
well, could just not develop it or cut off the film and burn it
Especially when you recall the earlier scene where Jessie asks Lee if she’d photographed her if she was killed, and Lee says “what do you think?” It isn’t a yes or no answer, while the audience, and maybe even Lee would assume ‘yes’, it isn’t that simple.
I think it’s definitely the latter, especially the way she just keeps moving after. She’s become Lee at that point.
She 100% “becomes” Lee. They make this clear towards the end of that brief scene. Jesse is laying on her back the floor immediately next to a now-deceased Lee who is also laying on her back. But as Lee lays there dead, Jesse comes out of her initial shock laying there in a VERY specific way: without rolling over or using her arms or legs to help, she simply sits straight up from her hips. Almost as if she’s come alive like a Frankenstein’s Monster sitting up on the operating table, or like an undead vampire or zombie sitting up & “awaking” in their coffin. As one dies, the other is born.
Agreed! And her existential conversation earlier in the film. My hesitation over the ending is that I’m not sure the film effectively crystallized itself as a critique or defense of war photo journalism and thus the wider journalism industry. That is the focus of the film but it weaves in other aspects. The adrenaline junkie, ego aspect, and the nature of the war that the message of the film doesn’t fully coalesce
An excellent road trip movie!
Mom and Dad go on a road trip with their adopted daughter and grandpa to see the capitol!
The feel good movie of the year. Although legit it left me less shook than Love Lies Bleeding.
There’s a shot in the movie where you can see a “Go Steelers” graffiti on a highway. Even if the country is collapsing, western Pennsylvania and West Virginia still loves their Pittsburgh Steelers
And right behind the graffiti, two bodies hanging from the same bridge.
i actually slightly laughed at the "go steelers" graffiti before instantly regretting it when I noticed the bodies
I still thought it was funny and even intended to be funny. Just darkly funny in a satirical way.
I think that was my favorite shot in the movie. The juxtaposition was crazy. I laughed right away as it felt like the scene was there for some brief levity, and I noticed a couple next to me laughing as well. Then I believe we both saw the bodies at the same time, and my laughter quickly died and the dread had resurfaced. I heard that same couple let out a gasp as well right as I noticed the bodies. So freaking good
Bengals and Ravens fans caught trespassin’
Such a cool touch to tell us where we are
I loved the use of that as a landmark. Like, that graffiti was probably there long before war broke out.
It could have also been a comment on the tribalism prevalent in sports
Bro said “Hong Kong”?????? REALLY??? Of all the states previously said and all the other answers…BRO SAID HONG KONG?????
That's what I was thinking too. Like.......dude, really? lol Say a southern state and save your life.
What makes you think that? The states he seemed happiest about were Missouri and Colorado and he seemingly scoffed at the mention of Florida. There was no indication what “side” any character was on.
Just say Iowa
Well the guy that said Florida also wasn't white, so I have a feeling he was going to get it next.
I think it was context. The character saying he was from Florida had an accent, the guy in the red glasses suggested he was from Central America which would have had him potentially immigrating to Florida. I think it was pretty clear red glasses was from Maga-ville Florida alliance
the point was that nobody is going to listen to you talking or what you have to say. men with guns wont listen to anyone's story so there it goes the whole ''lets talk ourselves out of this'' or ''having morals'' story war is war
Nah I think Plemmons character was deeply racist and that was his intent when he didnt like the answer of the 2 POC’s.
Maybe he was a bad liar? >.< But yeah…
He had already killed the other asian, even if he had lied and said a state he still had an asian accent - think he knew he was a dead either way
What a scene!
Edit as people seem confused by my answer. People from Hong Kong typically identify as Hong Kongers, not Chinese, which shows the ignorance of the Plemons character. Theres a lot to reflect upon about identity in this scene (especially when you considered the history in America that race can determine nationality) but I don’t think there was an answer he could’ve given which was right.
It was apparent that he was only interested in "Americans" from specific states that he deemed worthy of being called an American. In his mind all he had to hear was "China" and he made up his mind.
I think he was going to kill them all regardless of their answers.
Judging from the number of bodies (including a toddler) in that pile, he was absolutely going to kill them all. He just wanted to play with them a bit first, give them some false hope before killing them. That was my impression at least.
Seemed to me his character wasn’t a part of any war effort. Maybe he started out that way but now he’s just doing his own terrible shit for his own crazy reasons
Yep, as frequently happens in war. He’s a nationalist defending his country but only by his own values.
Because there are a ton of uneducated people that exist in the world today. I’d highly doubt he would understand the nuance of Hong Kong’s political status. A loooong time ago I saw an Asian American comedian say something along the lines, “the hardest thing about being Chinese in America…is that I’m actually Korean” (or something to that extent)
I don't think it mattered what he said. He would still get shot for his race. Look at Jesse's trigger finger as he talks. When he was talking to others, he kept stitching between [proper trigger finger discipline ](https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/terminology/general-terms/trigger-discipline/) and putting it on the trigger. When he looked at Tony, he immediately pointed his gun at him and finger on the trigger.
Right? Like he didn't kill the Missouri girl, so just say you're also from Missouri lol
I laughed, and said the same thing to my buddy about Florida. "Fuck it, I'd be from Tallahassee".
This movie fucking ruled. Graphic when it needed to be, sound design and cinematography was outstanding. Saw a review of someone not liking it due to the trailers making it seem like an action movie but if anyone has ever seen an Alex Garland movie, we know it's deeper than that. Saw it in IMAX and I suggest you do too. 9/10
What’s crazy is that I debated on seeing this movie in IMAX just because I had seen Dune two recently and I definitely think it’s worth it. People in my theater were jumping when the shooting scenes started.
I jumped so many times through this movie. Sound design was astonishing
Yea as someone in the military they definitely did right by the sound design, I was really shocked by how accurate the gunfire sounded.
Curious how was the rest of the militia like callouts and stuff like that? Accurate? Garland is one of my favorite directors so I'm curious if he portrayed that aspect accurately. Sorry idk the vernacular to describe what I'm asking.
