With a title like “Civil War,” you expect this film to have some heavy-hitting and timely social commentary. However, one of the most prominent features of the latest feature film from writer-turned-director Alex Garland is that it doesn’t take any particular political stance. Instead, it throws us right into the mix of a modern-day civil war alongside a group of photojournalists on a road trip traversing across a divided United States of America. The film really thrives in moments where it puts you with the main characters right on the front lines, forcing you to experience all of the horrific gunfire and violence. Although moments like these are impactful, the film is heavily undermined by its thin and predictable road-trip narrative. It ultimately results in a film that makes a whole lot of noise but really doesn’t have much to say about anything.
It’s the not-too-distant future, and America is under the authoritarian rule of a corrupt president (Nick Offerman), who is currently serving his third term. We aren’t given too much background information as to how things have unfolded, but we do know that the United States has been divided into different factions (I’ll include a map below to show you the geographical outline of the film’s depiction of America). Instead of following a group of soldiers or fighters in the war, we are kept in the company of a group of war-photo journalists consisting of acclaimed photographer Lee Smith (Kirsten Dunst) and her colleagues Joel (Wagner Moura) and Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson). They are traveling from Brooklyn to Washington to interview the president, and also joining them is a young and aspiring photographer, Jessie (Cailee Spaeney). She idealises Lee and has a very innocent outlook on the situation, in contrast to the others, who have a far more stoic perception of the situation. The group needs to get to Washington fast, though, before an invasion of the White House takes place.
It has been reported that Civil War is the most expensive A24 film to date, with a reported budget of about $50 million, and it’s clear to see that the money was well spent in creating the look of the film. The cinematography from Garland’s frequent collaborator Rob Hardy is haunting and manages to depict some moments of beauty amidst all of the destruction. The sound design is also incredibly effective, as the various gunshots and explosions that occur throughout really pack a punch (seeing the film in IMAX also greatly added to the experience). There are numerous sequences where we follow our characters taking pictures of intense shootouts, which gives the film a strong sense of realism and simultaneously throws the audience into the chaos that unfolds. However, while all of the technical qualities of the film are great, I do get the impression that the film’s main priority was to deliver a visually arresting experience rather than having a compelling plot to underpin everything that is going on.
The film could best be described as an intense road trip film across a war-torn country. Garland uses this plot structure as a way to showcase different groups that have been affected by the Civil War. These include groups that have chosen to stay out of the conflict entirely to some more sinister folk that are using the situation as an excuse to exercise their own violent agenda. It all sounds very promising, but I do wish the film had spent more time in some of these locations instead of treating them like pit stops on the character’s overall journey. It ends up making them feel like isolated segments rather than parts of the bigger picture. There is one moment in particular where I felt the film really landed a home run with the messaging and cranking up the intensity, and it’s a scene involving Jesse Plemons playing a xenophobic soldier. His appearance here could really just be classified as a brief cameo, as he’s only onscreen for about 10 minutes, but he completely steals the show and really gets under your skin. I do wish that there were other moments in the film that reached the same level of quality.
Aside from Plemons, there are some other strong performances throughout, particularly from Kirsten Dunst. She does a brilliant job portraying someone who has become desensitised to all of the horrors of war throughout her career, capturing harrowing moments of violence. Her interactions with Jessie, portrayed very well by newcomer Cailee Spaeney, are the most memorable in terms of characterisation as she is enthusiastic about following the same career path as Smith and is the role that the audience can place themselves in. Her naivety and innocence are what make her stand out from the other main characters, who have removed their sense of humanity from their jobs, and she gradually learns that she must not show fear when capturing images of brutal violence if she wants to be as successful as Smith. The film does set these character arcs up well, but it doesn’t develop them any further. By the time the film rolled into its third act, the focus drifts away from focusing on its characters and instead transforms into a loud and explosive siege thriller.
Much like Garland’s previous feature, Men, I predict that Civil War will be a divisive film. Some may wish that the film had more substance, and others will be satisfied with the film just being an immersive sensory experience. I would position myself somewhere in the middle (much like the film’s apolitical stance). I thought the cinematography and sound design were excellent; it featured some strong performances and a terrifying sequence involving Plemon’s character. But what really holds the film back for me is an underdeveloped narrative and a meandering plot. I think the film would have benefited from a slightly longer runtime, as it would have further fleshed out its characters and given us more of a reason to care about what was happening. SEAN MORIARTY
Cold Coffee Press 