Alex Garland's Civil War: must-see

Erika and I were both gripped by Alex Garland's Civil War today. We highly recommend it; it's powerful, relevant, and utterly compelling, and probably the most important film Garland has yet been involved with -- including his work with Danny Boyle, though 28 Days Later certainly gives Civil War some competition. Garland's last two films as director, Annihilation and Men, were exceedingly strange affairs; I didn't much like the former and rather loved the latter, but was ill-prepared for how gritty and reality-based Civil War is by comparison; if Men is a bit strange-for-its-own-sake at times, revels in its own excessive weirdness, Civil War is very disciplined, very focused, and feels very, very real, speculative fiction though it may be. 

The premise is simple: the United States has been divided by war, with Texas and California leading the secession; there are violent uprisings everywhere. A group of journalists (led by a fine Kirsten Dunst, playing a photographer who shares a name with Lee Miller) travel through war-torn cities en route to Washington DC, where they hope to interview the president. Many things happen en route. Knowing more is not in your interests as a viewer -- just trust me.

The film, of course, purports to be about journalism, and war photography in particular, but no one will be looking for a story about that when they enter the theatre; rather, they will of course flock to it with the Trump Problem in their minds -- imagining horrifying futures that may well come to pass. Probably that is the real meat of the film, but Garland is not interested in direct commentary or any real-world partisanship; making an anti-Trump propaganda film, for example -- even making the besieged president a recognizable caricature of Trump -- would not serve the film well, ultimately. There is probably wisdom in this; so whatever commentary on real wounds in America is present in the film, its disguised a bit, even given improbable expression in the film's fictive world. For instance, in what version of an American insurrection would Texas and California be allies?  

Still, even if that subtext is really the main text of the film, Civil War is nonetheless an excellent, dramatic depiction of photojournalists at work -- which is not a subject I've seen represented often; I missed The Bang Bang Club, don't remember The Killing Fields or Under Fire (isn't there a photojournalist in both of those?) and haven't seen Salvador since I was a teenager. 

Civil War stands alone among them, head and-shoulders the best of the bunch. Gripping, terrifying. There are some very intense battle scenes, a couple of upsetting death scenes -- be prepared for something powerful (also including depictions of racist violence, note); but take my advice, don't miss this film. See it theatrically, if you can.

 It's great.