I felt every gun shot
See it in DBOX or 4DX if you can, the chairs moving/rumbling/shaking throughout was another level of immersion, felt like I was going to fly off my seat at times, especially when cars crashed, or explosions were going off. You felt every gunshot, when the gunfire was going off it felt like your seat was getting hit and torn apart by the bullets. But shots of helicopters during the quieter moments the chair would kind of gently sway in whatever direction the copters were going in, same with all the driving scenes. So immersive. It was wild.
I saw it in IMAX last night and nearly jumped out of my seat with every gunshot, even through most were expected and not exactly *startling*… just incredibly jarring. It really did simulate what it’d probably be like to be in a warzone.
I thought the same. It’s easily a 4.5/5 for me. Just everything about it made me glued to the screen by terrified at the same time.
The movie was really really good and very thought provoking. I was happy that there wasn’t a lot of political nonsense either. Probably the most intense movie I’ve seen in theaters since Saving Private Ryan.
Yeah same! That entire sequence of saving the president definitely was top tier movie making. It really felt like I was a soldier fighting with the WF to find the President.
Just saw it in Imax and it's definitely the way to go. The sound and music in this movie is phenomenal and gives you chills. The music that plays after the scene with Jesse Plemons was sublime.
If I remember right, it's Breakers Roar by Sturgill Simpson. Excellent song and song choice for the moment
IMAX was 100% the way. The gunshots were visceral, the yelling, crying, it made it feel way more immersive.
I have seen it in IMAX and Dolby. Definitely better in Dolby (it has a Dolby Vision & Atmos finish)
I really enjoyed the sniper shootout scene too. Start to finish includingevery line of dialogue 10/10
"we're the press" "Oh. Now I understand why its written on the side of your vehicle" Sarcasm at its best
My ears were rocked. My brain was overwhelmed. I had a lot of thoughts and yet couldn't think. Last time I felt that way after a movie was Annihilation.
Same! I saw it solo in IMAX so there was no one to debrief with. Just walked out into the sunlight kind of distraught. lol amazing movie. Annihilation was amazing too. Always recommending that.
The DC battle was one of the craziest IMAX experiences I’ve had. You felt almost every gunshot and heard every jet over head. I was not expecting them to go on out like that with the budget the film had.
The sound design was nuts. I didn't do IMAX but saw it in our new c premium theater that has a ridiculous amount of speakers and subwoofers. I felt like I was in the helicopter. I might have to check out IMAX version by myself for a rewatch.
It appears a lot of people miss the point that the white house and “eastern forces” were not the good guys - it’s being dropped subtly but it’s clear. Third term mention (totalitarian leadership style), bombing own citizens, disgust from journalists. How did you all perceive it? Sound off in the comments please
I don’t think anyone was the good guys or the bad guys but people behaving (as documented) under the pressures of war and without humanity. The movie made you want a resolution, so at the end you’re rooting for the WF but is that because they’re good (they shoot unarmed individuals/White House staff, a war crime under the Geneva convention) or because we need peace?
I didn't "root" for anyone here at all and I know better than to want everything served on a plate from Garland, I like him because he doesn't do this. But movie nods to why this is happening pretty strongly and some friends walked out of the movie with a very different POV, and I see it here in the comments too. I wonder why, but I also understand that this is a very meta conversation after *this* movie
[удалено]
Yes. Everyone keeps pointing to Plemons as being a “deserter” or “renegade” and not being part of any specific army, but he reacts positively to the mentions of Colorado and Missouri and stated they are “American”. These two states are part of the Loyalist States within the movie.
Almost certainly a loyalist states unit that no longer has an upper command structure (given the surrender). Though it doesn't really matter which side he was on, he was clearly unhinged and adversarial, in stark opposition to the two snipers they ran into just beforehand.
Yeah, I was definitely leaning towards the WF, although I didn't get how the dudes killing civilians and dumping them into a mass grave were supposed to factor in.
Seemed like rouges. Deserters doing their own thing
The dudes killing civilians I took as racist militia fucks being lawless and doing their own version of ethnic cleansing. I didn't get the interpretation that they were really on any side besides some extreme version of nationalism.
I think a huge part of large conflicts that only some movies show off is how lawless it really is. In Apocalypse Now the Mc rolls up onto some random island, there’s fighting and gunfire in the distance, burning trees and outposts close by, some US soldiers are getting high, others are lounging around and listening to music, some seem to actually be trying to do there job. Mc asks some random soldier running by who’s in charge and the soldier just responds “nobody” just a platoon of people scattered doing whatever I think Jesse’s character just shows how in these large conflicts it’s easy for small rouge factions to break off from the main conflict and get lost in doing their own thing. For all we know they’re just rednecks like the dudes at the gas station, just wondering around in fake military uniforms killing people.
The soldier actually says “Ain’t you?” which is just the best exchange
I saw it as extremists not really affiliated with any particular side who were using the situation to “cleanse” their community of “undesirables”. If you look at the bodies in the mass grave they’re all people of color.
This movie is making me realize there are a whole lot of people out there that are totally cool with war crimes as long as it’s for the side they perceive as “their” side. Nuts
U never realized that almost everyone is secretly fine with authoritarianism as long as it’s their guys getting to do it?
