Title · no scrobbles indexed yet

Civil War

The first scrobble for this title is still propagating, but a community review is already indexed below.

Reviews

Longform community posts about this title

Civil War (2024): Through the Lens of a Nation Shattered...@chris-chris92378d

I walked out of Civil War (2024) with a pit in my stomach and dust in my lungs, like I’d just returned from the front lines myself. Directed with chilling precision by Alex Garland, the film drops us in a version of the United States that looks hauntingly familiar but broken in all the ways we’ve quietly feared. There are no grand political expositions here, no convenient villains, no sides begging for moral alignment. Just fragments—of cities, of families, of ideals—shattered under the weight of something we thought could never really happen here. It’s not a movie about how we got to this point, but what it feels like to survive it.

At the heart of the film is Lee, a seasoned photojournalist played with understated grit by Kirsten Dunst. Through her lens—both literal and metaphorical—we witness the unraveling of the American dream in real time. She’s not interested in taking sides, and that ambivalence, that weariness, becomes the film’s emotional core. Watching her maneuver through warzones that used to be suburban cul-de-sacs isn’t just surreal—it’s nauseating. There’s a scene where she quietly photographs the aftermath of a massacre in what was once a shopping mall, and it’s not just the image that burns into your brain—it’s her expression. Detached, exhausted, but still chasing the truth. And maybe that’s the real tragedy: when even the truth starts to feel futile.

The violence in Civil War is not stylized or cinematic—it’s procedural, intimate, and deeply American. There’s something uniquely disturbing about seeing apple-pie Americana twisted into kill zones. The film doesn’t revel in gore, but it doesn’t flinch either. What struck me the hardest was how normalized everything felt. Civilians stepping over bodies, militia groups rolling through neighborhoods like they were running errands. Garland seems to be asking: what does it take for a nation built on exceptionalism to implode? And the answer isn’t dramatic—it’s gradual. Unremarkable, even. That’s the scariest part.

Growing up outside the U.S., I used to watch American media with a sense of awe—like they had figured it all out. The freedom, the optimism, the moral clarity. But Civil War dismantles that illusion with surgical calm. It suggests, without sermonizing, that the very myths America exports are the ones that could blind it from seeing itself clearly. Yet, the film never becomes a political lecture. It simply observes. Maybe too closely. And in that observation, the audience is forced to confront a darker mirror.

GMPhRAQbwAAJ87W.jpg_large.jpg

Source

What makes Civil War feel so urgent isn’t just the destruction on screen, but how close it brushes against current fractures. The polarization, the distrust, the media echo chambers—none of it feels speculative anymore. The movie doesn’t predict a dystopia; it renders a version of today, just a few steps further down the path. But amid the dread, there’s still a heartbeat: in Lee’s mentorship of a young aspiring journalist, in brief moments of solidarity among strangers, in the camera’s unblinking gaze. Cinematically, it’s stark and deliberate—shot with icy beauty, soundtracked by silence and explosions—and it leaves you asking not just what’s next, but what we’ve already lost.

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post

Comments

No comments yet — be the first.

11 more reviews

›Civil War (2024)@andreseloy581463d
[Source](https://www.filmaffinity.com/ve/filmimages.php?movie_id=975245)

Civil War focuses on four photojournalists, led by Lee (Kristen Dunst), who must travel across a country in chaos to capture it on camera.

From this premise, Garland brilliantly x-rays the profession and some of the debates that have always accompanied war journalists. He does so without moral judgement, with a totally immersive experience that feels very real.

Following the group of protagonists Alex Garland examines passivity in the face of violence, even when it is right in front of us. All that matters here is the photo, and above all the knowledge that you were there to immortalise it.

[Source](https://www.filmaffinity.com/ve/filmimages.php?movie_id=975245)

This inevitably brings to mind the ethical questions of the journalist, of putting our humanity before our supposed duty to inform above all else. Civil War makes us think about all this and more, reminding us at times of the also terrifying Nightcrawler.

As well as revolving around journalism, Civil War offers one of the most tense and anxiety-filled road movies cinema has given us in recent years.

Even with its differences, titles such as Children of Men come to mind, where constant uncertainty was part of the identity of the film itself.

From the moment the group begins their road trip, we witness several sequences that put us in an incessant state of nervousness. At the same time we witness a magnificent portrait of what would be a modern America at war.

Alex Garland offers several scenes that remain in the retina, the road being another character in the film (a certain scene justifies this statement, believe me).

All of this culminates in a third act that further enhances the film as a whole, with a precision in each and every department that is astounding.

From the sound, editing and Garland's own direction, Civil War shows an overwhelming sobriety. It is not surprising, considering that it is the most expensive film in the history of A24 (50 million budget).
Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Civil War (2024) - REVIEW - [ENGLISH-SPANISH]@maaasha557d
[Source](https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/thoughts-and-reactions-to-civil-war)
I've been looking forward to seeing Alex Garland's new film ever since I first read about it, and now that I've seen it, I can say that it's made me think a lot. This sci-fi film about a near-future American civil war is quite intense, thought provoking and quite disturbing at times. The story is about a group of journalists who go into the lion's den to interview the presi before it all goes to hell. Garland steers the series more toward the effects of conflict on people rather than getting lost in the rhetoric of politics. The final product is a raw and disturbing story of what a civil war on the soil of the United States of America could really be like. It's a very uncomfortable film to watch, but I won't say it's one I could easily forget. So let me start by giving my take on this rather controversial and relevant film, which certainly touches on many topics of debate.

Tenía muchas ganas de ver la nueva película de Alex Garland desde que leí por primera vez sobre ella y, ahora que la he visto, puedo decir que me ha hecho pensar mucho. Esta película de ciencia ficción sobre una guerra civil estadounidense casi futura es bastante intensa, provoca muchas reflexiones y resulta bastante inquietante en algunos momentos. La historia trata de un grupo de periodistas que se meten en la boca del lobo para entrevistar al presi antes de que todo se vaya al carajo. Garland dirige la serie más hacia los efectos del conflicto en la gente que a perderse en la retórica de la política. El producto final es una historia cruda e inquietante de lo que podría ser realmente una guerra civil en el suelo de los Estados Unidos de América. Es una película muy incómoda de ver, pero no diré que es una que podría olvidar fácilmente. Así que permíteme que empiece dando mi opinión sobre esta película bastante controvercial y relevante, que sin duda toca muchos temas de debate.

[Source](https://awardsradar.com/2024/04/09/film-review-civil-war-is-a-deeply-upsetting-yet-undeniably-effective-and-visceral-experience-from-alex-garland/) [Source](https://news-decoder.com/a-disconcerting-movie-zooms-in-on-war-reporting/)
The actors in the film perform well, especially Kirsten Dunst gives perhaps the best performance of her career, Lee, who is the protagonist of the film, her character is quite emotionally detached as if she is cold-blooded and cares little but it is as she said during the film "I warned them" ,but she does not lose sight of the psychological effects of the character which has a strong impact on her. Cailee Spaeny is also good as Jessie, the young and very naive girl who opposes? or actually wants to be like the experienced and bitter Lee. During the film we see how slowly her character's naivete transforms into a more rebellious nature as she is introduced to the world of war. The rest of the cast, including Wagner Moura and Stephen McKinley Henderson, also give good performances in the unfolding of this dark future for the country, it looked like Wagner was going to be the focus of the film since I saw the trailer but he wasn't, more of a filler in the vast majority of the scenes.

Los actores de la película tienen un buen desempeño, en especial Kirsten Dunst hace quizá la mejor interpretación de su carrera, Lee, que es la protagonista de la película, su personaje tiene bastante distanciamiento emocional como si tuviese sangre fria y poco le importara pero es como ella dijo durante la pelicula "yo les adverti" ,pero no pierde de vista los efectos psicológicos del personaje que tiene un impacto fuerte en ella. Cailee Spaeny también está bien como Jessie, la chica joven y muy ingenua que se opone? o en realidad quiere ser como la experimentada y amargada Lee. Durante la pelicula vemos como poco a poco la ingenuidad de su personaje se transforma en una naturaleza más rebelde a medida que se introduce en el mundo de la guerra. El resto de los actores, incluidos Wagner Moura y Stephen McKinley Henderson, también ofrecen buenas interpretaciones en el desarrollo de este oscuro futuro para el pais, pareciera que Wagner iba a ser centro de la pelicula desde que vi el trailer pero no lo fue, mas que todo fue un relleno en la gran mayoria de las escenas.

