Civil War (2024) | a Review
originally published on 03/05/2025;
Hello everyone, I am the radical floridian maoist, G.E.M.Simov, a creature so politically volatile that this movie is about me, here to tell you about “Civil War”.
Simple review details - I rank films on an out of 10 basis, granting up to 3 points in 3 categories, as well as a last, single point from my own self, depending on my experience with it.
A disclaimer - the terms 'movie' and 'film' will be used interchangeably in this review.
Presentation
Civil War is a road-trip movie, in which a bunch of characters goes on a road-trip to a certain destination. The twist here is that, being set in the USA, the trip is going to be altered, thoroughly, by the wonderful addition of a violent civil war. There are at least four factions in said civil war, and there are many, many supporters of said factions all over.
That leads into a very particular setting for a movie, which is almost at the cusp of being a post-apocalyptic flick, in the vein of “the Road”, but is, actually, barely not. Truthfully, many of the scenes that can be observed are reminiscent of exactly that - stuff that shows off the complete collapse of civilization and the dissolution of large societies.
Large-scale shots displaying the vast metropolises of the USA empty, their obtusely large numbers of lanes on their far-too-many roads - empty, with not a single vehicle in sight. It calls back the wonder and eeriness that the Covid pandemic brought with itself. Everything is empty, everything is still, everything is dead or dying. The world is holding its breath, uncertain of whether it can resurface.
There are impressively entertaining displays of destruction, but such that are clearly man-made and not total. A vast pile-up that has been left for weeks, maybe even months, with cars strewn about on the roads. Burning or burned down buildings. Corpses here and there. Gunfights and explosions pretty much all over.
And all of that coupled with the fact that the quartet that sets off on the road trip features four journalists. That brings with it another interesting angle to the movie - rather than it just being a film about the civil war and the dissolution of the “great” USA, it is about journalism… About war journalism.
The director goes on to do some neat things every now and then. When certain photos are taken, the audience is treated to the photos themselves. Black and white, naturally possessive of that enchanting factor that black and white photos happen to have… But also still, for a second or so, almost inviting the viewer to consider and to ponder. Their presence implies that there is great meaning behind them, and there’s a bit of wonder, a bit of thinking to be done - does this photo actually have meaning, even if only in the context of the film itself, or does it have meaning outside of the film’s context, or is its meaning meant to be derived from within the context of the film, but applied outside of it?
There’s a very pleasant provocation that comes along when the photos are shown to the audience. The pleasantness does not come from the subject matter, of course, but rather from the fact that the film has this interesting, and relatively unique, way of presenting the “think about this” demand that most such movies want to present.
On top of that, the movie does not limit itself to just visuals, though in that regard it is quite striking. It also makes use of music, of sound… To various effects, though the effectiveness of said use - primarily the music, frankly - is very lackluster in most cases.
Regardless, an explosion goes off and everything goes quiet. Slow motion kicks off. Suddenly, things are odd, things are trying to be as immersive as possible, but the silence lasts for a bit too long, and there is no process of returning to normal, there is no screaming of the ears, there is no slow readjustment to hearing, no. Instead, the cue for the reappearance of sound is the shutter of the camera, the sound of a picture being taken… Followed by the presentation of the picture itself.
Then there are other uses of sound - ones that are, frankly, very interesting. Rarely, if ever, does a film about a war show the war off from afar. It would much rather go on to thrust the audience into the action, to see the grit. And, of course, this movie does that as well - but it also does something else. It pulls back. There are a couple of scenes that take place far away from a battlefield, but at the same time close enough so that the battle is discernible.
The firmament, filled with bullets, the sound of gunfire echoing through the silent night, tearing the calm apart… In addition to that, the way the bullets look is quite interesting. Granted, that could just be a personal thing, but observing a line of machine-gun fire going off into the sky is quite different from anything else one might see - certainly nothing like a firework show.