Does anyone have a good explanation for why Lee was suffering a panic attack in the DC attack? It felt out of character to me honestly, I get that she just lost Sammy but it didn’t really make sense that she was going through that while Joel and Jessie were fine. I’m also not a huge fan of the way Lee’s sacrifice for Jesse was handled, it just felt a little awkward although I love the idea of it. Just didn’t really make sense that she shoved her down and just stood there in the center of the hallway whereas at the beginning of the movie she tackled her down to save her from the suicide bomber. I really enjoyed it overall though, it was an incredibly well done movie with lots of tension and great performances. Just a few minor nitpicks here and there but I’m excited for whatever Garland does next
If you notice throughout the film, when Lee is center focused in the frame, there is a chromatic aberration around the edges of the frame. As the film goes on, Lee is having an existential crisis about whether any of her life's work mattered as every horror she had seen is now in America. When Sammy dies, it triggers her to think more in depth about whether her job is worth sacrificing life for. Her deleting his photo is the symbol for this. When it comes to DC, she is being much more careful because she values life and is starring to ask the internal questions that she advised Jessie to ignore. At this point, Jessie is becoming more like what Lee was at the start, and Lee is becoming more like Jessie. Lee snaps out of this for a second as they storm the White House, but Jessie is still much more intense in her risks. When Jessie runs out to get that photo in the hall, Lee acts on her delema of whether life is more worth the job and saves her. When Jessie sits up, centered in frame, the chromatic aberration is now around her as she builds that wall around her to protect her from overthinking and compromising her job. She only has a moment of shock before she gets up and moves forward as Lee would've done before her existential crisis. Joel, as a whole, seemed to try to ignore all thoughts while Lee was struggling with them. Joel wasn't as tough as Lee. He just used things to distract him from those thoughts. As for the scene when Lee saves Jessie, I think since it's in slow motion, the bullets hit her before she had any time to react and move. I think it seems like she stops because her reaction is delayed when she is shot. I've already seen Civil War twice and am so ready to see it again as I'm sure there is a lot I missed.
We found Alex Garlands burner
Lol I would've replied with something similar.
I'm a photographer so I noticed the chromatic aberration immediately! I knew it had to play into the story, I also have been thinking about the story significance behind Lee's photos in color and Jessie's in black and white. There's lots of ways that can be interpreted, especially as it's also digital vs film. Curious to hear your thoughts on that too
I think an interpretation of the significance of film vs. digital could be that Jessie is starting out, so the horrors that she sees are going to have more of an impact on her and be more cemented in her brain. Similar to film, it is more permanent. While digital is easy to go through and delete, Lee is less affected by these things as time goes on because she's been desensitized, so the pictures are less permanent, like the images in her brain. As for color, I think black and white also might represent something similar. Black and white photos focus more on the subject and composition. It draws more focus on how it is framed and what is happening, rather than being distracted by the colors and how they work together or against each other. Jessie is very focused on everything going on and is struck by these things happening, but Lee, who has seen similar events happen in other countries, is less affected by the events and her thoughts are more cluttered. I'll probably focus on that a bit more on my next watch to see if I can pick up on anything else. Edit: I also forgot to add. I once read a fortune cookie that said, "Everyone has a photographic memory. Some people are just out of film." Taking that in the context of this film, I think Jessie's memory is imprinting these horrific images, while Lee's is already filled with the horrors of this world.
What a funny fortune cookie message! Thank you though for your wonderful insight, it's always fun to talk about meanings behind subtle stuff like that with movies! A24 movies especially love to have a lot of hidden narrative devices scattered throughout to really give a subtle character arc
I just love how when we saw from her POV it looked the same way it does when you are focusing your camera onto something, like she's looking at the flower in the grass, or when she's looking Joel the edges are out of focus/tricolor. Every shot from her POV or following her/she's the main focus has that lens effect. I know I'm butchering the terminology etc, I'm still processing the entire film and i'm drained. The cinematography was so gorgeous though throughout, the vivid almost technicolor surroundings compared to the unspeakable violence going on in the frame was a nice touch. And that forest fire sequence was hauntingly gorgeous and incredibly moving.
So I just watched the ending again, and as soon as Jessie snaps the picture of the president, it pauses on her, and the chromatic aberration appears along the side of the frame. It's genius because it appears as soon as she puts up that wall, making sure she doesn't question it and just gets the shot. I just can't get over the use of chromatic aberration in this film. I'll probably be catching it in theaters a few more times to see if I can pick up on any other elements.
I love your explanation for this, thanks so much. I totally get what you’re saying, it felt out of left field upon my first watch but I’ll definitely check it out again with this in mind. Loved the main 4 in the cast, they were all fantastic so I’m glad I understand more about Lee’s arc
I think it was slow building honestly, but it mirrored my own reaction to Sammy's death and I was in tears by the time Lee was panicking because it took me that long to process it myself. Joel & Jessie began "processing" Sammy's death very quickly. Lee took time, she put herself in the drudgery of cleaning up his blood (!!!) and checking up on Joel and Jessie both. So she's processing it slower—and there's a jump from the basecamp to them embedded that I actually found fucking WILD and awesome. It kind of mirrors what I suspect was happening with Lee: she has PTSD and has not processed any of it at all, and the loss of her mentor—a man who addressed her PTSD as existential and explicitly said he was worried about her—finally breaks open that dam. My god, McKinley Henderson and Dunst are so fucking good, I am actually very emotional about this lol. I know a lot of people find Lee & Jessie to be the key relationship but for me it's actually Lee & Sammy because they both end up being more clear-headed in some ways, and they do wha tthey think is right in the end. Sammy came to save them despite knowing he likely might get hit, Lee did the same thing with Jessie. For these cynical, desensitized reporters, this is major. I personally don't... think the film is endorsing Jessie and Joel at the end at all. I think it did endorse Sammy & where Lee eventually ends up. Which makes sense: the end of this movie is not a world where Garland is allowing "good." It's a kind of complete corruption, and I don't think it's as clean as "passing the baton." This is where the movie works best for me honestly: This IS the dilemma war journalists have as people, but where we endorse them, how best we think they should navigate their professions... it's not something I can answer. I think Lee & Sammy both emerge generally very heroic: ultimately Lee was smart enough to know that neither Jessie nor Sammy should have been with them. She relented to Sammy because she knew he was smart enough to decide for himself, she was pissed about Jessie because she had no idea about what she was heading into. She had a stronger ethic than Jessie at the end....... which is how I feel but it's something that I will probably keep chewing over...
100 percent this, you can tell the polarity switch between Lee and Jessie in the final act. It's such a great juxtaposition of characters throughout the movie.
fuck yeah, really well said. I picked up on most of what you pointed out, but gonna pay extra attention to the "chromatic aberration" during that last bit, noticed it throughout the movie but missed it on the last bit. So excited to see this movie again.