[Source](https://variety.com/2024/artisans/news/civil-war-white-house-battle-1235969683/)
The lack of exposition and explanation of how things came to be this way was for me one of the most surprising features of the film, Garland has created an atmosphere that makes you feel that the apocalypse is just around the corner, only without reason to be, from where and how all this started?!!!. The environmental story is not so straightforward, but effective, and includes deserted cities, makeshift checkpoints and anything else that depicts a nation in a state of disarray. The use of camera and sounds are effectively employed to create the tension that something bad is going to happen at any moment. One thing I liked about the film is that Garland doesn't engage in blame casting or finger pointing. Not everyone is a hero or villain here and everyone acts in the best interest they can in a post-apocalyptic world. This moral complexity is not just limited to the supporting characters, but is also part of our protagonists, who struggle with the question of whether they have any role beyond reporting the events of a war.

La falta de exposición y explicación de cómo las cosas llegaron a ser así fue para mí una de las características más sorprendentes de la película, Garland se ha creado un ambiente que te hace sentir que el apocalipsis está a la vuelta de la esquina, solo que sin razon de ser, de donde y como empeso todo esto?!. La historia ambiental no es tan directa, pero sí eficaz, e incluye ciudades desiertas, puestos de control improvisados y cualquier otra cosa que describa una nación en estado de desorden. El uso de la cámara y los sonidos se emplean eficazmente para crear la tensión de que algo malo va a ocurrir en cualquier momento. Una cosa que me gustó de la película es que Garland no se pone a echar culpas ni a señalar con el dedo. No todos son héroes o villanos en este caso y todos actúan en el mejor interés que pueden en un mundo postapocalíptico. Esta complejidad moral no se limita sólo a los personajes secundarios, sino que también forma parte de nuestros protagonistas, que se debaten con la cuestión de si tienen algún papel más allá de informar sobre los acontecimientos de una guerra.

[Source](https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3255760/controversial-civil-war-movie-prompts-debate-over-us-schism-2024-election-looms)
The reporters go from one dangerous situation to another on their way to D. C. The film sometimes feels like it lacks momentum. But I think this approach is a good reflection of the fact that war is anything but a systematic process. There is always a sense of uncertainty about what lurks around the corner, which makes the film very suspenseful. Aside from the conflict, what struck me most was the portrayal of the role of journalism in the film. It makes you think about whether taking pictures of people dying is helping or being a fool with a camera. The film raises very interesting questions about morality, about whether witnessing a tragedy is enough and whether the quest for the perfect photo becomes a form of violence. The violence depicted in the film is raw and real, it's not the kind of movie that enjoys gore, but it also doesn't cut corners when it comes to showing how ugly it all is.

Los periodistas van de una situación peligrosa a otra en su camino a D. C. , y a veces da la sensación de que a la película le falta empuje. Pero creo que este enfoque es un buen reflejo del hecho de que la guerra es cualquier cosa menos un proceso sistemático. Siempre hay una sensación de incertidumbre sobre lo que acecha a la vuelta de la esquina, lo que hace que la película tenga mucho suspenso. Aparte del conflicto, lo que más me impresionó fue la representación del papel del periodismo en la película. Te hace pensar si sacar fotos de gente muriendo es ayudar o ser un tonto con cámara. La película plantea cuestiones muy interesantes sobre la moralidad, sobre si ser testigo de una tragedia es suficiente y si la búsqueda de la foto perfecta se convierte en una forma de violencia. La violencia representada en la película es cruda y real, no es del tipo de peli que disfruta con la sangre, pero tampoco se corta a la hora de mostrar lo feo que es todo.

[Source](https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/movies/civil-war-movie-2024-rcna147303) [Source](https://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/civil-war-ending-explained/)
Another thing that I thought was very good was the use of familiar American symbols and structures as the setting for the battle, it's one thing to read about the destruction of historical monuments and another thing entirely to see it happen in familiar places like the National Mall or the Lincoln Memorial. It appeals to that central concept of American individualism and makes us question whether we really are as invulnerable to the fall of society as we would prefer to think. The film doesn't give you easy answers it makes you think about how we treat those who don't think like us, how fragile this whole thing we call society is, and how quickly things can go off a cliff if we're not careful. It also raises questions about collaboration and the role the media plays in defining our view of events.

Otra cosa que me pareció muy buena fue el empleo de símbolos y estructuras estadounidenses familiares como escenario de la batalla, una cosa es leer sobre la destrucción de monumentos históricos y otra completamente distinta ver cómo ocurre en lugares familiares como el National Mall o el Lincoln Memorial. Apela a ese concepto central del individualismo estadounidense y nos hace cuestionarnos si realmente somos invulnerables a la caída de la sociedad como preferiríamos pensar. La peli no te da respuestas fáciles te hace pensar en cómo tratamos a los que no piensan como nosotros, en lo frágil que es todo esto que llamamos sociedad, y en lo rápido que las cosas pueden irse por un barranco si no tenemos cuidado. También plantea cuestiones sobre la colaboración y el papel que desempeñan los medios de comunicación en la definición de nuestra visión de los acontecimientos.

[Source](https://deadline.com/2024/03/civil-war-review-alex-garlands-journey-through-desolation-loses-its-way-sxsw-1235859621/)
All in all, I can say that this is a rather difficult, but very interesting film that I will remember for a long time. It may not solve problems, it may not offer clear solutions and I think that's the main idea. What Garland does is put us before a vision of an America torn apart and challenges us to confront the worst in ourselves, in our neighbors and in our institutions. Despite the hopelessness shown by these characters as they struggle to hold on to their individuality in a world of violence, there is hope and a hint of change for the better. It is by no means an easy film to watch, but I still think it is valuable and relevant, and I hope it provokes further discussion about the current state of our society and what might come next, it is the kind of film that leaves the audience with thoughts to reflect on after the film is over, and makes people want to be better. Score 7/10.

En definitiva, puedo decir que esta película es bastante difícil, pero muy interesante, que voy a recordar durante mucho tiempo. Puede que no resuelva problemas, no ofrezca soluciones claras y creo que ésa es la idea principal. Lo que hace Garland es ponernos ante una visión de unos Estados Unidos desgarrados y retarnos a enfrentarnos a lo peor de nosotros mismos, de nuestros vecinos y de nuestras instituciones. A pesar de la desesperanza que muestran estos personajes en su lucha por aferrarse a su individualidad en un mundo de violencia, hay esperanza y un indicio de cambio a mejor. No es, ni mucho menos, una película fácil de ver, pero sigo pensando que es valiosa y relevante, y espero que provoque más debates sobre la situación actual de nuestra sociedad y lo que podría venir después, es el tipo de película que deja al público con pensamientos sobre los que reflexionar una vez terminada la película, y hace que la gente quiera ser mejor. Puntuación 7/10.

Translate with Deepl.com

Posted Using InLeo Alpha

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Civil War@cute-cactus621d
Set in the near future, Civil War, a dystopian civil war themed movie that erupts with social collapse, brings what happens in wars to the big screen from a different perspective.
[source](https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/upk042Tms2EBfIzJf13OtOej0sd.jpg)
My first thoughts about the movie are that it is a successful production that focuses on humanity, morality and the destructive effects of war without the rush to create its own hero.

Even if it is fiction, watching and experiencing the turmoil in the lands of those who have so far taken the war to the lands of others caused me to have complex emotions.

Like many people, I use the phrase “there are no winners in war” at every opportunity and unfortunately the losers are always women, children and civilians.

In short, it is the people, because those who start and end wars are never on the front lines.

By focusing on the destructive and moral dimensions of war, the film makes or reminds enough social criticism, because humanity has been making these criticisms within itself for years.
[source](https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/zCU3M2FxiOPgpdKNASOXMCLBIT5.jpg)
In an environment where chaos reigns and there is no legality, people are reminded of what they can do to each other.

In doing so, the viewer does not need to take sides. In the fiction, the events are staged not by the combatants but by the journalists.

The competition between them for the best picture or the best interview is actually the biggest detail of the story and the way the movie is handled.

