Oh, Alex Garland…you subversive lil scamp, you!
I’ve kept my eye on this writer-turned-director’s work going back to his terrific debut novel, 1996’s The Beach (I also unapologetically appreciate Danny Boyle’s 2000 adaptation of the same name). From there, he transitioned to screenwriting, starting with 28 Days Later (2002), and following with 2007’s under-appreciated Sunshine. From there, he wrote 2012’s excellent Dredd adaptation and, it’s rumored, ghost-directed the flick. Either way, that movie kicks ass! Where’s our sequel, Alex?!
In 2014, Garland tackled his first feature film as a writer / director, helming the impressive and eerie Ex Machina. There was a real-world tangibility to his brand of science fiction, a ‘hardness’ that I found relatable. So, good start.
Next up was an adaptation of Jeff VanderMeer’s 2014 novel Annihilation and this was where he stumbled a bit, IMO. Now, the novel didn’t exactly blow my skirt up to begin with, so couple that with a very esoteric take on the material and what seemed to be weirdness for the sake of weirdness and the result was somewhat Meh. Don’t get me wrong, there is some cool shit in that flick…but I found myself more frustrated than anything else when the credits finally rolled.
Then came Men, in 2022, a weird and unsettling flick that I remember appreciating when I first saw it, largely for the oddly subversive narrative choices and the creepy visuals. But…as a story, it hasn’t stuck with me. I know I’d like it again, should I re-watch, but it’s not one that stayed lodged in the black matter of my brain.
Which brings us to his latest – Civil War.
When I first saw the teaser trailer for this one, I braced myself. The political climate in the United States is seemingly fast reaching a societal boiling point and the once-far fetched concept of Civil War 2: The South Strikes Back, now doesn’t seem so chuckle-worthy.
So, seeing that a filmmaker was seemingly going to cinematically hypothesise what many of us fear happening (and I write this as an uppity Canadian) with the greatly divided Left vs Right system that’s threatening the Great American Experiment (which has already failed, in my humble Left-leaning opinion), was the resulting product going to light a cultural powder keg? But, being that this is Alex Garland, an artist who’s cultivated a bit of taste for subversion, I was unsure of what the end product would actually look like, though I was highly curious.
With my oldest friend and my oldest nephew in tow, on a beautiful Spring Sunday, I hit the theatre and dove into Alex Garland’s Civil War.
Civil War opens in what I interpreted to be an alternate contemporary timeline, similar to the approach 1984’s Cold War ‘what if’ classic Red Dawn took. In this world, a great societal downfall has resulted in the factually unrealistic alliance of Texas and California (that concept is a satirical joke in itself) waging a war against the allegedly tyrannical president and his government. During this time of unrest, mass protests are erupting in response all across the nation. During one of these uneasy gatherings, we meet famed photojournalist ‘Lee’ (Kirsten Dunst) as she helps an injured novice photographer named ‘Jessie’ (Cailee Spaeny). We also meet her plucky and charismatic reporter partner ‘Joel’ (Wagner Moura) and the three narrowly escape death when a suicide bomber attacks. Later, as they recuperate, it’s revealed through a conversation with veteran reporter ‘Sammy’ (Stephen McKinley Henderson) that they plan to travel to embattled Washington D.C. in order to, hopefully, interview the President before his capture and expected execution. It’s quickly agreed that ‘Sammy’ can tag along. The next morning ‘Lee’ discovers that ‘Jessie’, who is revealed to be a fan of hers, has also managed to talk her way into their vehicle for the journey. And thus begins a road trip through several tense and perilous scenarios that a modern American civil war may unleash…and they are not pretty.
So, is Civil War good? In many respects, yes. But unfortunately, for this reviewer, it fell short of Great, and this was largely due to stylistic choices Garland made along the way.