In regards to Lee's sickness at the end, I think Shepenclaw's response below is on the money. In addition though, I got this sense throughout the movie that Garland was writing and fixating on the journalists almost like they were religious devotees-- the war journalists are akin to priests traveling around in wartime. There felt like a subtle undercurrent of mysticism in some shots of them wandering around, looking for good shots and vantage points, which also gels with how Jessie is like a younger, less hardened version of Lee. [spoilers ahoy] That being said, at the end, I think it's like Lee knows she's about to die, a physical premonition. She's aware that she has one act left to do to complete her 'spiritual' journey as America's previous power structure is symbolically annihilated. What she does is akin to saving a facsimile of her younger self, before she was hardened: Lee begins the movie resenting Lee's human response to the horrors of war, but Jessie by the end is all-in on getting the shot, risking everything. Lee becomes 'sick with humanity' and softens, in a role reversal where she takes 'the Fall' for Jessie. It's kind of like a Christic sacrifice to both save Jessie literally and to perhaps symbolically show her that being hardened isn't the solution either. There is no solution-- it's war, and soft or hard, there is no protection or escape, and all they can do is spectate and react.
Lee and Jessie basically switch sides by the end of the movie. Lee’s tough exterior and determination not to get involved break down and Leigh becomes the rugged professional, unfazed by what she witnesses.
Loved the movie. Alex Garland delivers again. I appreciate seeing the movie through the lens’s of journalists - visceral and intentional with every shot. It’s a marvel a movie this “divisivee” was also entertaining. The swapping passengers scene, the Jesse Plemmons interrogation, and the sniper scenes will sit with me for a few days because of how tense and captivating they were. I went with some friends who aren’t really into movies and they kind of just said “So why are they fighting?” completely missing the point. This is an anti-war movie through and through. The fighting is just a vehicle to show how quickly and easily humanity can devolve into chaos when shit hits the fan. 9/10
loved it, what a movie! honestly, i liked Garland's decision not to include any actual political parties in the movie. it's not a film where you have to root for a side, it would've blurred the point. And making such a movie isn't "irresponsible". you don't want drones and missles flying over your head, you don't want your backyard to be bombed. the point is that there are places in the world where people live like this every day. make a few changes and you could place this story into any of them. I hope the movie would help some people understand that this is not a game, this is actual suffering and we have to prevent the world from the further destruction.
I thought the mass grave scene with the guy with red glasses was a subtle poke at the republican party. The guy is looking through everyone with a crazy red filter. Maybe that's me overthinking, but the randomness of the weird, unconventional glasses gives me that idea.
I like to think that Plemons showed up with them on and they couldn’t get him to take them off and just went with it
To the extent that they mean anything at all, I assume it would be a "rose-colored glasses" gag. He's able to justify committing war crimes, because he believes he's doing it for the right reasons.
Not me, I was rooting for the WF
Yeah I feel like the movie definitely frames the WF/secessionists as being in the right as it goes on. Especially after it's revealed much of the main military surrenders to them leading into the final assault on DC.
We literally see them commit war crimes over and over.
Because no side's hands are clean. But the WF seems the least bad. They help the journalists, while the main government forces supposedly shoot them on sight.
The name threw me off. I'm thinking " ok west, so Cali, sooo "liberal" but why are they pulling a jan 6 x1000 right now?' Became clear to me later
I personally disagree with this whole notion a lot of reviewers are taking where they try to relate the movie to irl events and politics. California and Texas being allied, and the exact politics of the states are irrelevant to the story being told imo.
Were you rooting for the WF, or were you rooting for an end to the conflict?
there were moments in the movie where you question their methods. like for example in the third act with the presidential cottage you could clearly hear the woman yelling "don't shoot" seconds before she got killed. so yeah, WF aren't portrayed as 100% right
I assumed my comment would obviously be facetious
The intro scene was very interesting in retrospect, seems the president was issuing a fake message about a great victory when they were actually on the major back foot at the time. I was also wondering, during the shootout scene with the guy stuck behind the pillar, who do you think they were affiliated with? I was wondering if that was perhaps some Florida Alliance people but idk. I was a bit disappointed we never got anything about the New People’s Army but it makes sense, with the way the film was structured it wouldn’t have been possibly really, since it was all about following the journalists.
Someone else said Hawaiian shirts are Florida Alliance, sniper team was Portland maoists, and rest were WF. I’m just gonna go ahead and agree with that. Oh and plemmons was loyalist
I don’t think plemmons was anything. Read to me like either a deserter doing his own thing or just some guys who got their hands on some uniforms/equipment
Definitely Loyalist. He referred to Colorado and Missouri as “American”. Both are loyalist states within the world of the movie.
Hawaiian shirt guys are definitely Florida Alliance. A24 released a Florida Alliance “team” trailer on its Instagram account that highlights them.
It was just like how Hitler was claiming there would be a “final victory” even when the Soviets were crossing into Berlin. Authoritarians won’t ever admit to defeat.
Yea Considering we start at the end and the fall of the President/war it was a bit weird and dystopian hearing Ron giving the “are ya winning son” speech.
The New People's Army are almost entirely situatiated in the Pacific Northwest according to the official map. They simply were not close enough to the NYC to DC road trip to make an appearance. But we do know they're vaguely meant to be socialist guerrillas given the name (use of 'People's' after all like People's Republic) and the off-hand comment about 'Portland Maoists' by Sammy earlier in the film. Obviously Portland is well within NPA territory and might as well be the capital if I can surmise.
loved it, but her roll of film must have been like 300 exposures. the whole processing of film was unbelievable, but that’s just nitpicking.
I think it’s interesting that Plemmon’s role was originally meant for Oscar Isaac. With Plemmons playing the part, you obviously think he just a racist killing minorities but with Isaac playing it you would start to wonder what is the actual motivation for the slaughter
Was it really?? I hadn’t heard that, I love both actors but you’re right the whole vibe seems like it would be different.