Lastly, songs and music. This movie does not have that many of those, or, perhaps, it has some incredibly pronounced uses - a number of tracks that are so loud and overwhelming that they drown out every other sound - and then it has tracks that are ambient or background noise. There are also many scenes that just do not have a musical accompaniment. They are quiet - all that is heard is the sound of voices, of gunfire, of gasping for breath… And of the shutter clicking.
But here appears the most problematic element. Whenever the songs appear and overwhelm everything else, it is clearly done with intention, and that intention is clearly visible. The scene becomes something akin to a music video, cuts and actions being timed so as to move in unison with the song itself. That was quite interesting and even entertaining to watch, but…
The songs suck. The songs are not ones that are pleasant or interesting or even anything too worthwhile to listen to. Frankly, there is something that can be gleaned here - that the USA’s country music really struggles to impress yours truly - but also that the use of just that, of something that can be considered emblematic of the USA, is so carefully done, is interesting.
It is as if the movie, through the use of those songs, is saying that THIS is the USA. That it is ugly, that it is beautiful and serene, and that it does not sound all that good. In truth, I can clearly see what was the intent here - unfortunately, it fails to adequately catch on, to get to the truly juicy fruit. If, instead of getting scenes of people screaming their lungs out in anguish, but muted by a song, the audience was treated to the actual scream, perhaps drowned out by the whirr of military equipment and the marching of soldiers, the effect would have been different, more authentic.
Because is suffering not difficult to even observe? And is it not markedly poignant for that suffering to be almost impossible to notice over the roar of war? I digress.
Ultimately, Civil War looks quite good, but a few bold choices wound up being losing gambles. One thing that I am both pleased and perplexed by is the way the outfits of the characters look, in particular - those who are taking part in military “operations”. Some have proper equipment and camo suits, but then their nails are painted and their hair looks like a toddler’s drawing. Then, there are others who have Hawaiian shirts or normal clothes, but are decked out with guns, vests and equipment. Then there are also some that would look absolutely normal and unremarkable, but have applied one element to their outfit that makes the stick out.
One other thing that the movie does a good job at presenting is the horridity of it all. The strange vindication and freedom that such a situation presents to those who are kept on a leash by the law and society, to those who are actually just bad people, to those who would excuse a lack of empathy with “i don’t know you” - it is very well shown off, and the scene in question is very good.
With that said, Civil War is better than it is bad. It is almost excellent, but it instead only gets to lay claim to goodness. There are a few mishaps here and there, with some colors being oddly off, some visuals being wonky, and a very important moment being marked by a resounding lack of something crucial. 2/3
Acting
The cast for this film was not very large. There are four main characters and there are a few supporting actors who show up here and there, and, surprisingly enough, there is barely any misstepping anywhere along the track.
Naturally, the matter portrayed in the film is very heavy. One of the main quartet is quite young and is just starting out with the deal of being a war journalist, but then the others are also in a situation that is exceedingly unique. As a result of that, there is a lot of room for lots of intense reactions to terrifying situations.
Surprisingly enough, they pull it off - or so it seems to me. As I have said many times already, I am no big dog when it comes to telling whether an actor did a good job or not. There were a few very minor characters who showed up here and there who clearly did not do the proper thing, or so it seemed, but aside from that everything is quite good, there is a good level of plausibility to all reactions and the main quartet does a lot of good work.
Naturally, those who do the most acting wind up being the actors playing the longest lived characters - the ones who survive, rather than the ones who are oldest. What is interesting is to observe the shift from incredibly potent and seemingly real reactions, to true anguish and immense despair or distraughtness, to an indifference that can be experienced thanks to going numb.
I liked the performances and I do not see any faults with them. I also really liked Stephen McKinley Henderson’s performance and what he lent to the character. Good vibes! 3/3
Story
The premise of this film is incredibly interesting and entertaining. The setting - even more so. It winds up spawning a number of questions that did not get answered, and yet at the same time did not seem to need an answer. I found myself curious about the factions that are participating in the civil war, the reasons for the civil war itself - all of that was incredibly compelling.
