Civil War

[bankybruce]

In what possible way did they address the idiocy that California and Texas became allies?

Yes, they do.

Spoiler

They say that they'llturn on eachother the moment that was is over. Essentially, the current President suspended the current Constitution and force a 3rd term.

Or that South Carolina would not be part of the Florida Alliance? Having lived in SC, they still think the civil war isn't quite over yet and the South will rise again and I say this seriously.

Yes, they do.

Spoiler

It disinformation from the President. Washingtonis about to be taken and hes spewing tons of lies.

 

[bankybruce]

Friend who saw it said the war correspondent characters are ghoulish, terrible people. Heh.

Spoiler

One if the fiest quotes are, "I thought the picturs I sent home from other wars were warnings. But I guess not".

 

[Stout]

Yes, they do.

Spoiler

They say that they'llturn on eachother the moment that was is over. Essentially, the current President suspended the current Constitution and force a 3rd term.

Yes, they do.

Spoiler

It disinformation from the President. Washingtonis about to be taken and hes spewing tons of lies.

So, addressed it very, very poorly, then.

 

[Shane]

I just got out. And honestly this sucked. BIGTIME

 

[Mulli]

I don't need your "Civil War."

 

[Krangodnzr]

I liked it. Played on a lot of current themes (anti-immigrants) that we see in modern America.

Sure the concept of a California-Texas is silly, but the point was to make it not a left-right thing. The focus of the movie was much more on the war correspondents and they handled covering violence as a profession.

This kind of scenario isn't as crazy as it looks. The military is inundated with many right wingers and I don't know how it would look if multiple red states decided to secede at the same time. If Texas leaves, do they seize Fort Cavazos (Hood) and Bliss? There are Stryker Brigades and some heavy (armor) along with some attack aviation. Pretty much a crown jewel for a secessionist state to attain. Plus the Texas National Guard is pretty strong in its own right.

 

[JohnnyCakes]

I liked it. Played on a lot of current themes (anti-immigrants) that we see in modern America.

Sure the concept of a California-Texas is silly, but the point was to make it not a left-right thing. The focus of the movie was much more on the war correspondents and they handled covering violence as a profession.

This kind of scenario isn't as crazy as it looks. The military is inundated with many right wingers and I don't know how it would look if multiple red states decided to secede at the same time. If Texas leaves, do they seize Fort Cavazos (Hood) and Bliss? There are Stryker Brigades and some heavy (armor) along with some attack aviation. Pretty much a crown jewel for a secessionist state to attain. Plus the Texas National Guard is pretty strong in its own right.

( anti-ILLEGAL immigrants. )

ftfy

 

[Krangodnzr]

( anti-ILLEGAL immigrants. )

ftfy

No this isn't about "illegal immigrants".

Take your politics nonsense out of this forum. Quit trolling.

 

[Cheesebeef]

So, addressed it very, very poorly, then.

They didn’t address it.

Pretty mediocre, predictable movie. Best scene was Plemmons going full Plemmons.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Yes, they do.

Spoiler

They say that they'llturn on eachother the moment that was is over. Essentially, the current President suspended the current Constitution and force a 3rd term.

No they didn’t. They said what would happen AFTER the War. They have no believable reason Texas and Cali would have joined at the outset.

The idea that Texas would have joined Cali because of a 3rd term from the President is fantasy from a writer who fundamentally doesn’t understand American politics. At this point in history, if the Trump demanded a 3rd term, every GOP state in the Union would invent reasons to agree with him… especially a state run by the pieces of garbage down in Texas.

And the more I think about it, the dumber that movie looks in retrospect. The writer/director is obviously trying to say something about America but he set the story in what might as well be Fantasyland. The reality is what he did was really chicken-ish. He wanted to make a political thriller for “all people” without actually taking any kind of stand politically except “Trump bad”. Brilliant. Never seen that before.

 

[Devilmaycare]

No they didn’t. They said what would happen AFTER the War. They have no believable reason Texas and Cali would have joined at the outset.

The idea that Texas would have joined Cali because of a 3rd term from the President is fantasy from a writer who fundamentally doesn’t understand American politics. At this point in history, if the Trump demanded a 3rd term, every GOP state in the Union would invent reasons to agree with him… especially a state run by the pieces of garbage down in Texas.

And the more I think about it, the dumber that movie looks in retrospect. The writer/director is obviously trying to say something about America but he set the story in what might as well be Fantasyland. The reality is what he did was really chicken-ish. He wanted to make a political thriller for “all people” without actually taking any kind of stand politically except “Trump bad”. Brilliant. Never seen that before.

This is what I was afraid of from the trailers.

 

[Covert Rain]

No they didn’t. They said what would happen AFTER the War. They have no believable reason Texas and Cali would have joined at the outset.

