I struggle to think of a movie in recent memory which has made me feel as anxious as A24’s newest thriller, Civil War. Even with a recently revitalised interest in classic horrors, I have rarely jumped as high, clung to my chair so hard, or held my breath so long for any monster or villain as I did for this movie.
As the credits rolled I grabbed my boyfriend’s sports watch (whose brand will remain unnamed but trust that it is a reputable little device) and took a pulse reading that was shocking even to me, despite my never really being in that great of shape.
Director Alex Garland is known for a specific, discomforting genre; it’s unsurprising he achieves this tone so well in Civil War. Ex-Machina and Annihilation in particular are championing works, displaying Garland’s ability to set his audience on edge, pulling constantly at a doubt over who is prey and who is predator.
Civil War is no different. We follow a quartet of journalists, led by seasoned (read: tortured) war photographer, Lee Smith, played by Kirsten Dunst, as the crew make their way through the presently war-torn and not-so-United States of America.
I recognise and appreciate the criticism over Garland’s seemingly agnostic take on current politics, as people seem to have take issue with his lack of commitment to an explicit description of which side is Republican and which side is Democrat and whether Nick Offerman’s president is meant to be Donald Trump and precisely why the country went to war, along with a menagerie of other questions that, from my view, ask too much of this movie (though I will say if everyone left the cinema feeling that Offerman bore a striking resemblance to a certain ex-president…)
I’ll admit, Garland does leave some questions that may reasonably be perceived as ill-considered plot holes, but I my belief is that this was a, relatively successful, attempt to steer clear of a narrative which places blame and gives you leave to comfortably root for any person on the ‘good guys’ side’ with a gun, even if they have little to no qualms about using it.
While I appreciate this has been understood as a statement on Garland’s own politics, I disagree. The story is not about a war hero, or a winning military campaign. These elements exist, and play a crucial role in the central narrative, but the decision to follow war photographers sets us up for a film less interested in a fiction about right-wing extremism (although, again, I feel those aspects are noticeably present) but one which explores why humans do the despicable things they do to one another.
The sound design is also impeccable, and hugely lends itself to Garland’s style. Sound designer Glenn Fremantle should easily win some awards, or at least nab some hefty nominations.
And in the acting category, Dunst’s performance is devastating. Tired and disturbed, Lee battles with what she has seen and who she has become, a sentiment which may ring true for many of us, who feel not only a draw to knowing, understanding, and watching atrocities, but also some responsibility to ensure we have an awareness of the modern, daily evils of the world. As with Lee, we often see these acts committed through glass, her camera perhaps acting as a replacement for our screens. But, as with Lee, looking through the glass leaves us feeling hollow, hopeless, and haggard. Like her, we tend towards inaction despite how devastating and cruel we see humanity become……..
On that happy note, 4.5/5 stars! Civil War is a fully-rounded, thrilling, and shocking physiological experience.
Reel Talk 