Civil War | A24 | Alex Garland action thriller | 04/12/2024

[AniNate]

Negative review

 

https://mashable.com/article/civil-war-movie-review

 

Mixed-positive

 

'Civil War' Review: Kirsten Dunst in Alex Garland's Dystopic War Film (hollywoodreporter.com)

 

Positive

SXSW Film Review: Civil War: Alex Garland enters the battlefield of combat zone journalism - Screens - The Austin Chronicle

 

'Civil War' Review: Alex Garland's Worst-Case Vision of America (variety.com)

Edited March 15 by AniNate

[MysteryMovieMogul]

Alright, I read the Slashfilm review, and it sounds like it'll be a bit more decisive in wide release. Not because of the film's politics, but because, according to the review, no one knows why the Civil War is even happening. Maybe that just means misinformation caused the in-film civil war, but I can't think of any actual wars that have taken place that didn't have an explicit reason for existing, even if the reason was a bad one. The review definitely made me more eager to see the film, that being said.

[Eric Loves Rey]

37 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Never understood the hate for this film on these boards based on, I guess, a throwaway out of context line about political coalitions in the trailer? This is the exact kind of movie we should want - big budget auteur blockbuster with actual political stakes. It's the ideal type of film we should be supporting for adults. Glad to hear it is great.

I mean I'm not speaking for everybody, but my concern was that Alex Garland's last two movies weren't very good. Annihilation was dull and convoluted, while Men is up there as one of the worst horror movies in recent memory. He looked like he was on the Gareth Edwards path of making pretty pictures with little else to admire. Which like, just because they're making movies I want Hollywood to make, doesn't mean I'm obligated to like them. Though unlike Gareth, he does have one really really really good movie with Ex Machina. So he has that going for him. And h

 

But hey. I was always going to support this. And while I have early festival hype skepticism, it seems more entertaining and interesting than Men. So yeah. I'm excited for it.

 

39 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

As an American Liberal, I can't help but be a little worried by the vibes I'm getting from these reviews/reactions. If this film is truly a "cautionary tale", then the right-wing media will have their "proof" that Hollywood has an agenda. Just great for an election year.

A24's definitely not an obscure brand, and I'm sure you'll have a few conservative magazines or websites making a negative review, but I really doubt Fox News or Daily Wire are really going to spend this much time on a movie that's only going to get to 35M at best. Nor is it going to be a movie that will influence people into voting for Trump. Media matters and certainly has an impact in our world, but an artsy A24 movie releasing in the spring is not going to make people vote for a fascist dictator. A TikTok ban though? That's another story.

[titanic2187]

This would easily be the first 100m, 200m, 300m and 400m for A24.

 

 

 

[WorkingonaName]

2 hours ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

but I can't think of any actual wars that have taken place that didn't have an explicit reason for existing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States

[Krissykins]

Wasn’t a fan of Men, so I’ll wait until we get closer to it. The SXSW crowd can be hysterical. 

[JimmyB]

I just don't trust social media reactions anymore. So, many movies are masterpieces according to these reactions and the movies end up being just fine.  

 

 

[SpiderByte]

4 minutes ago, JimmyB said:

I just don't trust social media reactions anymore. So, many movies are masterpieces according to these reactions and the movies end up being just fine.  

 

 

A lot of people seemed to be subtweeting this movie specifically by pointing out how Annihilation got a similar reception at SXSW and then when the movie actually came out... yeah 

[AniNate]

Annihilation is great tho

 

Actually I don't think any Garland movie has premiered at SXSW before. Annihilation was a Feb release, so it wouldn't have been there. Ex Machina premiered at Sundance though might've been shown there afterwards.

 

 

Edited March 15 by AniNate

[PrinceRico]

So far it has an 72 on metacritic and 78 on RT. Not many reviews so far. Will probably end up in the low 60s metacritic and high 60s to low 70s on RT. Basically the same as Men. Never trust reaction from SXSW.

[AniNate]

I don't know what "trusting" reactions is supposed to mean here. Everyone clearly has their own bias for/against Garland at this point. Basically if you're into Garland you'll probably like this, if not likely not.

 

I do think A24 has been promoting this a lot more forcefully than Men so even with a lesser critical reception I could see it doing $50-60 mil.

[4815162342]

8 hours ago, Eric Atreides said:

He looked like he was on the Gareth Edwards path of making pretty pictures with little else to admire. Which like, just because they're making movies I want Hollywood to make, doesn't mean I'm obligated to like them. Though unlike Gareth, he does have one really really really good movie with Ex Machina. So he has that going for him. 

 

I'd take Gareth Edwards the director over most of the Hollywood crowd. He just needs to not be the one writing the script.

 

Most directors would be lucky to have something as good as Rogue One on their resume 

[AniNate]

Edwards wouldn't be the first comparison that comes to mind. He had one indie sci-fi, then was immediately promoted to doing PG-13 franchise movies for hire, only just now with The Creator has he moved to doing an idea of his own but he's going right back to the franchise well w the next Jurassic.

 

Garland does not seem very interested in working in the Hollywood franchise complex while still aiming to do original genre-leaning ideas of his own, and I think he's worthy of admiration for that regardless of what you think of his movies.

 

 

Edited March 15 by AniNate

[Brainbug]

8 hours ago, Eric Atreides said:

Though unlike Gareth, he does have one really really really good movie with Ex Machina.

 

Godzilla 2014 is better than all of Garlands films though. And (the second half of) Rogue One is also fantastic.

[AniNate]

I'll defend Godzilla but no.

 

Rogue One was meh

[Eric Loves Rey]

Look, I've talked before about my immense distaste for Rogue One and what I hate about it, and you're not gonna change my mind on it at all, so might as well quit while you're ahead. Sorry!

[AniNate]

If there is any kind of comparison I can think of it's early period M Night. 

 

Ex Machina = Sixth Sense

Annihilation = Signs

Men = The Village

 

Maybe Devs would be the Unbreakable in there. Obviously all those M Night movies were much bigger commercially but he experienced a similar kind of erosion of public appreciation. I do think Civil War will have a much better reception than Lady in the Water.

 

 

Edited March 15 by AniNate

[titanic2187]

It may be just 75% fresh but the average rating is freaking at 8.8/10 and 9/10 for top critics. So clearly it is gonna be divisive movie, when it worked for someone, it really works like a masterpiece. The SXSW reactions make sense.

[AniNate]

This seems like it could be like a Wolf of Wall Street situation where it has relatively modest tomatometer but very high average rating. I do see a lot of rave reviews that don't appear to have been added yet.

[emoviefan]

1 hour ago, Brainbug said:

 

Godzilla 2014 is better than all of Garlands films though. And (the second half of) Rogue One is also fantastic.

Watched the Creator the other night. Great visuals and SFX but the movie itself was so flat . It did not help that JDW really does have none of his dad's charisma. Hoping Koepp has written a great script for the new Jurassic and Edwards can focus on everything else.