We don't realize this at the beginning of the film, but as the story progresses and the big picture emerges, we realize that there is not much difference between the humanity in fiction and the humanity in reality.
[source](https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/jusY751bqHfUspolmQHpJxeOISK.jpg)
The fact that the journalists trying to portray what happened are as comfortable as if the war was a computer game and the character who was killed was revived and continued his life from where he left off can be frustrating at some point, but it is not difficult to realize that this is the only basis for their ability to reflect what happened with all its nakedness.

Especially the cold-bloodedness and dull colors used in the characters contribute to the atmosphere of chaos and the uncertainty that war brings. It is easier to understand how every adversity consumes hope.

When describing a war, it is well portrayed how brutality and destruction destroy not only the physical but also the moral and human values of society.

I recommend you to watch Civil War with its very thought-provoking structure. The atmosphere and fluency of the story is kept in a way that is advantageous for the audience.

Thank you for being here and reading, take care and goodbye!

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Civil War (2024)@sheikhshaon680d
Hello movie lover friends, how are you all? Journalism is a great profession - through which all kinds of political, economic and state activities of a country, nation, country are communicated to the people and the outside world. It can also be said that through these journalists, people can know and see all kinds of current news from inside the country and outside the country. As a result, people have great love and respect for journalists. But with the passage of time, it can be seen that there are good and bad categories among journalists.

Those who connect the people of the country to the people of the country by expressing the truth with honesty and courage, if they are not self-hearted and good people, then the wall of distance created between a country and the people of the country is enough to destroy a country and the people of the country. Today I will tell you about such a wonderful movie, through which you can see and learn about how brave and selfless a journalist is. At the same time, one can see and know how the head of the government of a country destroys a country and the people of the country. Let us introduce you to today's amazing movie.
[IMAGE](https://www.cineman.ch/en/movie/2024/CivilWar/)
Movie Name - Civil War. Movie Director and Story Writer - Alex Garland. Movie Genre - War Action Movie. Movie Based On - An honest, brave and self-sacrificing journalist tells the true story of how a country goes into civil war and forces an autocrat to step down. Movie Cinematography - Rob Hardy. Movie Music - Ben Salisbury and Geoff Barrow. Run time of the movie - 1 hour 49 minutes. Movie Release Date - April 12, 2024. IMDB rating of the movie - 7.1 out of 10. Personal rating of the movie - 4 out of 5. Country of movie - United Kingdom and United States. Movie Language - English.
[IMAGE](https://smmirror.com/2024/04/a24-hosts-special-screening-for-alex-garlands-electrifying-film-civil-war-in-los-angeles/)
The movie featured outstanding performances in important roles by:

In the movie, Kirsten Dunst as Lee Smith and Cailee Spaeny as Jessie Cullen acted as heroes in the main role. Nick Offerman as the President of the United States played a great role as the villain in the movie. Other important roles in the movie include Wagner Moura as Joel, Stephen McKinley Henderson as Sammy, Sonoya Mizuno as Anya, Jefferson White as Dave, Nelson Lee as Tony, Karl Glusman as a spotter, Juani Feliz as Joy Butler, Evan Lai as Bohai, Edmund Donovan as Eddie.
[IMAGE](https://www.ledevoir.com/culture/cinema/810552/critique-film-civil-war-demain-amerique-de-trump?)
Interesting events of the movie:

1) Jessie interestingly meets and gets help from her idol journalist Lee Smith while photographing the war to become a journalist. 2) It is interesting to see and know how the media plan to establish themselves during the war. 3) How much mental strength a person needs to be a war journalist can be interestingly seen and learned through Lee Smith. 4) Interesting relationship can be seen between Lee Smith and Jessie. 5) It is interesting to see how the people of a city lead a happy life even after a terrible civil war is going on in a country. 6) Interesting incident of Jessie going from a moving car to another moving car.
[IMAGE](https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/how-to-both-sides-a-civil-war) [IMAGE](https://www.euronews.com/culture/2024/04/25/is-civil-war-an-anti-war-film-or-just-another-action-blockbuster) [IMAGE](https://www.latestly.com/socially/entertainment/hollywood/civil-war-trailer-kirsten-dunst-stars-in-this-dystopian-action-thriller-showcasing-worn-torn-america-watch-video-5627920.html) [IMAGE](https://www.npr.org/2024/04/12/1244092650/civil-war-review-kirsten-dunst)
Important events of the movie:

1) It is seen how a despotic ruler creates a civil war in the entire country by creating three factions among the common people of his country to hold on to power by force. 2) War Journalist Lee Smith can be seen how a brave war journalist played a remarkable role in bringing the situation of war to everyone through pictures during a civil war in a country. 3) It is seen how a young Jessie loves journalism and faces danger to become a war journalist by photographing rebel clashes. 4) War Journalist Lee Smith made the brave and selfless risky decision to go to the White House to take the closest photo even after knowing the 100% risk of death. 5) When a civil war breaks out in a country, it is seen how terrible the lives of all the people of that country are and how they continue to fight for survival by killing each other indiscriminately. 6) It is seen how violent people become during civil wars. 7) In addition to the brutal killing of Lee Smith's team members while collecting the news, Lee Smith himself was also tragically killed. 8) When a ruler becomes violent he tries in vain to stay in power by killing the people of the country and how brutally the rebellious people do not hesitate to kill the dictator.
[IMAGE](https://cinemalevincennes.com/films/civil-war)
Movie Review :

In the beginning of the movie, it can be seen how the dictatorial government of a country has declared the movement for the overthrow of the country's government to be rebels and brutally killed the common people, how the people of the country have become divided into three parts and turned into a terrible civil war. After that, it can be seen that war journalist Lee Smith is fulfilling the responsibility of advancing their news media by photographing such a terrible situation in the country.

It also follows Jessie, a young photographer who, in order to become a war journalist, gets into danger by photographing rebels and government troops as they fight. Lee Smith, being a senior and experienced war journalist, takes Jessie out of harm's way and takes her to a secure hotel and teaches her how to be aware when reporting during a war.

After that, Lee Smith decides to go to the White House through his news media to get a direct speech from the President and the members of the team decide to go with him in the interest of safety. It then turns out that Young Jessie goes with them and takes pictures of some of the war ruins as they go. On the way, they face various dire situations and it is seen that members of Lee Smith are killed by the enemy before reaching the White House.

But with great difficulty, Lee Smith and Jessie finally went to the White House to directly photograph the brutal attack by the rebels. It also turns out that Lee Smith himself is killed when Jessie is shot and killed while filming the attack, and Jessie eventually takes such brutal photos as a war journalist. In the end, we see how a dictator dies brutally at the hands of the rebels and how the people win the battle to establish their power.

Movie Comments :

Through the movie, one can learn about such an event, which is likely to have happened in our Bangladesh some time ago. One can see and know the terrible situations common people have to go through to remove a dictator from power. Also one can know and understand to some extent how terrible a civil war can be. One can see and know how brave, selfless and important duty war journalists perform during such a terrible situation in any country. I found the acting, action, cinematography, music of the movie amazing. Those of you who love to watch war action movies must watch today's new movie and let us know how you like the movie in the comments.

Thank you all so much for today's interesting and amazing new movie. Stay well everyone and always try to stay healthy.

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Civil War | Review [ENG-ESP]@davidpena21715d

Source

Humanity today is going through many social, economic, political problems and the slightest mistake can provoke a big war that will destroy a lot, causing very bad consequences. Beyond that, over the years several directors have recreated films of such situations, highlighting that political and military movement that occurs in each country that in the end is a disaster. So this year comes a film known as Civil War, which reflects a dystopian vision of the United States, causing a realistic effect on viewers, because at any time it can happen and this time Texas and California decide to separate to confront each other and so we are immersed in a story that no one would be prepared to go through.

La humanidad hoy en día está pasando por muchos problemas sociales, económicos, políticos y el mínimo error puede provocar una gran guerra que destruirá mucho, ocasionando consecuencias muy malas. Más allá de eso, a lo largo de los años varios directores han recreado películas de ese tipo de situaciones, destacando ese movimiento político y militar que ocurre en cada país que a la final es un desastre. Así que este año llega una película conocida como Civil War, la cual refleja una visión distópica de los Estados Unidos, provocando que se cree un efecto realista en los espectadores, ya que en cualquier momento puede ocurrir y esta vez Texas y California deciden separase para así enfrentarse y por eso nos sumergimos en una historia que nadie estaría preparado para pasar.