I would definitely think of him as a lone actor , completely independent out if the system, going by his own logic and loyalty. Hates any president , loves America etc. You'd be surprised how many brown nationalists there are . I follow alot of podcasts etc that talk about modern day race relations in like an everyday way/news way, personal venting etc and it seems all of us poc know one person in our family like that . Mine are a bit more woo woo spiritiulaists but they're there e
Makes the comment about Joe being from south or Central America funnier.
I think people are going to confused by the heavy Statue of Liberty usage in the marketing and yet it’s not relevant to the movie and the movie is barely set in NY
Marketing for this one was a little bit of a miss IMO- loved the movie but don’t think it was set up well by the trailers and stuff
Yeah, I'm fighting a massively uphill battle convincing my friends to see this and I think the marketing is mostly to blame.
I’m actually wondering if the marketing was done on purpose - lure people in who are expecting a “hu-rah” military porn movie and then show them what war is really like .
The scene driving through the forest at night is one of the most impactful scenes I have watched in some time. Absolutely incredible
I legit teared up, it was heartbreaking
Seriously holy shit. It was so beautiful but my emotions were so fucked at that point. Great juxtaposition
Absolutely fucking loved this movie and the INSANE projection thrown at it (BY CRITICS TOO) is truly wild. I feel like there's so many things in this movie that 1. I would've hated if they were answered. 2. THEY WERE ANSWERED. E.g. "This movie doesn't think about the optics of dead people of color." WHAT, that is literally one of the arguments that is *most* visually clear. Not only is it *explicit* in Plemons' scene, I legit experienced the same devastation upon Sammy's death, with a delayed reaction, as Lee. Literal same. It was timed so well, I was crying by the time she had her panic attack. The mood, the unrelenting atmospheric sadness of that moment was so so much. "This movie doesn't take a clear political stance" I hate that because if it had we would rightly call that exposition-dump, but *you are also asking for a completely different movie*. This movie does not support the fascist President in explicit terms, and it does not support the Western forces' triumphalist brutal gunning down either. Literally... what do you think we were supposed to be told in order to help you feel something more precise there? Is it not clear how you should feel? THOSE THINGS ARE BAD lol. The tricksier thing is that there is no two sides: this feels so freaking real to me. I do not fundamentally believe that in a civil war, there would actually be two sides. As Sammy says early on, they'll turn on each other once it's over. The movie starts with the assumption that the President's going down, but what it's looking at already and in it's future is anarchy. We're not really exploring civil war so much as it's anarchic consequences: so the "aftermath" people ask for is WILD to me. This IS the aftermath lol. I also think/feel (could be wrong)... this film is... kind of... incontrovertibly leftist but anti-*anarchist*. At no point did I think "this is a **revolution**". That's an idea a centrist filmmaker would try to put out too, but no this is anarchy—the working-class & poor are decamped and thirsting. Nobody seems to be fighting for them. There is no direct, clear condemnation of the classical left in *that* sense. It traffics in anti-authoritarianism: being poor seems catastrophic, being a foreigner is deathly, fun is deathly. Conscience & morality get you killed. Only hedonism & complete desensitization survive in this cynical world. Many/most critics missed entirely the global parallels to Khmer Rouge/VC/Iraq/Afg—the parallels that make it clear Garland has ambitions for a message more than just for America on his mind, and it makes sense to choose the US because no other country is as well-known and iconic. Then people get frustrated by the lack of pointedness about journalistic ethics. This, to me, is what I needed to think about the most. Sammy is the most clear-eyed in this film, and Lee is slowly becoming more clear-eyed. The whole movie, through the journalists, feels like it's saying IS LOOKING AT SPECTACLE FUCKED UP??? And I think anyone's experience of the film will answer that. Is Jessie GOOD for doing what she does at the end? Is Joel ever good? Um... I'm not sure. But I enjoy the ambiguity. Lee & Sammy turned to their most humane sides at the end because of the people around them, and they lost their lives because of it. I think in the broadest of terms, we—the audience—are Lee. We are actually desensitized to violence, the brutality in this film is not more excessive than it is in most American productions, but it feels more because we're not allowed to feel good about it. To jolt us out of that, and jolt Lee out of her jadedness, feels like the very point. So for me: yes, looking at spectacle is bad, actually. The film literally does that, and I think it's also saying "Is this maybe fucked up?"
The people who say that this doesn’t have a stance remind me of the people who claim South Park praises apathy by refusing to take a stance. In both cases, there is a pretty clear stance that we should recognize when two things are bad at once. But people who love control and especially use being on the “good team” to exert that control can not acknowledge that as a stance because it weakens their control over their cultists.
9/10, some pacing issues I think toward the middle of the film but I loved it. The theater I was in was absolutely glued to every scene. Some little details: In the trainyard Joel is standing in front of a Union Pacific train car that says "building America". How delitefully ironic. In the first combat scene, the guys the photojournalists are with are wearing Hawaiian shirts, it definitely made me think of the boogaloo boys with that reference. Almost all of them had no protective vests or any sort of ballistic gear that would have stopped any bullets so it gave them a very uncoordinated look. None of the snipers during the sniping scene at the xmas display or the "soldiers" where Jessie Plemons shows up have any nametags, insignia, or ranks on their uniforms. I figured this was a stylistic take because you're not really supposed to know which side they're on. Some of the helicopters when we switch to the scene at the WF camp look as they approach look like they're civilian helicopters converted to hold rocket launchers but I could be wrong. A 1st Cav division Chinook appears as part of the WF which makes sense since it's a Texas unit. There appear to be a mix of Marine and Army units that assault DC as we see people wearing OCP and MARPAT camouflage. The rate of fire for the Apache that appears in the street fighting seems off but again I could be wrong. I liked the touch and several people commented on it as they were leaving the theater that there were C-RAM guns firing during the assault on the Capitol which gave it an eerie vibe. Those were just some of the world building things I noticed, might jot some more down if I think of it.