The idea that Texas would have joined Cali because of a 3rd term from the President is fantasy from a writer who fundamentally doesn’t understand American politics. At this point in history, if the Trump demanded a 3rd term, every GOP state in the Union would invent reasons to agree with him… especially a state run by the pieces of garbage down in Texas.

And the more I think about it, the dumber that movie looks in retrospect. The writer/director is obviously trying to say something about America but he set the story in what might as well be Fantasyland. The reality is what he did was really chicken-ish. He wanted to make a political thriller for “all people” without actually taking any kind of stand politically except “Trump bad”. Brilliant. Never seen that before.

Even the director post interview comments don't make sense. He basically boiled it down to Texas and Cali agreeing the President went to far and team up. Current American politics? That would never happen no matter how bad the President is. We know this from recent history.

 

[bankybruce]

Even the director post interview comments don't make sense. He basically boiled it down to Texas and Cali agreeing the President went to far and team up. Current American politics? That would never happen no matter how bad the President is. We know this from recent history.

While it doesn't make sense in the real world today, they did still explain it. They even referenced how they could go after each other once they took the White House. Its not unprecedented for enemies to team up against a common enemy.

Here are a few examples.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Covert Rain]

While it doesn't make sense in the real world today, they did still explain it. They even referenced how they could go after each other once they took the White House. Its not unprecedented for enemies to team up against a common enemy.

Here are a few examples.

You must be registered for see images attach

I never said it didn't happen. I said in today's political climate it's not remotely realistic and we have recent proof of that. So, that makes the premise (set modern times) ridiculous. I am still going to see the movie but so far everyone I know has said the same thing.

 

[bankybruce]

I never said it didn't happen. I said in today's political climate it's not remotely realistic and we have recent proof of that. So, that makes the premise (set modern times) ridiculous. I am still going to see the movie but so far everyone I know has said the same thing.

Sorry, I was conflating two different responses. My bad!

I went understanding it's not the real world and looked at it as more of a Day After Tomorrow or 2012. I enjoyed it immensely.

 

[Covert Rain]

Sorry, I was conflating two different responses. My bad!

I went understanding it's not the real world and looked at it as more of a Day After Tomorrow or 2012. I enjoyed it immensely.

I love movies like this. I will still likely find it entertaining but sometimes the premise is so ridiculous you have to suspend belief.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Sorry, I was conflating two different responses. My bad!

I went understanding it's not the real world and looked at it as more of a Day After Tomorrow or 2012. I enjoyed it immensely.

Then they should have just placed the civil war in the United States Of Notamerica.

Because they very clearly are trying to make a real world political statement. They just didn’t have the balls to actually get into it, probably thinking if they magically joined Cali and Texas, they could get “both sides” butts in the seats. It was chicken-ish, trying not to offend.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I love movies like this. I will still likely find it entertaining but sometimes the premise is so ridiculous you have to suspend belief.

Even beyond the ludicrous premise, it’s pretty mid. The scene with Plemmons is nails, but the rest of the movie? Meh.

 

[bankybruce]

Then they should have just placed the civil war in Norge United States Of Nontamerica.

Because they very clearly are trying to make a real world political statement. They just didn’t have the balls to actually get into it, probably thinking if they magically joined Cali and Texas, they could get “both sides” butts in the seats. It was chicken-ish, trying not to offend.

That's fair and I honestly hadn't looked at it from that angle.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Then they should have just placed the civil war in the United States Of Notamerica.

Because they very clearly are trying to make a real world political statement. They just didn’t have the balls to actually get into it, probably thinking if they magically joined Cali and Texas, they could get “both sides” butts in the seats. It was chicken-ish, trying not to offend.

I do kind of agree with you here.

A real world civil war would be created by one side and we know which side that is.

 

[Russ Smith]

watched it last night on Prime for free with a coupon. glad I didn't pay for it. Not horrible but not all that great either.

 

[Phrazbit]

Just watched it, knew very little going in other than what was in the trailer, "3 way civil war, Plemons has a great scene".

I went in expecting to like it and I don't think I've disliked a movie this much in a while. Had some bright spots, the action scenes were good, the broad plot isn't totally unbelievable, but holy smokes, what mess the rest is. Bland, boring characters who's emotional states do a 180 basically every 10 minutes and, while I do think a free press is incredibly important to democracy, the aggrandizing here was utterly absurd. The actress who played the young photographer gave a brutal performance. Kirsten Dunst's character was pretty much Tom Hank's "Capt Miller", only if he was on quaaludes.

Ham fisted.

 

[oaken1]

I've tried to watch this twice so far and can't get through the first 30 minutes.

Does it get better? Is it worth pushing through the slog to get to a payoff?