Source

A film that has not long since it was released and before watching it I was reading several things about it and it is impressive the imagination and creativity that the director has in building the whole plot, since most war movies are narrated from the point of view of the soldier, that man who is there in the game of survival and that no bullet hits his body, However, this new installment is narrated from the perspective of a group of journalists who have the mission of covering every detail of the war, which is an impressive and surprising thing, since it takes a lot of courage and strength to be able to document every detail of this political event.

As the film progresses, the destruction of each country where the war is taking place, deaths and the fear of being able to go out into the streets and emphasizing that it is all the government's fault. It is undoubtedly impressive how these journalists take on the challenge of being able to document every detail and look for the perfect shots to be recorded, being the craziest thing and when I saw it the first time in the film I got a scare and we wondered: Will the journalists survive, what are they doing there, and many other things, since in the middle of the war one should be a refugee.

Una película que no tiene mucho tiempo desde que se estrenó y ante de verla estuvo leyendo varias cosas de la misma y es impresionante la imaginación y la creatividad que tiene el director en construir toda la trama, puesto que la mayoría de las películas de guerras son narradas desde el punto de visa del soldado, ese hombre que está allí metido en el juego de sobrevivir y que ninguna bala impacte en su cuerpo, sin embargo, esta nueva entrega es narrada de la perspectiva de un grupo de periodistas que les toca la misión de cubrir cada detalle de la guerra, la cual es una cosa impresionante y una sorpresa, puesto que se necesita de mucha valentía, fuerza para así poder ir documentando cada detalle de dicho acontecimiento político.

A medida que va transcurriendo esta película se nota la destrucción de cada país donde se está desarrollando la guerra, muertes y ese miedo de poder salir a la calle y haciendo ese gran énfasis que todo es culpa del gobierno. Sin duda es impresionante como estos periodistas toman ese desafío de poder documentar cada detalle y buscar las tomas perfectas para que así queden registradas, siendo lo más loco y al verlo la primera vez en la película me lleve un susto y nos preguntamos ¿Podrán sobrevivir los periodistas?, ¿Qué hacen allí? y muchas otras cosas, ya que en plena guerra uno debería estar refugiado.

Source

A film that is very well worked in every aspect and more in the visual to see a whole country destroyed, confrontation of sides and especially that fear of knowing who to trust, plus a director who presents a country that is considered the best in the world with all the benefits and in just seconds is destroyed, causing losses, mistrust and many factors that are coming out. As we can also see how the journalists are discovering many details and aspects behind all these problems, as they are the ones who carry practically the entire film, as new problems arise and wars continue, so these journalists are to be admired and it is not easy to be there covering every second.

Each of the characters that make life in the film are perfect, since each of these journalists has a touch that represents them, a way of thinking and above all how to face the day to day situation. The actress Kirsten Dunst takes the role of getting the best photos in every moment of that war, which is a talented woman, with courage and admirable strength, to be there, where the most valuable thing for her is to make quality photos. Many other actors who are there are very important, because without them none of this film would be the same until the last moment when it is their turn to cover each event.

Una película que está muy bien trabaja en cada aspecto y más en lo visual al ver todo un país destruido, enfrentamiento de bandos y sobre todo ese miedo de poder saber en quién confiar, además un director que nos presenta un país que se considera el mejor del mundo con todos los beneficios y en tan solo segundos es destruido, provocando pérdidas, desconfianza y muchos factores que van saliendo. Como también se aprecia como los periodistas van descubriendo muchos detalles y aspecto que hay detrás de todos esos problemas, ya que ellos son los que llevan prácticamente toda la película, a medida que va saliendo nuevos problemas y las guerras continúan, por eso estos periodistas son de admirar y no es nada fácil poder estar allí cubriendo cada segundo.

Cada uno de los personajes que hacen vida en la misma son perfectos, ya que cada uno de estos periodistas tiene un toque que los representa, una forma de pensar y sobre todo cómo ir enfrentando la situación del día a día. La actriz Kirsten Dunst toma el papel de conseguir las mejores fotos en cada momento de esa guerra, la cual es una mujer con talento, con valentía y una fuerza admirable, para poder estar allí, donde lo más valioso para ella es hacer fotos de calidad. Muchos otros actores que están allí que son muy importantes, ya que sin ellos nada de esta película sería igual hasta el último momento en que les toque cubrir cada acontecimiento.

Source

It is a movie that presents us with interesting things, about a fact that may become a reality and society would not be prepared for that, the government would do what is convenient for them and I believe that there will not be any journalist present at that moment, for fear of being killed. That is why this installment of Civil War, is totally fascinating and you will see a war conflict in that country.

Es una película que nos presenta cosas interesantes, sobre un hecho que quizás se puede convertir en una realidad y la sociedad no estaría preparado para eso, el gobierno haría lo que ellos les convenga y creo que no habrá ningún periodista presente en dicho momento, por el mismo miedo de poder asesinados. Por eso esta entrega de Civil War, es totalmente fascinante y podrás ver un conflicto bélico en dicho país.

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Civil War: Criticism of interventionism or homage to journalism? [ENG/SPA]@danielcarrerag730d
How's it going community?

Finally got to see this movie, it's not usual for me to start by saying this but I loved the ending, what a critique of what the United States with its armies has done in other countries, but I'll expand on that later, obviously this post will contain spoilers so if you haven't seen it yet I recommend you do it first and then come back and leave me your opinion, I would love to hear it.

Civil War ¿Critica al intervencionismo u homenaje al periodismo?

¿Que tal comunidad? Finalmente pude ver esta película, no es usual en mi comenzar escribiendo esto pero me encanto el final, vaya crítica a lo que Estados Unidos con sus ejercitos a hecho en otros paises, pero de eso lo ampliaré mas adelante, obviamente esta publicacion contara con spoilers asi que si no la haz visto te recomiendo lo hagas primero y luego vengas y me dejes tu opinion, me encantaría conocerla.

Civil War, the new film by director Alex Garland (Ex Machina, Annihilation), presents a dystopian vision of the United States, where a bloody civil war has divided the country into several factions: The states of Texas and California decide to secede, facing off against the central government and the states loyal to it in order to overthrow it. In the midst of this chaotic scenario, a team of journalists embarks on a dangerous journey to Washington D.C., with the mission of documenting the conflict and achieving what no one has done before, interviewing the president.

Civil War la nueva película del director Alex Garland (Ex Machina, Aniquilación), nos presenta una visión distópica de los Estados Unidos, donde una cruenta guerra civil ha dividido al país en varios bandos: Los estados de Texas y California deciden separarse, enfrentándose contra el gobierno central y los estados que le son leales a fin de derrocarlo. En medio de este caótico escenario, un equipo de periodistas se embarca en un peligroso viaje hacia Washington D.C., con la misión de documentar el conflicto y lograr lo que nadie ha hecho hasta ahora, entrevistar al presidente.

Unlike other war movies, told from the perspective of soldiers or the citizens who are victims, this story is told from the perspective of the four journalists, led by the legendary photojournalist Lee Smith (Kirsten Dunst) and her partner Joel (Wagner Moura), joined by the young apprentice Jessie (Cailee Spaeny) and the veteran Sammy (Stephen McKinley). I'm not saying that this story is innovative, that this premise hasn't been used before, but it's the first time I've seen a movie told this way.

A diferencia de otras películas sobre guerras, contadas desde la perspectiva de los soldados o los ciudadanos que son víctimas, esta historia se nos cuenta desde la perspectiva de los cuatro periodistas, encabezados por la legendaria reportera visual Lee Smith (Kirsten Dunst) y su compañero Joel (Wagner Moura), se unen a ellos la joven aprendiz Jessie (Cailee Spaeny) y el veterano Sammy (Stephen McKinley). No digo que esta historia sea innovadora, que no se haya usado esta premisa antes, pero es primera vez que veo una película contada de esta manera.

The film takes place during these journalists journey through the eastern states of the country that have been severely affected by the war because they are bordering the rebel states, this journey shows them the horrors of war within their own nation, affecting each of them in a different way, suffering a kind of metamorphosis for better or for worse, which serves to open their eyes to the atrocities of war or making them stronger to endure them.