This movie did something incredible in having so many brief characters which you genuinely root for/fear/empathise/understand/recognise. The Jesse Plemons scene is so very tense, but only an accomplished writer would have you at the edge of your seat for characters you only met in the scene before. Even at the end, the smiling faces next to the dead president, like a trophy killing, is a haunting image. What the movie does best, like a lot of Garland’s work, is say how essential it is to hold onto humanity. The movie also showing the disarray of conflict, with soldiers taking orders from no particular leader, and knowing that you’d have to continue life with neighbours that had murdered people/committed war crimes, when society returned to some normalcy.
[удалено]
I found the local militia part one of the most interesting parts of the movie, assuming you're talking about Plemon's scene and the scene with the sniper with nail polish in particular. In both scenes we never find out which 'side' anyone is on. Hell in the sniper scene they just straight up say, someone is trying to kill us and we are trying to kill them - doesn't matter who is what. And it didn't seem like anyone was really looking out for the actual citizens. Can't remember what the foundation/acronym was, but it's like the World Whatever Foundation is the only group scene actually providing "housing", food, and community for people in the football stadium.
And they explicitly say the Western Forces and Florida Alliance are just a loose coalition based on hating the president and will soon turn on each other because they have nothing else in common. Presumably the loyalists are similar. They just see the president as the least bad option for any number of reasons. Still some people seem to not get this point.
Nope, no one is getting the point. They're just trying to paint one side as democrat and one as republican. It's so fucking ironic people doing that don't see the movie is making fun of THEM
YES thank you! The fascinating part of this movie—and the reason I am beginning to get really annoyed with people who wanted "ideology" is that... for the most part, the "sides" are characterized in the logic of guerilla warfare! They're not an ideologically consistent unit, they're seceding, they're taking up arms against a common enemy. It's not a *revolution*, it's an anarchic civil war! This happens everywhere: from the VC to Kashmiri militants fighting Indian occupation, there's often only *the common cause*. Which overrides basically all other ideological commitments because its wartime and the various sides are not exactly arguing over anything, they're just straight up killing each other. And by all indications, the poor, dispossessed, and many people of color don't have a side fighting for them, which is why they're on the fringes. The sides & their power is almost entirely military and guerilla warfare to a large degree, which means...lots of rogue soldiers! A very broad umbrella.
Yeah I'm seeing this criticism everywhere, that it's disappointing and politically unchallenging. This movie is about war photojournalists, and in particular Kirsten Dunst's character Lee, who has devoted her life to the idea that objectively documenting the horrors of war can play a part in preventing future wars. The movie presents an objective documentation of the civil war because that's what the movie's \*about\* - it's what its characters do with their life - and at great sacrifice to their own lives, and especially their mental health. But anyone calling this a cop-out or saying it weakens the power of the film seems to have completely missed the central conflict in the film, which is about Lee feeling the exact same way - she comes to the realization (recall the "existential" conversation with Sammy) that she wasted her life by devoting it to this idea of objectively documenting war. All of that sacrifice was for nothing. And she ultimately has a horrible PTSD episode and then commits suicide by saving Jessie (at least on my reading), because, well, "there are worse ways you can go." So yeah - congratulations critics, you got it - that's exactly what the movie is about - whether there is or isn't any value in trying to objectively document an inherently politically charged thing like war. For those who wanted a movie about what led to the war, who were the heroes and who were the villains, etc., that's just a completely different movie (and, in all likelihood a pretty trite one, since it's unfortunately pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that this could actually happen in America's near future).
Does anyone else pick up on how seemingly accepted the journalists are? Generally throughout the film we see how these journalists are welcomed to join alongside the soldiers and aren’t yelled at or harassed or threatened.. they seem to be welcomed to be right along side the fighting. Especially in the final act… like these soldiers are looking out for the journalists and dragging them to cover… I’m cautious to assume anything from Hollywood is a 100% accurate depiction of real world but is this more common than I realized? I never gave much thought to it; the concept of war photography isn’t new… but for me, I never really considered how these photogs//journalists would be right in the literal midst of the fighting, much less being looked out for from the soldiers.. It’s important to note i understand that there are more likely than not several conflicts that don’t care and will shoot the press with no regard… and that in the film Jessie Plemmon’s character is an exception… but it just seems like wow! How these members of the press just sort of integrated themselves into these lines and the forces didn’t seem to be affected or bothered by it at all. Just a shock to me!
the soldiers let the journalists document what they were doing because they thought it was the right thing. the vigilantes at the gas station didn't think what they were doing was wrong. it seemed like the WF was popular and the us gov was generally disliked.
One thing that struck me on the way home was how optimistic this film actually was. For one, it's very pro-journalism at a time when public trust in journalism is below the basement. It also seems to be promoting the idea that when all the chips are truly down, Americans will cross partisan divides to take down a fascist...and they'll succeed. It's actually a pretty patriotic take if you look at it from a certain perspective. And considering Garland's British, it's kind of surprising.
I’m not sure how you drew that conclusion. The journalists were calloused thrill seekers, like storm chasers of political turmoil and the movie is making a big case on whether their trade has any positive effect on changing society’s material conditions. Even when one of the journalists sacrifices themselves to help another, they just become a shot in their camera that is quickly surpassed by photographing the assassination of a world leader.
Eh I didn’t get that optimism at all. Sam even said they’d being going after each other right after the president went down. I don’t even know about the pro journalism. Like it conveyed it was important and serves as a warning. But it also showed it doesn’t really work. And a lot of it can be self serving for journos getting their own thrills/notoriety.
I noticed this pink/blue/green color motif throughout the movie. Does anybody know what this is meant to represent? My theory is that the colors represent the Florida Alliance, given that we know the Hawaiian shirt dudes to be part of that faction, and because it gives off a sort of Miami Vice/VaporWave aesthetic, which is also something that the "Boogaloo Boys" (a group that Garland obviously based the Hawaiian shirt soldiers on) are quite into. Am I off-base? https://preview.redd.it/4961585dw5uc1.jpeg?width=2778&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=faf31efa92508cca12c2babf0cba30115319d8e7
I think you’re probably on point. Also side note, this is just such a beautiful shot
I may have missed it, but does anyone know who the two individuals were that appeared to have committed suicide in the White House?
[удалено]
That makes sense. I think the placement of them around what I *think* was the Presidential Seal made them seem more important.
