Is Civil War with Kirsten Dunst a good movie? Viewers have their say

From Ex Machina to Destruction, including some of the films he wrote (28 Days Later, Sunshine, Dredd, Never Let Me Go…) or the series he supervised (Devs), Alex Garland made waiting one of his favorite toys square.

And he proves it once again with Civil War, his fourth work. Although he remembers that optimism rarely suits him.

Set in the near future (but never clearly defined), the feature film takes us into the heart of America, which is in the grip of a new civil war. And it is in this hostile territory, where every encounter can turn out to be fatal, that a group of photojournalists tries to reach the capital to question the president.

What did the audience think of this shocking film?

With an average rating of 3.74 out of 5 from 425 ratings*, Civil War is currently the second best movie by Alex Garland. Ahead of Men (2.4) and Annihilation (2.9), but behind Ex Machina (4).

Second place also among Kirsten Dunst’s recent films: Civil War ahead of Woodshock (2.3), Les Preies (2.6) or The Power of the Dog (3.5).

They liked it

“Awe-inspiring, exhilarating, current crescendo with absolutely perfect screenplay and constant emotion.said Movie lover (5 out of 5), which even gives itself a say “madness”.

“The atmosphere is quite depressing and that’s what makes this film so interesting and unusual”for that Timothy (same note). “The violence of the Civil War is shown in a very interesting and realistic way compared to other films of the same genre.”

topic “shock” Supported by several internet users including Adrian Long (5 stars too): “An intense emotional journey, this film is a cinematic achievement that captivates and moves with its powerful performances and careful direction.”

but Matthew LeBlanc Talking about Opus “Chilling. Shocking. Scottish”And we present it as the best in the genre since Oliver Stone’s Salvador… released in 1986.

Mind-boggling, haunting, current crescendo. Absolutely perfect screenwriting and visual mastery. The emotion of every second

While a third of Internet users who left a review spoke of Civil War as the movie of the year, with A “A very nice tribute to war journalists” (Timothy) or a “Reflections on War Journalism That Reads” (Benoit J4.5 out of 5), the casting is also praised.

by Jaliot (4.5 out of 5), who’s to judge “perfect”. or Naughty Dog (3.5), which likes actors as much as “Relevant bias, questioning the impartiality of images and their impact on the individual, and this across different encounters.”

In short, the term “visual shock”, often used indiscriminately, is relevant to describe the audience’s feelings towards the Civil War. Which makes the image one of the main strengths.

They didn’t like it

The shock of the photos is. But what about the weight of words? “A highly political film which, although relatively predictable, knows how to keep the audience in suspense, with effective staging and above all powerful images that question our relationship with violence and shocking images.”

The journey of these war journalists in a fractured America is difficult, especially with the upcoming election.” (T-rhy3.5 out of 5)

that Little black rabbit (3 out of 5) describes it as follows: “This movie is quite confusing, with almost no plot, if it’s not just a warning, given the upcoming American presidential election.

and Proud R. (3.5 out of 5) Like this: “The main criticism we can make of the film is that it partially misses its highly political, fascinating subject matter, and above all, the news itself. It’s as if Garland comes in afraid of what he might say.”

The main criticism that can be leveled at the film is that it partially misses its highly political, fascinating and, above all, topical theme.

If the performance is there, the substance poses a problem for more than one viewer. of which evariste75 (0.5 out of 5) who regret not having it “I didn’t understand anything in context.” And this netizen isn’t the only one to point out that the Civil War aspect could have been fleshed out more.

without resorting to violence of words Damien Vabre (1 of 5): “A road trip film about a team of journalists set against the backdrop of a completely bogus civil war, told without the slightest bit of intelligence. Every war scene reeks of demand and stupidity. A bad farce by a loose little provocateur.”

in total

As a show that’s impressive and chilling, Civil War appeals to the majority of audiences (even those who are less excited will admit to that power). Also Alex Garland’s tribute to the work of war journalists.

But the substance and everything about the civil war itself is less convincing. Often because of the lack of context, if we believe the criticism expressed. Namely, by this internet user who thinks a feature film would be better “War Reporters”.

And you ? What did you think of the civil war?

*Remarks on Wednesday 17 April 2024