Billy Oduory looks at House of the Dragons’ titular beasts and their riders… “The idea that we control the dragons is an illusion, They’re a power man should never have trifled with. One that brought Valyria its doom,” Viserys reminds Rhaenyra in season 1 of House of the Dragon. His warning could have saved House […] From blockbuster Hollywood movies to independent and British cinema, Flickering Myth has you covered. Read the original post here: House of the Dragon: All the Dragons and Their...
“Civil War,” the latest and ostensibly final film from director Alex Garland, has a lot on its mind. From the first scene in which the unnamed U.S. president, played by Nick Offerman, addresses a divided nation, it’s clear that this film was intended to comment on modern times. What’s less clear, however, is what it
For those of us who love A24, Civil War is a milestone: It earned the quirky indie distributor its highest opening weekend box office to date. Granted, built-in controversy surely drew many viewers to this dystopian drama from English writer-director Alex Garland (Men, Annihilation, Ex Machina), which depicts a U.S. civil war in the present day. The deal We join said war already well in progress. It all appears to have started when the unnamed U.S. president (Nick Offerman) decided he...
There's been a lot of discourse around the film, and Alex Garland's Civil War is a movie that should make you angry.
The new film Civil War is a historic cinematic achievement. British director Alex Garland has made a movie that might be worse than a real American civil war. Perhaps that was Garland’s intention. His film is a series of horrifying set pieces—Abu Ghraib-style torture by gas station attendants, government aerial bombings of civilians, summary execution of journalists, a massive California and Texas invasion of Washington, D.C.—that seem to add up to a warning. If we don’t steer away from our...
A24 used AI-generated posters of war-torn American cities to promote Alex Garland's "Civil War," and audiences are not happy.
Civil War eschews the typical trappings of a combat action movie by turning the lens not toward the soldiers but to the photographers capturing them. And while it excels in some aspects of its portrayal, it falters when it comes to the big stuff. [Read More]
It appears to be the making of a larger piece of art
Alex Garland wasn't kidding. The writer/director of 'Civil War' said his dystopian thriller didn't take political sides. The film bears that out, focusing entirely on journalists scrambling to cover a country at war with itself. The problem? 'Civil War' isn't action-packed in a traditional, rah-rah sense. Nor does it shed new light on what it means to be a war correspondent. What's left? Visceral moments and the sense that almost anything can happen on screen. Like Garland's previous film 'Men,'...
It’s the closest Alex Garland’s “anti-war” film comes to a distinct political statement.
British filmmaker Alex Garland has returned to A24 with his newest film “Civil War.” Though the title suggests otherwise, the film is less about politics and more a critique of how Americans can’t sustain democracy or civility. The film begins with an internal war in America where the fictitious Western Forces — California and Texas This story Review: ‘Civil War’ asks viewers what kind of American they are appeared first on Washington Square News.