However, it was not important. What the audience needed to know, the audience was provided. There are factions, they do their thing. The audience is going to be looking at these journalists going on a road trip to Washington, so they can get an interview from the president of the USA, who is in big trouble.
Prior to that, though, just after the trio of rugged journalists - Lee, Joel and Sammy - are done figuring it out, a fourth piece joins the pie. Jessie is a young wanna-be war journalist who had a run-in with Lee, who is poised to be the Main Character, and winds up accompanying them.
The trip they go on is really messed up. They get to see many funky things, Jessie gets to experience nice trauma that will undoubtedly lead into PTSD, and at the same time she learns how to be a war journalist. Meanwhile, though, a lot of other things happen, and before I spoil the entirety of the story, I would like to talk about some stuff that might not rely on spoilers.
This movie is very good at telling its story, but it is also horrendous at managing its characters, in a very particular sense. There are scenes that show off something happening, which scenes indicate that the characters who have taken part in them are going to do something differently in future scenes. These preceding scenes can be interpreted as teaching moments for the characters themselves, and they are meant to show off the growth of the characters.
However, instead of that happening - with what is, perhaps, the most impactful and important scene in the film - the audience is treated to the opposite. Instead of the moment being one that teaches the characters something, it winds up being just another moment. The most perplexing thing here is that there was great care among all the characters relating to the moment - it was impactful and important not just from the standpoint of the story, not just for the audience, but for the characters themselves.
Yet it almost seems as though that event has absolutely no bearing, and as if it means nothing at all in the long run (that being the film itself). It just happened, it showed off how things are, and so that is that. No need to actually dwell on it.
Ultimately, what wound up happening is that the movie built up the expectation that it is actually going to be good. There was a scene, relatively early on, that created an expectation - involving a young female character, defenseless, and a slightly older, armed and dangerous male character. The expectation that the audience should have had in that moment was clearly conveyed - first the girl walks off, then the dude sees her and follows in a relatively conspicuous manner.
Considering the context - no law enforcement anywhere in sight, guns everywhere, we are in the STATE OF NATURE (ala Locke) - it is obvious that the audience should expect that kind of thing. Sexual Assault. After all, has the audience not been conditioned by cinema to know that this is what follows such scenes?
Well, conveniently, the way the movie approaches the topic is so good that, in truth, it is just an idea. What actually happens is that another character notices, goes over, and turns things around in such a manner that the concept of Sexual Assault does not even get brought up, it does not even get hinted at. The only indication that there might be something like that happening is the look that the newly joining character has on their face as the two others set off, and the funky way the dude carries himself.
So the film makes me expect good things. Very subtle, or perhaps not that subtle but still relatively subtle seeding, only to then subvert the expectation that was put in place in the audience’s mind. However, it does not manage that for long. It has its moments, granted - but it does not get to maintain the height.
Ultimately, the next time the expectation is sown, it just delivers. Exactly what was expected happens. Then, again - the expectation is sown, the streaks pop out, and then we separate the wheat from the chaff. It becomes so obvious that this one character is going to bite the bullet AS SOON as the way that other character is moving is shown to the audience, as well as how the soon-to-be-dead character is behaving. There’s something deeply unsatisfying about that - and about the failure to convincingly allow the characters to grow.
One other thing that I quite liked about the story is the way the good old “fuck around and find out” meme is introduced, but more on that a bit later.
Overall, without going into spoilers, the story does a wonderful job at introducing a world that is plausible, and at introducing characters who plausibly live in that world. It does not really let the audience get to know the world, but at the same time that distance makes it all the more tantalizing and interesting. Unfortunately, those characters wind up failing as characters.
Now, onto spoiling the story.
