OK I don't think I've seen a thread about this, but thought it was interesting. There is apparently a movie coming out from a major studio next year (april 2024) about a US civil war. Link to the trailer: I thought at first this had to be some kind of propaganda thing, but it's a major studio that makes serious movies (A24). "A24 not giving up on theatrical in 2022 led to it becoming the sixth-largest domestic box office studio, trailing only the legacy Hollywood studios — Disney, Universal, Paramount, Warner Bros., and Sony." A24, the studio behind 'Everything Everywhere All at Once,' is the 'cool kid' of Hollywood The director is Alex Garland, again, a serious director/screenwriter. "Alex Garland is an English novelist, screenwriter, film producer and director. He is best known for the films Ex Machina (2015) and Annihilation (2018).Garland's others works as a writer includes The Beach (2000), 28 Days Later (2002), Sunshine (2007), Never Let Me Go (2011) and Dredd (2012).He is also the co-writer on the video game Enslaved: Odyssey to the West. In 2015, Garland made his directorial debut with Ex Machina and was nominated for an Oscar in the Best Writing, Original Screenplay category." Given all of that background, I was kind of curious about everyone's thoughts about this. To me, IDK, it seems weird, given the tensions currently in the US, to write and produce a $50 million dollar movie about a potential civil war that could conceivably happen in the next couple of decades. Is this just capitalism at work? They think this will sell? Do you think they will try to be making a political statement? Is it responsible or irresponsible? I'm kind of torn. It feels off to me. And ok - interesting side question if you watch the actual trailer, they mention 19 states that secede, including a western alliance led by... wait for it... California and Texas. What in GODS NAME would have to conceivably happen in the next 2 decades or so for Texas and California to team up in a secession from the US? I couldn't think of anything. Anyways, thought this one would be fun, but let's try not to glorify killing each other too much as we discuss it lol.
So, why isn’t this something that is obviously in the wheelhouse for art? Can “civil war” only be discussed on OAN and Newsmax? Alex Jones? US Senator Colton Moore? This idea has been raging for years now.
The secession point stumped me, too. As for the movie, it seems a timely and apropos statement about where we're headed. I certainly see our country headed in that direction based upon the diametrically opposed views of what America is and historically has been about. It's almost as if forces, mostly largely unseen, have been behind the scenes framing Americans being in one of two camps: toxic masculinity or wimpy liberals. "Yeah, but what kind of American are you?" says the gun toting guy to the unarmed family. I turned 80 Saturday past. I won't know the outcome, but I fear for my descendants because of this divisiveness (and global warming. I guess my left leaning is showing.) Thanks for the post. I'll keep an eye out for the movie.
I'm not declaring it only the purview of those places. I was just kind of shocked to see a major studio decide to pursue it. And IDK why I feel weird about it. Maybe because I'm worried that life will imitate art? Or maybe I feel like we're too close to the potential event for the movie? I remember feeling really weird about United 93 when it came out 5 years after 9/11. Like it felt too soon, too close to the event. Maybe that's why I get weird vibes IDK. But yeah, just to be clear, not saying a studio shouldn't pursue it. Just thought it was interesting and wanted to see what others thought.
I hear you. Don’t disagree with your take. Except the “life imitates art” idea. That has never been true. Art reflects life, and there is no way that it cannot. Art is limited by life, even when it is fringe.
Now this is a delicious topic for debate. I imagine that any resisting opinion would have to lean on spirituality as a muse and that entertains a debate that imo is fruitless. At the same time, I find it impossible to believe that revolutionary artists such as John Coltrane, Pablo Picasso, and Igor Stravinsky were limited by human nature. I would def opt for a different word than "fringe." Some would claim that Ornette Coleman was a fringe jazz artist. Others claimed he was a genius and a revolutionary. In the end, I believe that art reflects life, except when it doesn't. There is a greater inspiration available for those willing and able to seek it.
Just another dystopian movie like the Purge imagining America’s descent to lawlessness to tell a violently entertaining movie. Hunger Games too. A2A puts out good movies though.
I'll see it just based on the director. Apparently from the online talk, Texas and California are on the same side, I don't think its conventionally political.
Will Robert E. Lee be played by a black woman and will the underlying theme be the North fighting for trans-rights ? If not I’m giving it a hard pass.
But Trump should be the Jefferson Davis, not the Abraham Lincoln. The start of the war should be yet another election stolen from Trump.
Maybe in this movie the "United States" has become the confederacy so the Jeff Davis character would be the hero
She, like most Americans, cannot deal with trap questions. And really, is there any answer she could have given that would have sated the rabid identity politicians ? Even if she, a child of Indian immigrants had issued a groveling apology for what some white men did 160 years ago, that would have only elicited a jaded “Well, of course her handlers rehearsed her on that. She can’t mean it. She’s a non-black Republican.”
I'll take a stab at it. OK, since California is full of vegan liberals, they would be easy to take over so Texas could take over all their military bases. Then all the conservative people living in the central valley and mountain areas of California could come to power. Arizona and New Mexico would fall in line to create a contiguous territory. Then the eastern parts of Oregon and Washington would do the same. Would be pretty easy to get the Idaho's and Montana's and Dakota's to fall in line with them, little more difficult with Colorado and Wisconsin. Not sure what the movie meant when they mentioned the Florida alliance. that would leave the rest of the US with the NE down to Virginia or so. I'll let someone else do the midwest states.
