Civil War: Alex Garland film is a stark, timely warning
It’s difficult to know whether Civil War’s timing is brilliant or just macabre. Alex Garland’s action thriller imagines an America in the latter stages of civil war, where the states of California and Texas have seceded in order to overthrow an authoritarian president (Nick Offerman), alongside separate rebel armies. Veteran war photographer Lee (Kirsten Dunst) leads a group of journalists on a journey across the country to document the conflict, struggling to survive in a fallen empire.
The film is opaque in its politics, carefully pairing two politically opposed states to avoid this being a Left vs Right issue. This is a blessing and a curse – on one hand, making the villains MAGA extremists would have been too obvious, and unhelpful for debate. On the other, this means there is a neutrality that prevents more succinct points being made. The film’s focus is on the effects of the civil war rather than its cause, and in that sense, it is haunting to watch. American cultural staples like carwashes and sports stadiums are given ghoulish new purpose, while the constant threat of violence is nerve shredding.
What comes across loud and clear is the film’s celebration of journalism, both through the script and performances. Dunst is terrific, wearing the look of someone who has seen too much over the course of her career, but is driven by her vocation. Lee doesn’t have a lot of dialogue, meaning the star has to show a life’s worth of violence through her expressions. Hers is the most interesting journey, believing her work was a “warning” for home, that was clearly not heeded.
Garland has been quoted saying he believes his films are more about the present than they are visions of the future. If that’s the case, Civil War is a stark warning to a divided political landscape. It may not hit the targets you expect, but it leaves a lasting impression.