The main thread of the tale in here is the following - Lee sees herself in Jessie, and, in a sense, feels the need to do something about it. Ultimately, Lee is not happy with her life, or at least so it seems. She does not appear to have a romantic relationship, and she does not appear to have a good relationship with other people - aside from other journalists who busy themselves with the same sort of stuff that she busies herself with.
Lee appears lonely, and is haunted by the past. She has seen horrible things, and she has parted with her humanity, in a sense, because as a journalist she sees her job as one that demands she takes no action so that others may take action. She is experiencing a crisis of existential proportions (as is noted by Sammy in an interaction they have), because even though she sacrificed her humanity to do the reporting she has done, even though she is recognized as a great war-journalist, it appears as though all of that has been for naught.
For, as can be seen, the USA has gone to the dump, courtesy of the civil war. She has done everything in her power, and yet no one cared and it meant nothing. That is quite bothersome, indeed. So, now she sees this young lass, Jessie, wanting to do the same as her, and Lee takes on a mother-ish role. Things do wind up resulting in them going on the dangerous trip to Washington, which is such, because journalists have been getting killed on sight over there.
Regardless, they set off, and aside from becoming Jessie’s mentor, Lee seems to want to dissuade her from pursuing the career - at least initially. Hard lessons, many of them, in a decently rapid succession. The other two - Sammy and Joel - are doing their own part, with Sammy taking on the role of the friendly grandpa, whereas Joel is… Well, he’s a weird, flirty dad?
The story the film tells is that of Jessie, or, rather, of Lee passing the torch onto Jessie. They have a few situations they go through, they have a few conversations they experience, they get through some dangerous moments, but everything appears to be under control - as under control as going through what is essentially an active warzone can be.
Then, the most dangerous thing that could happen happens. Two reckless journalists, presumably both of them from Hong Kong, catch up to the quartet and mess around. Joel knows them, so they get a bit of a pass. One of them hops from their car’s window into the quartet’s car, and then Jessie decides that she wants to do that, too. So she does, and then the other car’s driver speeds off.
That irks Lee, because she’s in mother mode, and so she speeds after the other car, only to reach it, stopped and vacant, next to a farm. Bad news. Then, the quartet-1 and Joel’s buddy sneak over and see a pair of goons, clad in military gear, leading Jessie and the other reckless journo to a mass grave. They are dumping bodies in that mass grave - civilian bodies.
Sammy, who is old and wise, tells the quartet that going there is suicide, so they go without him, because he’s also obese and he would not be able to run. It quickly becomes apparent that the situation is very bad, as one of the dumpers, straight up shoots the buddy of Joel’s buddy. Then they try to de-escalate, and it seems as though things are smoothing over, but that’s not very true, because the madmen doing this whole thing are some weird type of white supremacist ultra-nationalist lunatics.
As soon as they get to Joel’s buddy, whose friend was just murdered, they mess around with him and, when he says that he is from Hong Kong - which the psycho announces as chinese - he gets shot. That makes everyone panic, everyone loses their composure, only for Sammy to drive the quartet’s car through the group, running over the maniacs and managing to secure everyone else.
Jessie falls in the mass grave (a very neat scene) and gets dragged out, but as the quartet is driving away, the other goon, who manages to recover, grabs his gun and shoots at the vehicle. Unfortunately, Sammy has been hit, and he bleeds out in the car.
Everyone is very stricken by this, very sorely affected. This event was the teaching moment. This should have been the scene that allows the characters to undergo character development - and by characters I mean Jessie. Recklessness gets you this, in short. Do not be reckless. It’s so obvious it will poke one’s eyes out.
Then imagine my shock at the insane recklessness that Jessie shows off as the culmination of the movie rolls over. They are trailing a squad of separatist soldiers as the latter are storming the white house. Bullets flying everywhere. Naturally, journos gotta journo, so they take pictures and expose themselves to danger by doing so, but there’s a very pronounced care that’s on display, that is present…
Only in Joel and Lee. Jessie is going crazy with excitement to get a good photo, so she’s being reckless, as if Sammy did not die because of her being reckless and deciding to “wanna go too!” The teaching moment - not there at all, completely deleted from her mind. Meanwhile, Lee is having a meltdown or a crisis, which manages to boil over, and then they get going, everything seems to be slowly moving towards the oval office or wherever the president is hiding… Until Jessie decides to walk into the middle of a hallway, during an active shootout, and snap a few pictures. She’s not even moving - she just walks there, stands still, and starts snapping photos.
