Spoilers Civil War Movie

[Stalker0]

Saw the new movie "Civil War" (no not the Avengers movie or a movie about the OG American civil war)

In a time when movie trailers often spoil the best parts, honestly I think the trailers undercut this movie. At its core, its a movie about war journalists documenting the finale of a new American civil war. The movie is really focused on the core protagonists, using the backdrops around them to highlight what is going on in the war.

This movie is tightly scripted, it felt perfectly paced, and told me enough to keep me in engaged without feeling the need for overly drawn out exposition. The audience knows what they need to know, aka what the journalists know, and uses the fog of war to deliver some very gripping scenes.

I also appreciate how apolitical it is, it doesn't tie in to any explicit politics of modern America.


There has been a lot of talk lately that with the possibility downfall of the billion dollar marvel movie, that movie audiences are hungry for lower budget more character focused movies, and if that's you, this is exactly the kind of movie you have been looking for. I went into this movie with a very low bar of expectation, and was quite impressed.

 

[Morrus]

I also appreciate how apolitical it is, it doesn't tie in to any explicit politics of modern America.

I'm curious how it achieves that? Does it not define the sides in the war, what it's about, or how it started or anything?

 

[Umbran]

I'm curious how it achieves that? Does it not define the sides in the war, what it's about, or how it started or anything?

I have not seen it yet, but to quote a review by NPR:

"...The story takes place in a not-so-distant future where Texas and California have improbably joined forces and seceded from the U.S.

Florida, not to be outdone, has also broken away on its own. The president, a third-term tyrant played by Nick Offerman, has responded by calling in the troops and launching airstrikes on his fellow Americans, plunging the country into poverty and lawlessness.

Garland keeps a lot of the details vague; he's less interested in how we might have gotten here than in how we would respond. To that end, he focuses on characters whose job it is to document what's happening."

 

[Stalker0]

I'm curious how it achieves that? Does it not define the sides in the war, what it's about, or how it started or anything?

Umbran mentions most of the details. You know that the succession started by California/Texas and Florida (as a separate force). It is implied that the current president is seen as a tyrant that has potentially bombed americans and disband key organizations (but you only get that from the successionist side, so you can never "know for certain"), and its never stated that is the reason the war started, though you could imply it.

The movies focus is on the war's end rather than the war's beginning.

 

[Ryujin]

For the non-Americans here, The President of the United States is limited by the 22nd Amendment to The Constitution to only serve 2 terms, for a total maximum of 8 years. I've heard this called "The Roosevelt Amendment" because Franklin D Roosevelt served 3 terms and was elected to a 4th, but died shortly after taking office, prior to this coming into force. Saying "the three term President" is shorthand for saying that something has gone very, very wrong with America.

 

[Cadence]

For the non-Americans here, The President of the United States is limited by the 22nd Amendment to The Constitution to only serve 2 terms, for a total maximum of 8 years. I've heard this called "The Roosevelt Amendment" because Franklin D Roosevelt served 3 terms and was elected to a 4th, but died shortly after taking office, prior to this coming into force. Saying "the three term President" is shorthand for saying that something has gone very, very wrong with America.

Washington chose to only serve two terms, which seems like one reason that is the magic number.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

I'm glad to hear it's more about the journalists trying to survive and document the story, and agree that's not the vibe the trailers give it. They could've shot the trailers to feel more like what you'd expect a war journalist movie to be, where it's unnamed so you assume Africa or South/Central America, only to have it be revealed in the last shot it's America.

I get that they want to show the end and handwave past the background, but even the first Red Dawn gave us a few sentences that, while highly improbable, set the stage. ... and then Milius went to town before going to bowl with The Dude.

 

[Morrus]

Saying "the three term President" is shorthand for saying that something has gone very, very wrong with America.

Well something has changed, certainly. I wouldn't say it means things have gone wrong. 2 isn't a more magical number than 3, it's just the one you guys have agreed on at present. You had one go to 4 within a lifetime of today. You might have a different rule 50 years from today. That's OK.

We don't have any such limits over here, and on a practical level that also works just fine. As long as everybody agrees on the system they're using.

 

[Ryujin]

Well something has changed, certainly. I wouldn't say it means things have gone wrong. 2 isn't a more magical number than 3, it's just the one you guys have agreed on at present. You had one go to 4 within a lifetime of today. You might have a different rule 50 years from today. That's OK.

We don't have any such limits over here, and on a practical level that also works just fine. As long as everybody agrees on the system they're using.

I'm Canadian. We don't have those limits either

 

[Cadence]

Well something has changed, certainly. I wouldn't say it means things have gone wrong. 2 isn't a more magical number than 3, it's just the one you guys have agreed on at present. You had one go to 4 within a lifetime of today. You might have a different rule 50 years from today. That's OK.

We don't have any such limits over here, and on a practical level that also works just fine. As long as everybody agrees on the system they're using.

As you say, I don't think there is anything magic about two.

I think that a would-be tyrant or dictator is quite likely to want to change the law to give themselves more terms than their countries law currently allows - if it has limits. (Which, of course, doesn't mean they are a would be tyrant. There could be some other reason - like thinking no one else in their country could possibly handle it, or perhaps not wanting to switch the ship during a war, or just thinking term limits are silly).

I kind of view it similarly to wanting to put off an election during a War. It feels like Lincoln set the standard for us on that one. Other countries obviously have felt differently (and I can understand why!).