La película transcurre durante el viaje de estos periodistas a través de los estados del este del pais que se han visto severamente afectados por la guerra debido a que son frontera de los estados rebeldes, este viaje les muestra los horrores de la guerra dentro de su propia nación, afectándolos a cada uno de distinta forma, sufriendo una especie de metamorfosis para bien o para mal, que les sirve para abrir los ojos ante las atrocidades de la guerra o haciéndose mas fuertes para soportarlas.

When reading reviews and opinions about the film, I really liked one that points out that it feels different from the ones we are used to seeing because it is not about an armed conflict from our past history, nor a post-apocalyptic dystopian future, but events that could very well happen in the present of the nation that is accused of being the cause of many armed conflicts in various countries of the world.

Al leer críticas y opiniones sobre la película, me ha gustado mucho una que la señala como una película que se siente diferente a las que estamos acostumbrados a ver porque no se trata de un conflicto armado del pasado de nuestra historia, ni un futuro distópico post apocalíptico, son hechos que pueden ocurrir muy probablemente en el presente de la nación que es acusada de ser la causante de muchos conflictos armados en varios paises del mundo.

Beyond the regrettable events that a war causes, such as deaths and the loss of peace, the film shows details of what a society that calls itself first world would suffer for the loss of its comforts and way of life, such as the value of its currency, which is the main factor of exchange in the world, collapses, giving way to other fiat currencies that would revalue, such as the Canadian dollar, those little details within the story stand out and make you think if you are paying close attention.

Mas allá de los hechos lamentables que una guerra ocasiona, como las muertes y pérdida de la paz, la película muestra detalles de lo que una sociedad que se hace llamar de primer mundo, sufriría por la perdida de sus comodidades y sistema de vida, como el valor de su moneda que es el principal factor de cambio en el mundo se desploma, dando paso a otros fiat que se revalorizarían como el dólar canadiense, esos pequeños detalles dentro de la historia resaltan y te ponen a reflexionar si estas muy atento.

These details that I mention don't go unnoticed because they are told from the perspective of journalists, let's not forget that, we are not told the details of a combat, it is the day-to-day life of the citizens of a country suffering from war and how the conflict progresses as one side gains ground. Thanks to these details, the film makes clear the importance of the journalistic role in a story, how they are capable of risking their lives to be impartial so that we know what is happening.

Estos detalles que menciono no pasan desapercibidos porque son contados desde la perspectiva de periodistas, no olvidemos eso, no se nos está contando los detalles de un combate, es el dia a dia de los ciudadanos de un pais que sufren la guerra y como avanza el conflicto a medida que un bando gana terreno. Gracias a estos detalles la película deja en claro lo importante del papel periodístico en una historia, como son capaces de arriesgar su vida siendo imparciales a fin de que sepamos lo que pasa.

Now, it's not that the movie doesn't have action and adrenaline-pumping moments to tell a story, in fact, many of the shots take place during confrontations between the sides where the reporters are taking pictures in the middle of everything, risking their lives alongside the soldiers. The most impressive moment, as I said at the beginning, is when they reach Washington with the invading army to kill the president, yes, as you read, kill him, not take him prisoner.

Ahora bien, no es que la película no cuenta con acción y momento que te suban la adrenalina por contar una historia, de hecho, muchos de las tomas transcurren durante enfrentamientos entre los bandos donde los reporteros están tomando fotografías en medio de todo, arriesgando su vida al lado de los soldados. El momento mas impresionante como decía al principio es cuando llegan a Washington junto al ejército invasor para matar al presidente, si asi como leen, matarlo y no tomarlo prisionero.

The mission of these journalists is to interview the president, no one has done it, and it's not going to happen if army kill him, that's where the most impressive scenes of the movie take place as they reach the Oval Office, groups of journalists and soldiers rushing to be the ones to kill the president or talk to him. These scenes are a critique of events in our history where nations have suffered exactly the same thing, you must see this ending and surely you will understand what I mean.

La misión de estos periodistas es entrevistar al presidente, nadie lo ha hecho, y no va a ocurrir si lo matan, es ahí donde se desarrollan las escenas mas impresionantes de la película mientras alcanzan la oficina oval, grupos de periodistas y soldados apresurados por ser los protagonistas en matar al presidente o hablar con el. Estas escenas son una crítica a hechos de nuestra historia donde naciones han sufrido exactamente los mismo, deben ver este final y de seguro entenderán a lo que me refiero.

_{Images from [IMDb](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt17279496/?ref_=tt_mv_close) gallery
Edition with Illustrator}
Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›'Civil War' by Alex Garland Review: A24 have lost their spark with AI@namiks741d

I can't help but feel that Garland has started to lose his appeal. He's made a few great films over the years but the more he makes, the more it feels as if he can't seem to adapt to the craziness of the modern film industry. Annihilation was alright, Ex Machina had a few good ideas, but these are two recent films of his that just felt as if something was missing from them. I couldn't help but find that once the initial spark of the main ideas behind them were already over, they're actually quite shallow films. The kinds that would be better as short films rather than deserving of something large budget. Garland's style of the years definitely speaks of a more lower budget era, one that wasn't with such heavy budgets and crazy marketing, and the marketing side is definitely something I can't help but mention here. Civil War's marketing, led by A24, relied heavily on false advertising of the film. This was done with the use of AI generated posters that were used as promotional material for Civil War, even though the posters both made no real sense with no connection to the film, but also didn't even feature events or locations used in it. A24 being the false prophets of indie cinema they are, remained quiet over the discovery that AI was used for these posters, and nothing came as a result of them.

This left a foul taste in my mouth when I heard of Civil War. Not only did it sound like a soulless attempt to profit from the insanity that is the fragility of American politics in the present, but also insulting the world of filmmaking by using AI to promote it. I avoided this film like mad, and even now I ensured that watching it did not require paying to view it. I have lost interest entirely in A24 as a result of this, and I suspect this will be the last film of theirs I watch for a long time, assuming something changes for the better. I want to make it clear that AI posters, or AI used in films of any sort is something I despise and will reject. And as companies begin to remove the human aspect of art, it brings up the question of what their products are really worth. Slowly opening up justification for the concept of piracy. Should one consider purchasing a film that had little human engagement? When there's no production cost beyond slapping in a few keywords into a website that then generates some low quality product that the consumer is then expected to pay for? Even in some cases the same prices as before? All of this has led to me already hating Civil War before going into it. But the question of why I would watch it comes to mind, no? I am curious to see as to how far Garland has fallen. To see if the negatives I had seen on the Internet about the film are true.

And unfortunately, this also gives me doubts over the supposed upcoming 28 Days Later sequel. Let me guess: AI generated zombies are coming.

Civil War

The problem here is that Civil War is actually made rather well. It holds a narrative that explores the lives of photojournalists during the modern chaos of a civil war taking place in the (former) United States of America. In such troubled times, much like our present which it certainly takes a lot of influence from while exaggerating things, Civil War looks at journalists as a group of people that are heavily despised. To be a journalist is to not only throw yourself into danger while trying to capture the reality of a situation, but also to put yourself in danger from the people that believe you are part of a greater conspiracy that tells lies and has an agenda. The free press is no longer considered free to many. I think this perspective really made the story interesting, particularly given we see these perspectives of photographers while are roaming through the torn states and capturing the events, while trying their best to survive. Our protagonist is primarily a rather famous war photographer, that accidentally manages to find a much younger photographer that is inspired by her, wanting to break into the industry.

This newcomer hasn't seen much of anything, and sort of becomes part of her group as she learns the reality of war. Not really understanding the while situation but trying to, while holding a camera within her grasp. What I didn't like was that our more famous protagonist (played by Kirsten Dunst with great performance) was a bit stereotypical with the war side of things. A character that is all toughened up and desensitised to the whole thing, almost a bit cruel in how she treats others. She's someone that doesn't really enjoy what she does, and it's told to us as the audience that she does this job purely to tell others to not. I felt like this was a bit of a cop-out to create a stereotypical character that serves as a blatant contrast to the more naive newcomer. Perhaps most won't consider this a problem as it's your typical narrative setup, but I just couldn't help but find it a bit too cliche. Especially with how things started. The Civil War side of things isn't really told to us either, it is something that has already started and been taking place for a while, with even some hints that things are slowly coming to a conclusion. Our characters supposedly have the intent of travelling through the states to get to DC, to interview the president.

