Alex Garland’s new film, Civil War, is a cinematic experience that is meant to provoke, disturb, and challenge. Already, it has elicited polarized reactions. The debate about its intent and execution has already begun. Whether it is a bold cautionary tale, dismissed as grim spectacle, or celebrated for its visceral storytelling, Civil War defies easy categorization. Garland, known for his transgressive and mind-bending storytelling (Ex Machina, Annihilation), subverts again and presents us with a piece that navigates journalistic integrity in a fractured United States.
A Bizarre Yet Compelling Premise
At its core, Civil War is a thought experiment, an exploration of the mindset of journalists covering chaos, upheaval, and collapse. The film is set in a near-future United States teetering on the edge of disintegration. However, it’s not just a narrative about political collapse or dystopian reality; it’s a story about those who document it. Drawing inspiration from classic films about foreign correspondents (The Year of Living Dangerously, Under Fire), Garland shifts the lens inward, placing the United States as the setting for a narrative typically reserved for war-torn nations abroad.
This is dissonance at its most startling. By juxtaposing a familiar, powerful nation going down with the ethos of journalists who chase stories into reckless abandon, Garland is forcing viewers to confront themselves with uncomfortable questions about perspective, morality, and the role of storytelling.
The Reporters at the Heart of the Story
The story follows four journalists: Lee (Kirsten Dunst), a legendary photojournalist; Joel (Wagner Moura), a South American reporter; Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson), an aging journalist from “what’s left of the New York Times”; and Jessie (Cailee Spaeny), an ambitious newcomer. Together, they navigate a crumbling America, capturing images and stories of violence, despair, and fleeting hope.
Garland does not feed exposition to the audience on a silver platter. He throws the viewers into chaos much like Haskell Wexler did in Medium Cool. The lack of clear exposition in the story accounts for the disorientation and confusion that the characters undergo. Their reporting of clashes, uprisings, and political negotiations blurs the line between chronicling history and making it happen.
Themes of Ethics and Morality
Civil War operates on several levels. At its surface, it’s a dystopian thriller with breath-taking visuals and set pieces. But beneath that, it is a meditation on the ethics of journalism. Garland explores the role of the journalist in the hour of crisis: do they remain impartial observers? Are they complicit in furthering suffering by recording without intervention? Or are they just adrenaline junkies who chase the next dopamine high?
The film raises such questions without giving clear-cut answers. Lee, Joel, Sammy, and Jessie are four sides of journalistic identity: idealism and cynicism, ambition and burnout. Their motives are complex, often conflicting, and Garland vividly captures the tension between personal drives and professional responsibilities.
A Future United States in Turmoil
It’s set in a divided America in which a federal government is met with violent opposition from a coalition known as the Western Alliance (WA). It is an America fractured by lines both of ideology and of geography, represented here by militias from Texas and California. The filmmakers have shaped this world with chilling plausibility, drawing upon real-world political and social tensions.
Garland’s choice to drape political specifics under subtext is at once strength and weakness. For one, it is what lends the film universality and timelessness. For others, it will seem an evasiveness, refusing to engage fully with what it depicts. But for viewers, this ambiguity lets them project their own interpretations upon the story, making this a Rorschach test of modern political anxieties.
The Role of Subtext and Symbolism
The film is packed with symbolism and allusions. References to historical events, such as the fictional “Antifa massacre,” are left deliberately vague, inviting viewers to question the narrative’s reliability. Jesse Plemons delivers a chilling cameo as a soldier interrogating the journalists, embodying the creeping authoritarianism that permeates the story. His performance, a mix of menace and smirk, underscores the film’s critique of power and its abuses.
A Reflection on Journalism’s Role
One of Civil War’s most compelling aspects is its exploration of journalism as both a profession and a moral quandary. Garland doesn’t shy away from critiquing the “both sides” approach that has plagued modern journalism. He depicts reporters who, in their quest to remain neutral and document history, risk enabling destructive forces.
The title Civil War resonates not just as a descriptor of the national conflict but also as a metaphor for the internal struggle within journalism. The film asks, “Is the storyteller’s highest duty to simply tell the story, or to choose a side?” It’s a question that has haunted the profession for decades, and Garland dramatizes it with unflinching intensity.
A Cinematic Experience Unlike Any Other
Visually and thematically, Civil War is quintessential Garland. Known for his meticulous world-building and immersive storytelling, Garland creates a vision of America that is both fantastical and disturbingly real. The film’s aesthetic—a mix of stark realism and surreal flourishes—evokes comparisons to Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket.
Yet, Civil War is uniquely its own. Garland’s narrative structure, which eschews traditional storytelling conventions, makes the film feel like an artifact from a future culture grappling with its past. Its fragmented, episodic nature reflects the chaos it depicts, immersing viewers in a world on the brink.
Conclusion
Civil War is not easy work to categorize or digest. It is challenging and provocative work that will get some frustrated and the other exhilarated. This will be because Garland, unlike most other filmmakers who depict politicians or soldiers, chose to focus on journalists.
Ultimately, the film is not so much about setting out to diagnose the ailments facing America but instead about laying bare how we record, interpret, and react to crisis. Whether you consider it a masterpiece or a misfire, Civil War is a film that pushes, provokes, discusses, and remembers. In an era of one-liner narratives, Garland’s refusal to give you easy answers appears to be almost revolutionary.