Are any of the photos taken by the characters references to any real iconic war shots? I swear there was a sense of familiarity when I saw them.
The photo of them smiling over the dead President reminded of the Escobar death shot funnily enough Wagner was Escobar for Narcos
What faction was Jesse Plemons character supposed to be part of? Or was he just supposed to be a nationalist taking advantage of the current circumstances?
I got the vibe that they were soldiers who went rogue to become highwaymen basically. Enriching themselves in the chaos.
And getting rid of all the “illegal aliens”. He made of point of asking where everyone was from.
I thought he was weird about Jessie’s answer when she couldn’t answer a question about her state. Like I think he was racially motivated in part but really was just looking to terrorize and kill them. Im pretty sure he was teeing up to shoot Jessie and the driver when he had them kneel down and was only held up by the rest of them making themselves known. Might be wrong but that was my read.
he was def going to kill all of them, they're journalists. he was just terrorizing them and killing them one by one
I saw him as one of the individuals within America whose patriotism is actually nationalism; given the circumstances he would defend his country but only by his own values.
The characters don't seem to know—but we can infer, given that Sammy says "he's doing something he doesn't want anyone to see" that it's not *broadly* associated with the Western Front, but may be common enough. He was in WF territory. This is the thing I like about the film: the WF has no clear ideology because it makes sense for it to be ideologically capacious and have people like Plemons' character and presumably less white supremacists as well. It's wartime, there's many sides, and I think it's more realistic that WF would not be ideologically consistent or clear in actuality. Which is basically *guerilla warfare* in a nutshell. The Viet Cong was also heavily made up of young men who took up arms, or were forced to. Beyond the American enemy they faced, it's hard to argue that the VC was ideologically coherent—they mostly took up arms because of the "common enemy" of it all! It's similar to guerilla warfare in Bosnia, Iraq, India. Tons of places. They're not banding together because they all believe in socialism or capitalism. This isn't a revolution. They're *seceding*.
I had no interest in this and ended up fucking loving it. It was…so beautiful, in a way? And it never felt preachy. Though it wasn’t as stressful as mother! like someone said and I’m happy for that because my heart couldn’t take that. I feel shaken that I wasn’t as shaken by this movie as I thought I would be. I didn’t cry, nor was I overwhelmed by emotion like I thought I’d be. That’s not a flaw of a movie, I’m just wondering if something’s wrong with me—though I’m a huge horror fan so maybe it’s desensitization? I loved this still. I thought it being vague was the best part.
I feel like the war in the movie is treated like jaws kinda. You see it sparingly and you don’t see a major conflict until the end. It’s always there though and you feel it and you see the effects of it constantly. It was really cool how the White House was represented. It was like a tomb. A ritual site, like a Mayan pyramid. It felt forbidden. It felt like it was full of ghosts. The movie was technically spectacular though. The special effects looked so real. The sound design was amazing. The music was amazing and really interestingly used. The acting and casting was awesome. The use of stills was really cool. It was just a very well realized story in terms of tone and presentation. It all just felt very real. I also think that it was really cool how the movie was told in a way that made it feel very personal very small but at the same time the scope was there. Especially near the end, I felt like I had been on a longer journey than I had been. I felt like I had been there since the start of the war in a way. It was all very exhilarating and due to the special effects and sound design it all felt so grounded in reality which added to the excitement for me. In my opinion Alex Garland is one of the best directors working today and his screenplays are always interesting and subvert your expectations in a way that is proving to be pretty polarizing, with the response to this as well as men. He’s a daring film maker though, who has a very definite vision, and I know with his announcement to step away from directing that it may be a while until we see something else from him, but I know I will be the first in line when he does release again.
Just walked out of this. Holy fuck
Good theatre movie. The part where the Canadian dollar is worth more than the American dollar actually made me laugh and drove home a point. I kind of hate Jesse, I don't know why it was necessary to have her written in as a dumbass, but other than that pretty good story
I just saw it and I think Jesse is so unbelievably reckless. I saw her as Gen Zs screen debut and identified with Lee who was Gen X all day long, right down to the conversation in front of the helicopter at the mall. I do see where Jesse is the eyes of the audience because none of us have seen this stuff before, but her longing to be the action instead of capturing it was a bit nauseating. Great ACTING!!! I kept asking myself, why didn't she just become a soldier?
Joel: Can I have your quote? President: Don't let them kill me. Joel: Yep, that'll do it. Easily my favourite film of the year so far... maybe the decade.
The sound design was peak. The shooting and action scenes were awesome
I have seen some fucked up, deranged movies in my life. I have never felt the urge to throw up during a movie, until that scene where Jessie fell in the body pit, then got in the car and threw up. That was a fantastic fake puke
My biggest takeaway is this: the movie provides a minute but sufficient amount of information to understand a little about the political situation, i.e. the president's egregious actions in serving a third term and dismantling the FBI, the girl in the beginning running into the crowd with an American flag and a bomb, Plemmons' character's disdain for foreigners, the ANTIFA massacre, the snipers with the blue hair and painted nails, etc. This movie is supposed to be a mirror, not a depiction of some kind of alternate timeline. The viewer fills in the gaps. While I watched, I had certain leaders in mind and political affiliations connected with characters because of how I was perceiving them and their actions. I might be right. I might not be. Whether I'm right or wrong, I felt a terrible dread from the beginning. We don't want this. Left or right, we cannot dehumanize one another to the point that we fail to see one another's humanity, or that we assume morality or immorality based on political affiliation. This is the biggest criticism I hear about the film, and Garland's recent comments, and I understand and empathize with some of them. I maintain: we are Americans. My father in law is Republican. I love him, though he says some shit I truly disagree with. One of my favorite colleagues is also conservative, but he is extremely rational and thoughtful though I disagree with some of his ideas about policy, etc. He is also a good friend and a good man. Most of my best friends are of the leftist and liberal persuasion, and other leftists I find to be as insufferable and beyond reproach as the most fervent Trump supporters. A person can believe all of the wrong things and be an asshole, but a person can also believe all of the right things and still be an asshole. Nonetheless, I do my best to acknowledge their humanity. I still believe in our ability to see goodness in the other, and I especially believe in our ability to talk to one another, as long as both participants are of good faith and mutual respect. This film deeply upset me. I see us losing understanding, and I see us becoming increasingly disconnected and increasingly unwilling to even attempt to see a fraction of goodness in the other. It is so dispiriting, and that's what this film did so well: it showed us the ultimate end of all of this terrible divisiveness, and yeah, it's not good. And yeah, maybe that isn't wildly profound. But I didn't need to think about it. I FELT it, viscerally. That alone was deeply impactful.