The first that comes to mind is the choice of seemingly random tunes popping up in tonally-opposed scenes. For example, there’s a sequence where our crew of journalists come across a harrowing gunfight between rebel forces and the military and over the hard-hitting imagery…is some jaunty rap tune(?!). This kind of thing happens more than once and while I understand the use of juxtaposition to convey a certain absurdity (just look at Full Metal Jacket), there were definitely instances where some form of moody score would’ve been a bit more effective (or no music at all, if I had my way).
What also may have been a bit more effective would’ve been a few more ballsy narrative choices. I do admire the restraint that Garland showed with the story, especially given the political and societal climate of the US currently, but I also think there was a bit of a missed opportunity to get under people’s skin and get them thinking critically. That will happen, regardless, but the chance to keep the film in the fore-front of people’s minds is greatly diminished with the unlikely and, at times, murky specifics of the story.
The story structure itself, by nature, is very episodic, which may irk some viewers. This is a ‘road movie’ and the journey the protagonists embark upon is marked by notable grim occurrences along the way, some of which are pretty harsh (just wait till you meet Jesse Plemmon’s robotic executioner of a militia member!). In addition, the manner with which a certain key character’s demise was handled I found bordered on disrespectful, given how the character had been built up, up to that point. I do see the intentional subversion of the scene, but it still struck me as ‘off’.
Which brings me to the Good.
Alex Garland has an interesting ‘eye’ when it comes to his framing and compositions. There are some shots that are gorgeous, such as a night scene where our characters are camping out and talking about the war…with the horizon in the distance lit up by artillery fire and streams of red tracer rounds snaking into the sky (loved the addition of the C-RAMs!). There are many striking sequences that pepper the story, some which caught me off guard, but in a good way.
From an acting stand point, I thought everyone did a great job and I found myself appreciating the fact that, at her age, Kirsten Dunst does not look like she has succumb to the ravages of plastic surgery, and if so, it’s been tastefully done. She still has the ‘cute sexiness’ that she maintained for some 20 odd years but she’s just starting to show the years around the edges, and I appreciated that. She brings an effective world-weariness to ‘Lee’ that seemed fitting to the character, especially as we find out more about her career. Along with her is Wagner Moura as ‘Joel’. I eventually recognized him from his turn as ‘Spider’ in Neill Blomkamp’s 2013 flick Elysium. Luckily, he did not annoy the hell out of me here like he did in that flick (I hated his character!). In fact, ‘Joel’ comes across as the most compassionate member of the crew, with an easy nature and a good dose of charisma that helps guide characters through certain taxing scenarios. Cailey Spaeny is a new one for me and I’m genuinely curious to see how she holds herself in the upcoming (and highly anticipated) Alien Romulus (2024) after seeing her effective portrayal of the dangerously naïve wannabe photographer. Having enjoyed his portrayal of ‘Thufir Howat’ in 2021’s Dune Part One it was nice to see Stephen McKinley Henderson in another fatherly type role, though I will admit that a certain action he takes in Act Two seemed out of character with what had been established. But, having seen very little of his previous acting work, it was cool to see him onscreen again.
All in all, I liked Civil War…but didn’t love it. As previously mentioned, it’s a Good film…not a Great one. While the base concept for the story has all kinds of potential to rile people up and get them thinking, especially in the US these days, Garland (a Brit) chose to play it largely safe and, in some respects, I think that was something of a detriment in the end.
The best way to tackle this one is to simply experience it for yourself and then make up your own mind about the effectiveness of Garland’s message. If all you’re looking for are some cool action scenes, you’ll find them here, just like if you’re looking for material to get you thinking, you’ll also find that here. It’s just that neither element is as fully embraced and executed as well as they could’ve been, in my humble opinion. As for rushing out to see this 1 hour and 49 minute ‘what if’ flick on the Big Screen, while it does boast some impressive visuals, I think you’ll be served just as well if you opt to check this title out on a streaming platform or, better yet, physical media. Civil War is mostly worth your time…and on that note, I CAN recommend…just not as glowingly as I’d hoped.
thekneejerkreaction 