Current Events > Civil War is getting rave reviews after premiere

(+) Yeah! (+)

Some tweet reviews/impressions in article

https://movieweb.com/civil-war-alex-garland-reactions-masterpiece/

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/e7406989.jpg

Looks like shit, but I'm not surprised journalists love the safe, take no sides civil war movie about "neutral" journalists. It'll be interesting to see how the general audience's reaction compares.

Do you just want it to be a movie literally about future trump?

Gritty posted...

Some tweet reviews/impressions in article

https://movieweb.com/civil-war-alex-garland-reactions-masterpiece/

I'm not clicking your links

Looking forward to seeing this movie in theaters, its been on my radar for awhile so Im glad to hear its getting praised by reviewers.

mah keys are logged damn it

CountCorvinus posted...

Looks like shit, but I'm not surprised journalists love the safe, take no sides civil war movie about "neutral" journalists. It'll be interesting to see how the general audience's reaction compares. I like this blurb from one of the negative reviews on Rotten Tomatoes:

Yep, you sound like part of what the movie is about

Ill watch it at some point but I doubt its anything special.

Gritty posted...

Do you just want it to be a movie literally about future trump?

I think the concern people have is that one 'side' of American politics in particular is dominated by fake news and the direct promotion of conspiracy theories by politicians to their base, and whether this movie will acknowledge that lopsidedness in the current political atmosphere or attempt to call those people equally valid/invalid to the people they hate.

The sequel to The Hunt that nobody asked for

I'm hearing that the trailers are very misleading and the movie is mostly focusing on war journalism and the civil war is mostly a background event for the journalists to work with.

YellowSUV posted...

I'm hearing that the trailers are very misleading and the movie is mostly focusing on war journalism and the civil war is mostly a background event for the journalists to work with.

That sounds more interesting to me.

A movie that specifically thanks Andy Ngo in the credits

no thanks

By the way

Critics compare Civil War to Christopher Nolan and Apocalypse Now , calling it Garland's best work with flawless cinematography.

Is the OP article written by AI?

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/civil-war-movie-review-2024
4 stars

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/civil_war_2024

CountCorvinus posted...

Looks like shit, but I'm not surprised journalists love the safe, take no sides civil war movie about "neutral" journalists. It'll be interesting to see how the general audience's reaction compares. I like this blurb from one of the negative reviews on Rotten Tomatoes:

Im assuming it doesn't explicitly mention Trump because the author doesn't want it to only be topical to the current political landscape and could be watched in different times and in different countries. It's a warning to all, present and future.

I'm sure there is a wink and a nod to Trumpers anyway.

I haven't read the reviews yet but I'm going to see it.

The more some of you guys rant about the movie, the more excited I am to see it tomorrow

Im gonna see it dont care what anyone says but not friday when it streams

CADE_FOSTER posted...

mah keys are logged damn it

That phrase from 15 years ago was explained to me 10 years ago, but I completely forgot. Could I get a refresher what it means?

https://twitter.com/machineiv/status/1777731160870715761

Doe posted...

I think the concern people have is that one 'side' of American politics in particular is dominated by fake news and the direct promotion of conspiracy theories by politicians to their base, and whether this movie will acknowledge that lopsidedness in the current political atmosphere or attempt to call those people equally valid/invalid to the people they hate.

Thats fair; I just dont know how directly the intent of the director was to correlate to current events.

obviously there is to some extent. But just having a trumpers bad movie may not resonate with the people. Maybe it will be one of those movies that should have waited to view this in more of historical scope.

and I do agree if it takes the safe route of not showing the dangers of that cultish thinking and misinformation then its done a disservice

I've also seen some people scolding about not assuming what the movie's about etc, to which I say, that's on A24 for heavily promoting this movie as being about a contemporary US civil war. You don't get to profit off controversy and then complain that your movie is being examined with the wrong lens.

CountCorvinus posted...

Looks like shit, but I'm not surprised journalists love the safe, take no sides civil war movie about "neutral" journalists.

Modern journalists legitimately believe they're heroes when their livelihood more often than not revolves around being paid less than a fast food manager to churn out what amounts to advertisements for media products

Looks like garbage.

Damn y'all triggered over a movie wtf go outside

Kain_Highwind posted...

https://twitter.com/machineiv/status/1777731160870715761

They didn't thank Andy Ngo, they used footage attributed to him. And looking at Helen Lewis' wiki, how is she a nazi?

Also surprising that Alex Garland has made such a divisive/seemingly lazy movie when he previously made the masterpiece of Ex Machina.

CRON posted...