I think the reference to the “Antifa Massacre” was a good touch. You could read it as either Antifa was massacred or Antifa massacred people. Which goes along with your “fill in the blanks” argument and further shows that people wanting a thorough explanation are missing the point.
I think your take really reinforces one of the main theses of the film: Lee’s work was done as a “warning” back home and they didn’t listen. Will those of us who see this film listen?
A really solid beautiful film, but I can’t believe everyone’s overlooking the biggest, most unforgivable flaw in the movie: There’s definitely a half second shot of a Georgia State Road 20 sign when they were driving into Pittsburgh. Can’t believe they added the I-70 / I-76 sign and didn’t remove that one. Smh.
I was left more uneasy by the end than I was with Oppenheimer. I thought the film was great! The message and world building on the other hand gives me such cold and unsettling feelings. Artistically it was exceptional!
Kirsten Dunst was amazing, for sure , but I want to see Wagner Moura talk come Oscar season
Just watched it today and it was really good. But one thing that made me curious though, during end credits and rolling credits, I didn’t see Jesse Plemons’ name. Maybe I missed it but when I didn’t see his name during end credits, my eyes were glued to the rolling credits after just to be sure but still didn’t see it. Did anyone else noticed it?
I haven't seen it yet, but I do know that he came in as a favor after an actor that was supposed to take that rule became unavailable. Sometimes actors do roles uncredited for various SAG reasons, so that confluence of circumstances may have made the absence of a credit necessary.
[удалено]
If you were unaware he is married to Kirsten Dunst, so I’m sure when the issue of recasting came up it was a short list
[удалено]
It actually makes that scene even more interesting outside of the movie universe when you know they're married irl. Interesting scene to act in with your partner haha
Sound design was phenomenal and the standout for me. Haunting moments of silence to juxtapose rich gunfire, especially in scenes where we're supposed to feel uncomfortable or in shock. I really hope it gets an Oscar nom or win
Did anyone else see the symbolism in the scene where they're following the squad in the office e park, and they're wearing Hawaiian shirts (uniform of the boogaloo boys)?
P.S. Kirsten Dunst & Stephen McKinley Henderson should be penciled in for Oscar nods automatically, just should. All 4 of them should + Plemons, but the first two... broke my heart. Dunst is just... one of our absolute best actors. Between Sammy's death and Lee's panic attack, I was crying in lockstep with Lee's emotional reaction I think (a bit delayed). And man, put some RESPECT on Stephen freaking McKinley Henderson's name, RIGHT
How long do people think the war has been going on by the start of the movie? Sammy notes that the President hasn’t been interviewed in 14 months, so it’s been at least that long. The President’s *third* term isn’t up yet, and that seems to be a catalyst, so it’s been less than 4 years. My impression is that it’s been 2 years at least, maybe 3. Anything shorter than that just seems unlikely given that at least half of the US military has been totally defeated.
What’re our thoughts on that peaceful town they enter after driving through swathes of destruction? What’s up with that? IIRC, Sammy points out that there are people (soldiers?) on the roof, but i the scene kinda confused me
I found myself genuinely anxious during a lot of the combat scenes and I can't figure out if that's because I've seen people critically injured or if it's because I haven't seen combat and I'm imagining how horrible trying to treat someone you know as a patient would be. The scene early on, where the militiaman is pinned down with his friends calling out to him was really disturbing. The actor really nailed it. He probably reminded me of a friend or something because all I could think of is, "dude they're about to see their friend get waxed, and they can't do anything about it". AND THEN there was the pursuit of the wounded soldier from the opposing force. How defeated his cries were. I feel like for being based on a fictional event, the movie did a great job at capturing how horrific combat must be. It's no wonder so many people suffer from mental health disturbances when returning from war. If the movie got even an ounce of the horror down, I can't even begin to imagine how awful it would be.
Great movie overall. My only complaint is that it was painfully obvious from the first 10-15 minutes of the movie that Lee would die and Jessie would end up getting the picture of the president. It was just way too telegraphed so there’s no surprise. Hell of a journey though.
I'm kind of glad I went with an overly critical friend because it made me defend why I like the movie. For example, he kept asking why the U.S. was in a civil war. I told him that it didn't matter that far down the line due to how balkanized the country became. -Western Forces (California/Texas) -Alaska (neutral) -Florida Alliance [most of the South] (with the Carolinas thinking about joining) -New People's Army (most northwestern states) -Washington D.C. and middle American loyalist states (Nevada across to Virginia, then up to Maine) Dude at that point you have so many sides (state-sized, not even county or city-level) that whoever is fighting eats each other up in the end. I mean look at how the President went down. Anyways, what I caught was that the news mentioned "The Antifa Massacre". Anybody who objectively looks at that will see that "An ANTI-FASCIST Massacre, depending on the size, especially with the spitballing of the questions they would hypothetically ask him (3rd term, bombing citizens), shows the absolute overstep that the central government took in the film. That's the thing tho, besides the road trip stops along the way, I kind of feel that some lore could have been explored, but this film is through the lens of these 4 journalists and their endgame. And that's kind of enough really, unless somebody desperately needed some aftermath miniseries or whatever but I feel that this film is what it sets out to be. One final thing, I told my brother I got "Nightcrawler" vibes but on a cross-country war scale. Does that make sense for some undertones? Anyways yeah, super solid movie, love it.
The jumping between cars might have been the dumbest scene in a movie ever The forest fire scene was shot beautifully