Alex Garland’s Civil War is the biggest undertaking yet for the British filmmaker and for everyone’s favorite darling indie distribution studio, A24. It’s a massive dystopian tale about the United States of the not-too-distant future becoming a war-torn nation dragging itself into self-destructive annihilation.
There’s the obvious novelty of turning our own backyard into a warzone. Seeing Washington DC look like a Call of Duty map is going to pique your interest at the very least (if not fully haunt you). But that’s unfortunately where the positives of Civil War tend to begin and end.
The war itself is simply a backdrop for whatever story it is that Garland is attempting to tell. Unfortunately, it never becomes clear what that story is meant to be.
The movie is ostensibly about journalism – photojournalism specifically. However, it seems that Garland has no real interest in, or reverence for the profession. There are spattered thoughts about its purpose, but no deeper considerations about its significance (neither macro nor micro).
There’s little insight into the psyche of Kirsten Dunst’s Lee Smith character. Which is a shame because I’m sure she would have thrived if provided the opportunity to do so. She already delivers a stellar performance, even with the little that she’s given to work with.
As a photojournalist, Smith is seemingly tasked with capturing the world as it exists. The questioning and interpretation portions are meant to be left for the rest of us. But it’s clear that she does have thoughts. Garland’s script and direction sadly don’t allow Smith as a character or Dunst as a performer act on them.
I suppose the intention is for the movie to exist as objectively capturing the resulting truth of an American civil war. While failing to make sense of said objective truth, Garland also forgoes an opportunity to explore his subjective thoughts on the potential causes of the war or of its horrific ramifications.
This could’ve been a movie about the politics that could lead to such an awful war. Garland dips a toe but seems too timid to fully dive in. Instead, the film engages in the worst kind of both sides-ism there is. The kind that does just as much finger pointing as the polar extremes without any of the conviction. At least pretend to stand for something. Don’t hide behind blaming everyone around you without offering up any proposed fixes.
I can’t help but think that as a non-American, Garland’s intent was to approach the subject with an uncorrupted outsider’s perspective. However, this movie would have benefited from an American filmmaker being able to tap into the unique particularities of our nation and where it currently sits in its history.
Questions of what it means to be an American, the frailty of our democracy, and our individual responsibility for the collective well-being all make an appearance but are not given proper time to breath. The result is a fairly aimless exercise in looking at a meaningless hypothetical.
One of Civil War’s stronger moments features Jesse Plemons popping in for a scene and creating some genuinely great tension. The building dramatic dread is all due to the brilliant menace that Plemons brings to the role.
There’s perhaps a more intriguing movie sitting within following that character’s story. Unless A24 decides to build out the “Civil War cinematic universe” we’ll never know. For now, we’re stuck with this film in its current form. One that should have been infinitely more thought provoking, shell shocking, and resonating.