In terms of cinematography, the film is actually shot very well. Garland has a love for the very cinematic wide angle perspective, mixed with a very shallow depth-of-field that adds to the depth of the scenes, our subjects stand out a lot as a result, and this is a style I quite enjoy, even if it has sort of gained a lot more popularity these days. In parts it looks as if the shots are done with high grain, vintage looking lenses. Perhaps some modern anamorphic lenses. Garland did a lot of this with Annihilation, where in many moments it almost looks as if the lenses have been smeared in a type of grease. Only where the subject is there is some general sharpness. Light bloom almost makes this look a bit more vintage and amamorphic. I found when there were times of action or flashbacks, the use of these effects worked quite well, particularly alongside the use of slow motion. Something that did feel a little different though was the changes from these lenses to aerial shots, where things looked sharper and more digital, removing some of that cinematic look. Moments of travel were accompanied with the photographic side of the journalism, the closing of a shutter, mixed wit the black and white film photographs of the moments through the eyes of the photographer.

I think these gave us more depth in the views of the photographers, pulling us out of the more cinematic moments and showing us a different perspective from them directly. This worked especially with that aforementioned black and white. Sometimes the music works well in creating this ambience between places, a gentle set of tones that didn't really hint at music or rhythm but had a slight sadness to them. A lot of this is disappointing because Garland certainly still has a lot of ideas that are creative and engaging, but A24 sold him out for a quick attempt at manufacturing advertising through anger, while also promoting the use of AI. I mentioned in the introduction that Garland doesn't quite suit the modern film industry, and that's sort of why. His approach doesn't fit. He's too much of a traditional filmmaker and Hollywood can't adapt to that. Perhaps that's why some of his films feel as if something is missing, perhaps there were supposed to be more to these ideas that the studios just wouldn't accept. And Civil War sometimes feels like that. Garland wanting to push the action and the chaos, but being incapable of really doing so with the need for more narrative and simplicity.

Civil War has a runtime that's about two hours in length, and I think it was a decent runtime that did manage to bundle together the horrors of a modern civil war, but also the exploration side as people travel throughout the remains of the United States. Areas left abandoned, left to rot. But also the areas that hold some aspects of civilisation. It gave these moments a lot of tension because we never really know what's to come. How do people react to such events? Different opinions, but also the lack of knowing what is to come as they advance through different areas. There are no real rules anymore, not really a set of police or law enforcement that really have a grasp on things.

Ultimately I think Civil War isn't a bad film, it holds a lot of good elements. But A24 really screwed this one up. and if Garland had any part in it, that's even more disappointing. And it is sad to say that I still think it's best to avoid giving this film any money, as the best course of action is to make it clear that such practices just aren't acceptable, even if it means good films suffer.

Join the Movies and TV Shows Community Discord.

Follow our curation trail!

Follow me over on Twitter!

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›CIVIL WAR | REVIEW.@fabian98748d
Saludos cordiales a todos.

En la reseña de hoy hablare un poco de la nueva película de A24, una productora sumamente increíble que nos ha traído otras joyas, pero de la cual hablaremos en Civil War, una película de la cual muchos están hablando y lo peor es que todos están de acuerdo que es algo que está cada vez más cerca de la realidad.

ENGLISH VERSION (CLICK HERE)
Greetings to all.

In today's review I will talk a little bit about the new movie from A24, an extremely amazing production company that has brought us other gems, but which we will talk about in Civil War, a movie that many are talking about and the worst thing is that everyone agrees that it is something that is getting closer and closer to reality.

_{Imagen hecha y editada en canva pro, fuente de los recursos: 1, 2, 3}

Civil War es probablemente la película que marcara este año, principalmente por su gran parecido a la realidad que se vive hoy en día. Ya que la polarización política y social en el país más libre de todo el mundo. Pero hablemos un poco de lo que va la trama.

Civil War comienza con el presidente hablando sobre su supuesta victoria del poder del país, mientras se pueden ver como estados unidos se cae a pedazos. Pero la historia se centra en los periodistas que cubren todo lo que sucede en el país, aquí conocemos a Lee, una famosa periodista que quiere hacer una travesía muy peligrosa a Washington para poder llegar hasta el presidente antes de que los rebeldes lo hagan.

ENGLISH VERSION (CLICK HERE)
Civil War is probably the film that will mark this year, mainly because of its resemblance to the reality of today's world. Since the political and social polarization in the freest country in the world. But let's talk a little about what the plot is about.

Civil War begins with the president talking about his supposed victory of the power of the country, while you can see how the United States falls apart. But the story focuses on the journalists who cover everything that happens in the country, here we meet Lee, a famous journalist who wants to make a very dangerous journey to Washington in order to get to the president before the rebels do.

Como se está viendo actualmente, la situación en Estados unidos está cada vez peor, temas como el desempleo, la inflación, la inmigración ilegal, las peleas políticas, entre muchas otras cosas, son el caldo de cultivo perfecto para que algo más grande estalle, algo como lo que muestra esta película. Y como hay personas que apoyan al gobierno actual de estados unidos y otros que lo rechazan totalmente, se siente toda esta tensión.

En la película podemos ver todo esto, ya que constantemente se ven luchas por el control de territorios y poder, además el grupo de Lee se ve sometido a peligros donde ven la muerte en más de una ocasión.

ENGLISH VERSION (CLICK HERE)
As we are currently seeing, the situation in the United States is getting worse and worse, issues such as unemployment, inflation, illegal immigration, political fights, among many other things, are the perfect breeding ground for something bigger to explode, something like what this film shows. And since there are people who support the current government of the United States and others who totally reject it, you can feel all this tension.

In the film we can see all this, as we constantly see struggles for control of territories and power, plus Lee's group is subjected to dangers where they see death on more than one occasion.

Ahora en mi opinión, es una película muy fuerte de ver. Ya que constantemente se ven las grandes atrocidades que se pueden cometer por la lucha del poder absoluto. Y aunque tal vez penemos que en nuestro país Venezuela estas luchas de poder exageradas no pudieran pasar, pues a cómo van las cosas esto se vuelve cada vez más real, por el cansancio de las personas y la necesidad del pueblo por un cambio.

ENGLISH VERSION (CLICK HERE)
Now in my opinion, it is a very strong film to watch. Since we constantly see the great atrocities that can be committed by the struggle for absolute power. And although perhaps we think that in our country Venezuela these exaggerated power struggles could not happen, because the way things are going this is becoming more and more real, because of the weariness of the people and the need of the people for a change.

Así que esta película es una clara enseñanza de cuando se juntan el extremismo y la desesperación, así como el abuso de poder y la falta de justicia, se hace una bomba de tiempo que resulta incontrolable y termina en una gran tragedia. ¿Ahora te toca a ti, has visto esta película? te ha estado? que es lo que destacas de esta película? Házmelo saber en los comentarios, muchas gracias por leer, nos vemos en una próxima reseña.

Las imágenes fueron capturadas directamente desde la película en mi computadora.

ENGLISH VERSION (CLICK HERE)
So, this film is a clear teaching of when extremism and desperation meet. this film is a clear teaching of when extremism and desperation come together, abuse of power and lack of justice, it becomes a time bomb that is uncontrollable and ends in a great tragedy. Now it's your turn to watch this movie, Have you seen this movie? what did you like about it? what do you highlight from this movie? Let me know in the comments, thank you very much for reading, see you in a future review. review. The images were captured directly from the movie on my computer. computer.

_{Imagen de portada editada en canva pro con recursos propios de la aplicacion / Cover image edited in canva pro with the application's own resources.}

_{Banner y GIF Footer hecho en Canva pro / Banner and GIF Footer made in Canva pro.}

_{Traducción realizada con la versión gratuita del traductor DeepL.com / Translation made with the free version of the translator DeepL.com}

Hola, Soy Fabian98 Un creador de contenidos y escritor de 26 años (por ahora) que habla de muchas cosas como deportes, videojuegos, peliculas, series, vida personal y gatos. En mi vida seglar soy Community Manager, con más de 1 año trabajando para una empresa de marketing. En mi perfil encontrarás diferentes contenidos de interés. Puedes seguirme en X aquí.