Lee jumps in, pushes her down, but then, for some reason, just stands still as well, and a few bullets give her the goodnight pill.
Joel, who previously warned Jessie that she was being too reckless, reprimands her, but he is also in the zone, in a sense, so things do not get to him just yet. Regardless, this scene could be argued to be what is wrong with the movie.
At the same time, of course, it could just be purposeful. It could be a means of conveying how Lee feels - and forcing the audience to get to experience that feeling. Nothing you do matters - no matter how many lessons you provide others, no matter how many warnings you extend, they will fall on deaf ears.
Lee tried teaching Jessie that being careful was important. So did Joel, so did Sammy. Sammy DIED because Jessie was reckless and not careful. She was next to him in the car as he died. Well, she did not listen to either of them. She did not allow herself to learn from those moments. She went on and was reckless as all hell, and that got one of her “heroes” killed.
The reaction? There was none. Jessie had learned well, at least in that regard, and had gone numb. She did not allow the horrors that she was seeing get to her. She had successfully gotten rid of, essentially, her humanity.
That’s one interpretation, of course, and it’s a generous one. The other interpretation is that this movie just can’t do character development, as a result of which it just has a bad climax. Either way, it really soured the whole thing - because everything else about the story was great! Joel, Sammy, Lee, even Jessie were interesting, compelling characters (until the ending, that is) and all the side-characters were also interesting and provided intriguing encounters and interactions.
Alas, the bag was fumbled. 2/3
Legendary Point
Does this movie get the Legendary point, so craved and wanted by all and none at the same time? I am inclined to say yes, if only because of just how well it encapsulates everything that I’m finding very troublesome with contemporary times.
Almost 2500 years ago now, a little known fellow by the name of Plato said a bunch of things. Then there was another unknown dude, Aristotle, who said a bunch of things. Weirdly enough, these things were very good and very smart! A shame it is, then, that no one gave a rat’s ass about them, and still no one gives a rat’s ass about them.
Similarly, the world had a war so terrible it was believed to be the war to end all wars. Very bad, very horrible. Folks then did it again, and so they got a sequel to the dreadfully terrible war. Then folks started wanting to not have wars at all, but some fellows decided that they must have war - but maybe not directly, though they could do it indirectly.
And every time it was horrible and no one liked it, and yet every time everyone just does not care. To this day we keep getting those things - someone goes and does war, even though he has learned that war is bad, maybe knows that war is not good from personal experience, and so on and so forth. Countless people support this war, even though they, too, have been taught, they have heard, they should know that war is bad in every single situation.
So, ultimately, this movie asks, is what gets done by journalists, teachers, pretty much anyone who tries teaching anyone anything… Pointless? In a sense, it is. Definitely. But then it is not - it’s just that folks are selective about what they learn. Maybe the movie is very nihilistic, maybe it’s fallen under the spell of “we can’t change a thing”, maybe there’s something else to it.
Still, this vibe is what I got from the film. That vibe, and the sight of civilization being on the verge of collapse, which is quite enchanting. So that warrants the movie the Legendary Point. 1/1
Conclusion
8/10. Civil War is a very interesting, albeit reasonably disturbing, film that shows off and warns against a future that might soon be coming, whilst also applying some mild critique towards the now. I’d say it’s a decently neat watch, though I’d refrain from engaging in repeat viewings, for almost all of the film is ruined by its ending. Still, it is a very good watch.
I tuck it under my belt, another shining achievement that I proudly display. It is a bit marred, but perfection is difficult to achieve.