Modern journalists legitimately believe they're heroes when their livelihood more often than not revolves around being paid less than a fast food manager to churn out what amounts to advertisements for media products

These aren't really journalists. They're critics masquerading what they're doing as journalism. Actual journalists have jobs that are dangerous sometimes / oftentimes depending on field of expertise.

Kain_Highwind posted...

A movie that specifically thanks Andy Ngo in the credits

no thanks

'Tbf' it just cites him as a source used rather than thanking him. Shouldve not used his stuff at all though tbh

C_Pain posted...

They didn't thank Andy Ngo, they used footage attributed to him.

It's just a really bad look for your movie credits to say "Footage provided by the AP, Getty and Andy Ngo" as if he's a real journalist, instead of a fake news peddler who's still tweeting about how George Floyd protests and "Black Lives Matter curriculum" ruined his school system. It platforms a guy who it is irresponsible to platform. The goal of his body of work is to harm minorities and incite fear & rage in conservatives. There's no universe where this movie couldn't have been made without crediting him.

I don't know who Helen Lewis is but from a google search I guess she wrote trans panic content about bearded men showing their penis in women's bathrooms and women being too scared to say anything if trans rights are advanced. Nazi may be a less accurate description than TERF. She apparently used to be pro-trans but something about the bathroom discourse crossed a line for her. Also I think she loves the monarchy which is cringe but what can you expect from the British I guess.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I will give my honest feelings, yeah. While I don't believe in "both sides" when it comes to actual politics (current Republican party is scum), I do believe that how the people react on both sides is certainly problematic. Many left wing people on Twitter make me sick and definitely do more harm than good.

CADE_FOSTER posted...

Damn y'all triggered over a movie wtf go outside

This is the most triggered response in the entire thread. Self-Awareness my man.

Funkydog posted...

'Tbf' it just cites him as a source used rather than thanking him. Shouldve not used his stuff at all though tbh

That's even worse. He's the guy who claimed Antifa or BLM were throwing concrete milkshakes, if I'm not mistaken injured himself to fake his story, and was exposed as a liar.

He shouldn't be considered a legitimate source for anything.

That level of not researching someone's credibility is like when the NYT hired a well-known neo-Nazi on Twitter to be senior editor, if I'm not mistaken, because they couldn't be bothered to do a basic Google search.

Sandalorn posted...

This is the most triggered response in the entire thread. Self-Awareness my man.

Most triggered? No. The people immediately jumping to conclusions are the most triggered.

https://twitter.com/afrocosmist/status/1777764206936236308

Imaging giving the director the benefit of the doubt

Man, it's night and day the reaction I see of this movie from a different forum to this one, especially from people who haven't even watched the movie. I got far left leaning users on a different movie forum that is praising the shit out of this movie they watched while on here I see left leaning users shitting on a movie they didn't even watch. I need to make this a case study or some shit.

Anyways I will be watching it and I will watch it with both an open eye for anything I can see as "propaganda" or trying to push an actual message (like I did with Top Gun Maverick being an obvious military propaganda, but fun and enjoyable, movie) and to see on its own merits if it's a good movie or not. I will give an honest review as much as I can.

refmon posted...

https://twitter.com/afrocosmist/status/1777764206936236308

Imaging giving the director the benefit of the doubt

Imagine having no clue about who this director is and how his movies always have some left wing ideologies

Acknowledging how fascism takes root with propaganda is pretty important with a sensitive topic like this, making a serious film about modern civil war in the US.

Thinking this is a both-sides problem is incredibly naive and sheltered bubble take from privilege

Kain_Highwind posted...

A movie that specifically thanks Andy Ngo in the credits

no thanks

This, and I simply can't buy a story where CA and TX are in an alliance. Just silly.

That said, the Ebert 4 star review softened me a bit. Seems the point as shown in the trailers is misleading.

The movie isn't really about anything relating to modern political divide under terms we grasp. Its basically just a war movie set in a very vague alternate reality trying to capture how hideous a war like this would be. The controversy around it is dumb, it isn't a both sides movie and it doesn't idolize journalists at all.

Thats unfortunate

It's a fucking movie. People just want to sit in a theater for 2 hours eating popcorn and having fun. Not everything has to bash viewers over the head with biased viewpoints.

Watch cable news if you want that.

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

Not everything has to bash viewes over the head with biased viewpoints.

I'd be delighted to hear what you consider to be a "biased viewpoint" on this subject.

Andy Ngo involved in any way whatsoever = automatic "garbage" label

Literally unwatchable

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

It's a fucking movie. People just want to sit in a theater for 2 hours eating popcorn and having fun. Not everything has to bash viewers over the head with biased viewpoints.

Watch cable news if you want that.

Thats more from being confronted with uncomfortable truths about your views and less to do with spoiling a fun time