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Reseña: Civil War // Review: Civil War@presidentx769d

Fuente

En la historia se conocen una gran cantidad de guerras civiles. En USA llegó a realizarse una en el siglo XIX; sin embargo, uno se pregunta cómo sería si se realizara una guerra civil en la actualidad, esta película nos muestra un posible evento parecido. Estrenada hace poco, siendo su director Alex Garland.

In history there have been many civil wars. In the USA one even took place in the 19th century; however, one wonders what it would be like if a civil war were to take place today, this film shows us a possible similar event. Recently released, being its director Alex Garland.

Sinopsis: En una realidad alterna, USA se encuentra en medio de una guerra civil. Lee Smith, una fotógrafa veterana de guerra, tiene pensado ir al lugar donde posiblemente termina la guerra, Washington. Sin embargo, a este viaje con su conocido compañero, se le sumarán una novata y un viejo rival; a una aventura que les mostrará la cruda realidad de esa guerra.

Synopsis: In an alternate reality, the USA is in the middle of a civil war. Lee Smith, a veteran war photographer, plans to go to the place where the war could possibly end, Washington. However, on this trip with her familiar companion, she will be joined by a rookie and an old rival; an adventure that will show them the harsh reality of that war.

Fuente

Luego de las presentaciones, el título va más a lo que categorizamos como Road trip, ya que el viaje se realiza en un auto que compartirán los 4 personajes principales. En cada parada iremos viendo como esta guerra civil afecta al comportamiento de la gente, desde pueblos enajenados con la situación, hasta psicópatas sin control alguno.

After the introductions, the title goes more to what we categorize as Road trip, since the trip is done in a car that the 4 main characters will share. At each stop we will see how this civil war affects the behavior of the people, from people alienated by the situation, to psychopaths without any control.

A su vez, se verá la dinámica entre la experta y veterana Lee, con la novata Jessie, que al iniciarse en este mundo, al grupo de expertos les hará difícil manejar el caos que de alguna manera ella representa, en un viaje altamente peligroso.

At the same time, we will see the dynamic between the expert and veteran Lee, with the novice Jessie, who, as she starts in this world, will make it difficult for the group of experts to handle the chaos that she somehow represents, in a highly dangerous journey.

Fuente

El drama y la tensión se encuentran en muchas escenas, resalta una en donde los personajes se encuentran con unos xenófobos extremos. A su vez, hay variadas escenas de guerra, siendo el trayecto final asombroso. Lo único que me descuelga, es la escena final de la protagonista, se siente irreal hasta incluso cómico.

The drama and tension are found in many scenes, highlighting one where the characters encounter extreme xenophobes. At the same time, there are several war scenes, being the final journey amazing. The only thing that I find off-putting is the final scene of the protagonist, it feels unrealistic and even comical.

Sobre la producción, se nota el esfuerzo en muchas escenas, y como recalcó el trayecto final es excelente. El gran punto positivo de la película es a mi parecer el sonido, la capacidad de sentir las balas, metralletas, explosiones y otros en el cine, te hacen sentir en el mismo lugar con los personajes. En la actuación, no me queda duda que Kirsten Dunst, intenta darlo todo con la protagonista, pero no me llega a convencer del todo su actuación. El que destaca, es la del secundario Jesse Plamons, como el miliciano nacionalista.

About the production, the effort is noticeable in many scenes, and as I said, the final scene is excellent. The great positive point of the film is in my opinion the sound, the ability to feel the bullets, machine guns, explosions and others in the theater, make you feel in the same place with the characters. In the acting, I have no doubt that Kirsten Dunst, tries to give her all with the protagonist, but I am not completely convinced by her performance. The one that stands out, is that of supporting actor Jesse Plamons, as the nationalist militiaman.

No tenía esta película en mi radar, pero ha acabado siendo una buena sorpresa. Recomendable.

I didn't have this film on my radar, but it ended up being a good surprise. Recommended.

Calificación personal: 7.8 de 10.

Personal rating: 7.8 out of 10.

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Civil War@steemychicken1793d
The new cinematic venture by Alex Garland (Ex Machina, Annihilation, Men) has arrived with the portrayal of the most controversial, ambiguous, and divisive subject matter: a destructive civil war, set amidst a polarizing election campaign. Who would have thought! source Egalitarianism in addressing thorny issues is employed when one does not wish to openly blame a particular side, implying a preference for the other. Garland has been accused of displaying shrewd neutrality on an issue he doesn't explicitly address. Admittedly, if his expressions practically undermine Trumpism—on certain issues that cannot be hidden, not taking a stand is itself a stance.

From the very first shots, Civil War thrusts us into the story without explaining how, when, or why. We know a Trump-like President (Nick Offerman from Parks & Rec) abolished the FBI and somehow secured a third term. California and Texas formed an unusual alliance and seceded from the Confederacy, with Florida following suit. US citizens and applications are affected. As the forces of the Western Alliance head for Washington, so does veteran photojournalist Lee (portrayed excellently by Kirsten Dunst with perhaps the most enigmatic impassive expression I've ever seen), along with three of her colleagues. Their aim is to extract a statement from the President before falling into the hands of the separatists. Along their journey, they encounter all the manifestations of horror, absurdity, and despair not only of civil conflict but of every conflict, yet they simply record without taking a stand or asking questions. "Once you start asking, you can't stop. That's why we don't ask. We record so that others can ask the questions," Lee says at one point to the young reporter in the group, summarizing Garland's vision of egalitarianism through the professional neutrality of photojournalism.

Stripped of overt political polarization, the film is a series of vignettes of horror and violence as the journalists delve deeper into the brutality and absurdity of the civil war. The basic structure is not too different from The Walking Dead, except that in their journey through a chaotic, post-apocalyptic landscape, the survivors of "Civil War" encounter not zombies but equally bloodthirsty militarists from both sides. But is Garland truly completely detached? The President is clearly authoritarian, and in the film's strongest scene (reminiscent of the Bosnian conflict of '92), Jesse Plemons' trigger-happy paramilitary character (Dunst's real-life husband) is evidently a far-right Q-Anon racist, a sadistic, creepy character that will haunt your memory for a long time.

Even as the creator endeavors not to distract the viewer from the central message "war is wrong and brings out the worst in us," it leaves some crevices, acknowledging that some individuals will always be worse than others, and they are the ones who drive us to this point. Because with this logic, there would never be any explanation, revolution, or resistance, simply because "war is bad." Yes, it certainly is, but a) sometimes it's necessary and b) even if you're a soldier, you can still remain human and avoid committing atrocities.
Beyond the viewpoint of political positioning (or lack thereof), Civil War remains an intense, raw, and shocking chronicle that conveys to viewers all the stress, fear, paranoia, and sense of chaos and disorientation experienced by the heroes.
Posted Using InLeo Alpha

Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
›Civil War (2024): could this happen? | ¿podría ocurrir esto?@cristiancaicedo793d
A movie from A24 | Una película de A24

Many times people go to the cinema to see a film because of the name of the director, or the protagonist, but I don't remember another moment in history - in my personal history - in which people were fans of a production company. That is to say, in my entire life I don't remember someone saying "That movie must be good because it's from Warner", or from Universal, or whatever, and that generated the desire to see the film with some confidence warranty. But now precisely that is happening with the company A24.

Muchas veces las personas vamos al cine a ver una película por el nombre del director, o del protagonista, pero no recuerdo otro momento de la historia - de mi historia personal - en el que la gente fuera fanática de una empresa de producción. Es decir, en toda mi vida no recuerdo que alguien haya dicho "Esa película debe ser buena porque es de Warner", o de Universal, o lo que sea, y que eso le generase el deseo de ver la cinta con cierta confianza de garantía. Pero ahora está sucediendo precisamente eso con la empresa A24.

Poster

From its beginnings as a distribution company and the production of its first film (Moonlight), to the countless and varied successes of recent years (such as Everything Everywhere All At Once) A24 has become a brand that people trust. Regardless of who directs the film, or who participates in it, people are coming to see the films because they trust that they will find a good cinematographic product and - in my opinion, based on the films I have seen of them - A24 fulfills (almost) always. Although I am not a die-hard fan of that production company, this time it was the appearance of its name on the promotional poster that made me go to the cinema to see Civil War, directed by Alex Garland (Ex-Machina , The Beach, Annihilation) and starring Kirsten Dunst. I didn't know much more about the plot, beyond what was obvious that I could infer from its title, but it wasn't necessary to enjoy the film. Without going into many details, Civil War begins with a war conflict in the United States, set in the current era, which evokes the civil war and which has fragmented the country on several fronts, the main one being the Western Front, formed by the states of Texas and California. It's not a fight between only two fronts: the country is really fragmented into at least four forces that fight each other, as if it were a game of a board game between different players.

Desde sus inicios como empresa distribuidora y la producción de su primera película (Moonlight), hasta los incontables y variados aciertos de años recientes (como Everything Everywhere All At Once) A24 se ha convertido en una marca en la que la gente confía. Más allá de quién dirija la película, o quienes participen en ella, las personas están acudiendo a ver las películas porque confían en que se encontraran con un buen producto cinematográfico y - en mi opinión, basada en las cintas que he visto de ellos - A24 cumple (casi) siempre. Si bien no soy fanático acérrimo de esa productora, en esta oportunidad sí fue la aparición de su nombre en el afiche promocional lo que me hizo ir al cine a ver Civil War, dirigida por Alex Garland (Ex-Machina, The Beach, Annihilation) y protagonizada por Kirsten Dunst. No sabía mucho más de la trama, más allá de lo obvio que podía inferir de su título, pero no fue necesario para disfrutar de la película. Sin entrar en muchos detalles, Civil War inicia con un conflicto bélico en los EEUU, ambientado en la época actual, que evoca la guerra de secesión y que ha fragmentado el país en varios frentes, siendo el principal de ellos el Frente Occidental, formado por los estados de Texas y California. No es una lucha entre dos únicos frentes: el país está realmente fragmentado en al menos cuatro fuerzas que luchan entre sí, como si fuese una partida de algún juego de mesa entre diferentes competidores.

Scene from the movie | Escena de la película

Since Civil War begins when the conflict is already more than a year old, we enter directly into the middle of the story. We don't know what happened or what led to this war, but there are some indications (comments about popular discontent with the president, the fact that he's in his third term) that tell us a little. However (I think) that is not the most relevant thing in the film. What matters is that a country that defended above all freedom and union and that saw domestic wars as distant - in geography and time - has become a battlefield in which your enemy is your own neighbor.

Como Civil War inicia cuando el conflicto ya tiene más de un año, entramos directamente en medio de la historia. No sabemos qué ocurrió ni que llevó a esta guerra, pero hay algunos indicios (comentarios sobre el descontento popular con el presidente, el hecho de que éste se encuentre en el ejercicio de su tercer mandato) que nos dicen un poco. Sin embargo (creo) que eso no es lo más relevante en la película. Lo que importa es que un país que defendía sobre todo la libertad y la unión y que veía como lejanas - en la geografía y en el tiempo - las guerras domésticas se ha convertido en un campo de batalla en el que tu enemigo es tu propio vecino.

Poster

In this context we follow the war photographer Lee Smith (Kirsten Dunst) who is covering the events of the war in New York and who together with her partner Joel (Wagner Moura) decide to try the impossible: reach the White House and interview the president, who has not granted any interviews since the beginning of the conflict. For different reasons, they are joined by Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson), a veteran journalist loved and respected by Lee and Joel; and Jessie (Cailee Spaeny), a young photographer who admires Lee and wishes to be like her. The film then becomes a kind of road trip in which the protagonists will encounter different scenarios along the way, some so different from each other that they seem to be two completely different universes, and others equally stimulating and dangerous. The construction of the characters and the mixture of their different personalities is almost scriptural, bordering on cliché, but it works well (I loved Spaeny, she's a sweet and charming pupil, but you also see her suffer and mature throughout the story), the direction is good, the script is interesting (although it has a couple of moments that didn't convince me) and the balance between successes and failures is positive for Civil War, and although some will think that perhaps more political content is missing, I think the film doesn't need it because it doesn't point to that.

En este contexto seguimos a la fotógrafa de guerra Lee Smith (Kirsten Dunst) quien está cubriendo los eventos de la guerra en Nueva York y que junto a su compañero Joel (Wagner Moura) deciden intentar lo imposible: llegar a la Casa Blanca y entrevistar al presidente, quien no ha concedido ninguna entrevista desde el inicio del conflicto. Por diferentes razones, a ellos se unen Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson), un periodista veterano querido y respetado por Lee y Joel; y Jessie (Cailee Spaeny), una joven fotógrafa que admira a Lee y desea ser como ella. La película se convierte entonces en una especie de roadtrip en el que los protagonistas se irán encontrando con diferentes escenarios en el camino, algunos tan diferentes entre sí que parecieran tratarse de dos universos completamente diferentes, y otros igualmente estimulantes y peligrosos. La construcción de los personajes y la mezcla de sus diferentes personalidades es casi de libreto, raya en el cliché, pero funciona bien (me encantó Spaeny, resulta una pupila dulce y encantadora, pero también se le ve sufrir y madurar a lo largo de la película), la dirección es buena, el guión es interesante (aunque tiene un par de momentos que no me convencieron) y el balance entre aciertos y fallos resulta positivo para Civil War, y aunque algunos pensarán que quizás le falta más contenido político, creo que la película no lo necesita porque no apunta a eso.

Lee Smith (Kirsten Dunst)

For me, the two main lines of the film's argument are: the importance of journalism (that objective, impartial and necessary documentation) and the possibility of an internal armed conflict in one of the most important countries in the world. Imagining that something like this could happen is very scary, but not entirely implausible.

Para mí, las dos líneas principales del argumento de la película son: la importancia del periodismo (esa documentación objetiva, imparcial y necesaria) y la posibilidad de un conflicto armado interno en uno de los países más importantes del mundo. Imaginar que algo así pueda suceder es muy aterrador, pero no del todo inverosímil.

Jessie (Cailee Spaeny)

Radical and violent groups, extreme patriotism, a history of public shootings, permissive legislation on the possession of guns, are characteristics of current North American society. They are not all, it's true, and perhaps not the majority, but we are talking about a country of more than three hundred million inhabitants and almost ten million square kilometers. A civil war would be devastating and - I think - bloodier and more chaotic than what is shown in the film. Inflation, shortages, protests, closed roads, executions, impunity, are things that in reality we have seen happen in many internal conflicts in countries in Latin America, Africa, Asia and some time ago (although sometimes not so long ago) also in Europe and North America, thanks to the work of journalists and photographers who, like Lee Smith's character, are literally in the middle of the battlefield to cover the news and tell it to the world. Although I enjoyed Civil War, it must be admitted that it has a good pace and moves forward without stagnating, I felt that they could have exploited some elements of the plot more and my recommendation if you want to see it - especially if you don't live in the US or you are not from there - before doing so, review the map of the country so that you can understand the dimensions, directions and chaos of a conflict that - hopefully - will remain eternally in the realm of fiction, have any of you seen this movie? I read you in the comments.

Poster

Grupos radicales y violentos, patriotismo extremo, antecedentes de tiroteos públicos, una legislación permisiva en la tenencia de armas de fuego, son características de la sociedad norteamericana actual. No son todos, es cierto, y quizás no la mayoría, pero estamos hablando de un país de más de trescientos millones de habitantes y casi diez millones de kilómetros cuadrados. Una guerra civil sería devastadora y - creo - más sangrienta y caótica que la que se muestra en la película. Inflación, escasez, protestas, carreteras cerradas, ajusticiamientos, impunidad, son cosas que en la realidad hemos visto suceder en muchos conflictos internos en países de América Latina, África, Asia y tiempo atrás (aunque a veces no tanto) también en Europa y Norteamérica, gracias al trabajo de periodistas y fotógrafos que como el personaje de Lee Smith están literalmente en medio del campo de batalla para cubrir la noticia y contarla al mundo. Si bien disfruté Civil War, hay que reconocer que tiene un buen ritmo y avanza sin estancarse, sentí que pudieron haber explotado más algunos elementos de la trama y mi recomendación si quieren verla - especialmente si no viven en los EEUU o no son de allá - es que antes de hacerlo revisen el mapa del país para que puedan entender las dimensiones, direcciones y el caos de un conflicto que - ojalá - quede eternamente en el terreno de la ficción, ¿alguno de ustedes ha visto esta película? Los leo en los comentarios.

Reseñado por @cristiancaicedo

Other posts that may interest you | Otros posts que pueden interesarte:

Late Night with the Devil (2023): when live television goes wrong |
--- | ---
Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post